Religion
See other Religion Articles
Title: Obama Rips Bible, Praises Koran
Source:
Breitbart
URL Source: http://www.breitbart.com/national-s ... bama-rips-bible-praises-koran/
Published: Feb 7, 2015
Author: Ben Shapiro
Post Date: 2015-02-07 06:32:22 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 191959
Comments: 433
Unless we get on our high horse and think that this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ. So it is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a simple tendency that can pervert and distort our faith. This is historically and philosophically illiterate. Historically speaking, the Crusades were a response to Islamic aggression in Europe and the Middle East; the Inquisition, as Jonah Goldberg points out while quoting historian Thomas Madden, director of the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies at Saint Louis University, was designed to regularize executions rather than leaving them to the will of the masses. Christians undoubtedly pursued horrible brutalities against people, including innocent Jews. However, as Goldberg points out, “Christianity, even in its most terrible days, even under the most corrupt popes, even during the most unjustifiable wars, was indisputably a force for the improvement of man.” Nowhere is that clearer than in Obama’s second example, slavery. Virtually all of the most ardent abolitionists were deeply religious Christians. Hundreds of thousands of American men marched to their deaths singing “The Battle Hymn of the Republic”: “In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea / With a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me / As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free / While God is marching on.” That was 150 years ago. It’s not exactly the modern Islamic slogan, “Death to the Jews.” Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., was, as his name suggests, a reverend. He quoted old black Christian spirituals and the Biblical story of the exodus from Egypt. Christians obliterated slavery. Christians obliterated Jim Crow. Modern slavery is largely perpetrated by Muslims. Modern Jim Crow is certainly perpetrated by Muslims under shariah law. There is a larger point, here, too: President Obama’s foolish argument suggests that because Christians were brutal a millennium ago, they should shut up about brutalities today. This is somewhat like saying that because someone’s great-great-grandfather held slaves in rural Alabama, that person should shut up about human trafficking in 2015. It’s asinine. But Obama has a history of insulting Christianity and Judaism while upholding Islam. In 2006, Obama bashed the Bible and religious Christians and Jews in particular: Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is ok and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount – a passage that is so radical that it’s doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application? So before we get carried away, let’s read our bibles. Folks haven’t been reading their bibles. He then concluded that religious leaders should not speak out against publicly-funded contraception or gay marriage. We can get into President Obama’s pathetic Biblical commentary here – his interpretation of Leviticus on slavery is incorrect, Jews still avoid shellfish, the Talmud explains that no child has ever been stoned for rebelliousness, and the Sermon on the Mount is not a pacifist document. Obama’s not Biblically literate – he’s the same fellow who says, “I think the good book says don’t throw stones in glass houses.” He said in The Audacity of Hope that he would define Biblical values however he chose, stating that he is not willing “to accept a reading of the Bible that considers an obscure line in Romans to be more defining of Christianity than the Sermon on the Mount.” Both are, in fact, parts of the Bible. Citing the Sermon on the Mount to justify civil unions for homosexuals, as Obama has done, is not in fact Biblical. But more importantly, Obama’s scorn for the old-fashioned Bible is obvious. That became more obvious in 2008, when Obama told some of his buddies in San Francisco that unemployed idiots “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” The Obama administration has routinely attacked religious organizations and people who violate Obama’s personal political predilections. They’ve attacked all trappings of Christianity as well. Whether they’re using Obamacare to force religious individuals to pay for others’ contraception or toning down the National Day of Prayer instead of holding a public ceremony, whether they’re covering a monogram of Jesus at Georgetown University during a presidential speech or objecting to adding FDR’s D-Day prayer to the WWII memorial, the Obama administration clearly isn’t fond of Christianity. This contrasts strongly with President Obama’s romantic vision of Islam. He famously called the Muslim call to prayer “the sweetest sound I know.” He said in his first presidential interview, with Al-Arabiya, that his job was “to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives.” Weeks later, he said in Turkey, “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world — including in my own country.” A few months later, in a speech in Cairo to which he invited the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama said: I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. He added that Islam has a “proud tradition of tolerance,” explained, ‘Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace,” and said, “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.” He said in his Ramadan message in 2009 that Islam has played a key “role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.” ISIS, Obama has said over and over again, is not Islamic. His administration maintains that America is not at war with radical Islam. He stated before the United Nations in 2012, just weeks after the murder of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya at the hands of Muslim terrorists, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” Hillary Clinton allegedly promised Charles Woods, father of one of the slain in Benghazi, that the administration would achieve the arrest of the YouTube filmmaker behind The Innocence of Muslims. The State Department issued taxpayer-funded commercials denouncing that YouTube video. President Obama variously called the video “crude and disgusting” and stated that “its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.” At the UN in 2014, Obama lauded a Muslim cleric who backs Hamas. And, of course, Obama uses Islamic theology to promote his vision of world peace: All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of the three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed, peace be upon them, joined in prayer. All three religions do have access to holy sites now, in Jewish-run Jerusalem. They did not when Muslims ruled Jerusalem. But facts have no bearing in the fantasy world of the president. Perhaps one final contrast tells the tale. In 2012, according to the Washington Post. “U.S. troops tried to burn about 500 copies of the Koran as part of a badly bungled security sweep at an Afghan prison in February.” Two American soldiers were shot in the aftermath. This prompted President Obama to apologize profusely to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, writing him a letter stating, “We will take the appropriate steps to avoid any recurrence, including holding accountable those responsible.” Three years earlier, members of the military burned Bibles printed in Pashto and Dari. CNN reported that they had been discarded “amid concern they would be used to try to convert Afghans.” The Bibles were burned rather than sent back to their source organization because the military worried they might be re-sent to another outlet in Afghanistan. There was no apology to the church that printed the Bibles, or to Christians more broadly. Sure, radical Muslims around the world, supported by millions of their compatriots and friendly governments, are murdering innocents. But it’s Christian aggression that forces Muslims to burn other Muslims alive in Muslim countries.
On Thursday, at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C., President Obama blithely informed his audience that Christians ought not get on their “high horse” about the problem of radical Islam:
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: cranky (#0)
They burned him alive in an iron cage, and as he screamed and writhed in the agony of hell they made a sport of his death. After listening to one newscast after another rightly condemn the barbaric killing of that Jordanian air force pilot at the bloody hands of ISIS, I couldn’t sleep. My mind kept roaming the past trying to retrieve a vaguely remembered photograph that I had seen long ago in the archives of a college library in Texas. Suddenly, around two in the morning, the image materialized in my head. I made my way down the hall to my computer and typed in: “Waco, Texas. Lynching.” Sure enough, there it was: the charred corpse of a young black man, tied to a blistered tree in the heart of the Texas Bible Belt. Next to the burned body, young white men can be seen smiling and grinning, seemingly jubilant at their front-row seats in a carnival of death. One of them sent a picture postcard home: “This is the barbeque we had last night. My picture is to the left with a cross over it. Your son, Joe.” The victim’s name was Jesse Washington. The year was 1916. America would soon go to war in Europe “to make the world safe for democracy.” My father was twelve, my mother eight. I was born 18 years later, at a time, I would come to learn, when local white folks still talked about Washington’s execution as if it were only yesterday. This was not medieval Europe. Not the Inquisition. Not a heretic burned at the stake by some ecclesiastical authority in the Old World. This was Texas, and the white people in that photograph were farmers, laborers, shopkeepers, some of them respectable congregants from local churches in and around the growing town of Waco. Here is the photograph. Take a good look at Jesse Washington’s stiffened body tied to the tree. He had been sentenced to death for the murder of a white woman. No witnesses saw the crime; he allegedly confessed but the truth of the allegations would never be tested. The grand jury took just four minutes to return a guilty verdict, but there was no appeal, no review, no prison time. Instead, a courtroom mob dragged him outside, pinned him to the ground, and cut off his testicles. A bonfire was quickly built and lit. For two hours, Jesse Washington — alive — was raised and lowered over the flames. Again and again and again. City officials and police stood by, approvingly. According to some estimates, the crowd grew to as many as 15,000. There were taunts, cheers and laughter. Reporters described hearing “shouts of delight.” When the flames died away, Washington’s body was torn apart and the pieces were sold as souvenirs. The party was over. Many years later, as a young man, I visited Waco’s Baylor University, often referred to as the Texas Baptist Vatican. I had been offered a teaching position there. I sat for a while in the school’s Armstrong Browning Library, one of the most beautiful in America, containing not only the works of Robert and Elizabeth Barrett Browning, the acclaimed Victorian poets, but also stained glass windows, marble columns, and elegant ceilings that bring to mind the gorgeous interior of Michelangelo’s Laurentian library in Florence. Sitting there, I found it hard to reconcile the beauty and quiet of that sanctuary with the photograph that I had been shown earlier by a man named Harry Provence, publisher of the local newspaper. Seeing it, I realized that as young Jesse Washington was being tortured, students his own age, some of them studying for the ministry, were just finishing their spring semester. In 1905, when another black man had been lynched in Waco, Baylor’s president became a leader of the anti-lynching movement. But ugly memories still divided the town. Jesse Washington was just one black man to die horribly at the hands of white death squads. Between 1882 and 1968 — 1968! — there were 4,743 recorded lynchings in the US. About a quarter of them were white people, many of whom had been killed for sympathizing with black folks. My father, who was born in 1904 near Paris, Texas, kept in a drawer that newspaper photograph from back when he was a boy of thousands of people gathered as if at a picnic to feast on the torture and hanging of a black man in the center of town. On a journey tracing our roots many years later, my father choked and grew silent as we stood near the spot where it had happened. Yes, it was hard to get back to sleep the night we heard the news of the Jordanian pilot’s horrendous end. ISIS be damned! I thought. But with the next breath I could only think that our own barbarians did not have to wait at any gate. They were insiders. Home grown. Godly. Our neighbors, friends, and kin. People like us. This post first appeared on BillMoyers.com.
And yet another opportune moment for TAR AND FEATHERS slipped away! -jmho
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
He's a Constitutional scholar, doncha know?
President Barack Obama inadvertently sparked both a theological and historical debate while speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast yesterday, inciting a wave of criticism from conservatives for asserting that Islam is not, in fact, the only religion to struggle with issues of violence. Addressing a bevy of faith leaders that included the Dalai Llama, Obama spoke at length about the wrongs of militant terrorist groups like ISIS, who he said abuse the Islamic faith for their own goals. However, he also warned against the temptation to cast Islam as a uniquely violent religion, imploring Christians and others to look at their own history before passing judgment. “Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” Obama said. “In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.” The President’s comments are, of course, accurate, and he went on to explain that his point was ultimately about maintaining religious humility. But his embrace of historical fact infuriated some conservatives, many of whom equated his reference to things such as the Crusades to an attack on Christianity. E.W. Jackson, a former candidate for Lt. Governor in Virginia and a devotee of much-maligned “prosperity gospel” theology, bashed the President on the FOX and Friends television show, saying, “Mr. President, we’re not on our high horse. What we’re on is high alert. And the American people would like to know, for once, that you’re willing to defend Christianity and defend America instead of defending Islam.” Well-known conservative pundits also weighed in. Rush Limbaugh dedicated an entire segment of his show to the comments, and Russell Moore, President of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, said, “The evil actions that he mentioned were clearly outside the moral parameters of Christianity itself and were met with overwhelming moral opposition from Christians.” Naturally, the conservative Twitterverse also exploded with tweets deriding Obama’s remarks, and conservative media watchdog Matt Philbin snarked, “So Obama’s not interested in fighting radical Islam today because of stuff Christians did in the 11th Century.” Even Jim Gilmore, former Republican governor of Virginia, blasted Obama,saying, “The president’s comments this morning at the prayer breakfast are the most offensive I’ve ever heard a president make in my lifetime. He has offended every believing Christian in the United States.” Jackson and Limbaugh’s dubious claimsto Christianity notwithstanding, the two main assertions underlying most of these arguments are both absurd and, arguably, unChristian. The first — that violence committed in the name of Christ is somehow exempt from criticism because it happened in the past — ignores history and reality. Like it or not, horrendous torture happened during the Inquisition and the era of slavery, both of which were justified using biblical scripture. And the argument that the Crusades — which resulted in the deaths of untold thousands — were only in response to Muslim provocation is highly contested among historians. More importantly, while these events are long past, these critics are apparently tone deaf to the numerous modern examples of violence perpetrated by people claiming to represent Christ. In 2011, Anders Behring Breivik, a self-professed Christian, launched a horrific assault in Oslo, Norway to defend “Christian Europe,” using an arsenal of weapons to kill 77 people — most of whom were teenagers. In November of last year, suspected Christian terrorist Larry McQuilliams mounted a full-scale attack on Austin, Texas, firing off more than 100 shots in the city before embarking on a botched attempt to burn down the Mexican Consulate. And in central Africa, the Lord’s Resistance Army (which, similar to ISIS, seeks to establish a theocratic state based on the Ten Commandments) forcibly recruits child soldiers, terrorizes local villages, and is thought to be responsible for the deaths of 100,000 people in Uganda and the displacement of 1.7 million in the greater region, according to the United Nations. One wonders if Jackson and others would be so willing to “defend” Christianity’s apparently sinless history to the faces of those 60,000 to 100,000 child soldiers, youngsters who were ripped from their homes, tortured brutally, and forced by the LRA to run needlessly into battle — all ostensibly in the name of Christ. In addition, the second argument directed at Obama’s statements — that violence in the name of Christ was always met with overwhelming moral opposition from Christians — is only true when examined through the lens of several centuries of history. Few senior members of the Catholic church would defend the Crusades today, but they were waged with broad support in their time, and the institution of slavery took centuries to dismantle. Granted, there is a credible argument about whether or not the deplorable actions of these movements and individuals invalidate their claim to Christianity. Just as millions of Muslims around the world have decried the actions of ISIS as unIslamic — and whyfive Muslims have won the Nobel Peace Prize since 2000 in their faith-rooted pursuit of peace — so too do Christians get to demand that a true Christian is someone who pursues peace and justice, not violence. Religion matters most when believers hold each other accountable and actualize their faith in their daily lives, and that includes the right to disavow those who pervert religion for bloodthirsty reasons. This is the legacy of those who opposed the hateful theology of racists and slaveowners with a message of spiritual equality, such as the prayerful abolitionists and civil rights pastors. After all, such is the example of Jesus Christ, who responded to treachery and violence enacted against him by his own disciples with radical forgiveness and peace. But Gilmore, Jackson, and others aren’t trying to forgive people who enact atrocities in the name of Christ, nor are they attempting to apply hard- learned lessons from the difficult parts of Christianity’s past to the present. Instead, they’re effectively refusing to acknowledge that such things even exist. No, the current wave of violence perpetrated by Christians is not the “same” as that undertaken by jihadists, but pretending it never happens ultimately reduces faith to a political talking point, and violates a central teaching of the Christian faith: the Bible, if nothing else, implores Christians to take sin seriously, and to repeatedly confront those who commit sins in the name of Christ. To do otherwise is to fall into self- righteousness, a worship of the church — instead of Christ — that borders on idolatry. Ironically, insisting on this blatantly inaccurate image of Christianity might also hamper the fight against ISIS and other terrorist groups, as the overbearing rhetoric of Jackson and others only bolsters the message of extremists. Countering ISIS’s savage self-righteousness with inaccurate theological hubris falls into their own characterization of the West as unapologetically self-indulgent, and could easily be turned into a recruiting tool. It is perhaps in preparation for exactly this kind of situation that Christian scripture implores believers to acknowledge their own faults early and often, because it is only after completing the hard, faithful work of self-examination that one can effectively address the failings of others. Why Obama Is Right About Christian Violence...by Jack Jenkins.
This is just another bold-faced LIE, spread as gospel by this treasonous administration and their spineless lackies. Please post documented facts for each one of these (4,743) 'alleged' lynchings. Thank you. alleged: adjective al·leged Y-Èlejd, -Èle-jYd : accused of having done something wrong or illegal but not yet proven guilty : said to have happened but not yet proven
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
Well, that settles it.
He's a Constitutional scholar, doncha know? Obama's middle name is Hussein so there is that sympathy he may have for Islam and/or maybe he is trying to prevent war fever in the USA - like the sinking of the Lusitania type of fever. As long as we don't go to war - more than we are that is - there. The Arabs have armies - this ISIS is a rabble that functions in a war zone no man's land the USA helped create by supporting Syrian rebels. Back the Assad regime and this is all over in 3 months.
Please post documented facts for each one of these (4,743) 'alleged' lynchings. Thank you. You are correct - there was probably more lynchings.
He's a constitutional scholar, doncha know? " He is no more a constitutional scholar, than I am a nuclear physicist. He is a communist muslim nig. He is a curse that has been placed on this nation! All true Americans should be ashamed that he was elected into office! I am sick of him, and I loath those that voted for him !!!
Si vis pacem, para bellum
No, I don't think Obama is a secret Muslim. I am saying that he lived in Muslim countries, His 2 fathers were Muslim - the Indonesian step dad and the birth father and he lived in a Muslim country (Indonesia). So without being Muslim himself he has a sympathy for them. That is not the same thing as being a Muslim himself (he drinks beer for example - and no he is not doing that to throw us off the Muslim scent). Obama has not done one thing to make the USA more Islamic - if anything his policies like supporting abortion and gay rights is anti-Muslim.
Obama is an insane loose cannon, brandishing a loaded cocked gun at the heads Americans who make any attempt at saving their families, or this once Great Free sovereign Nation! -jmho
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
So, you concede there were many lynchings in the United States. All you want to do is argue about the total number. Michael Donald was a young African American man who whose murder is sometimes referred to as the last recorded lynching in the United States. Link: 'Last Lynching' Shows Racial Inequity, Advancement.
He has shown no behaviors that many of the American people can trust to their Commander- in-Chief. His remaining time as Commander-in-Chief and President is passing far too slowly!
I'd love to play a few rounds of poker with you, boy(?). LOL! I'm sorry, but there are just no more words left to define...STUPID!!!
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
In case you're under the delusion you're ANY kind of American patriot, here's a subtle hint: YOU'RE NOT. How much are you paid to toot your .goob dog-whistle and troll LF? Was it more than at LP? Do you buy the donuts for the local ACLU and SPLC meetings?
This week, President Obama met with Muslim leaders in a private political meeting for the first time in his six-year presidency. The meeting set off predictable angry reactions from the political right, with Fox News’ Sean Hannity even saying he wished Obama had demanded that the leaders publicly denounce radical Islam. Obama further raised the hackles of the Christian right when he said at the National Prayer Breakfast that no religion has a monopoly on violence, saying, “And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. Slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.” The reaction to these comments was apoplectic. Rush Limbaugh called it an “insult” to Christianity; the Tea Party News Network said Obama threw “Christians under the bus”; the Daily Caller surmised that Obama’s remarks were designed to “curb” criticism of Islam. All of these critics failed to engage with the substance of what Obama was saying. The president was not attacking Christianity, he was simply noting that just as ISIS may be using the name of Islam to rally followers to its violent agenda, extremists within the Christian faith have done the same thing historically. Violence has been in the mainstream of Christianity throughout history. If anything, Obama didn’t go far enough in his remarks. Christianist violence isn’t a relic of the Crusades; it continues today, and in many of its forms is just as violent as what we are seeing from ISIS.
Oh I'm sorry -- Am I actually suppose to respond to your Botware program? *snicker*
LOL! I'm sorry, but there are just no more words left to define...STUPID!!! Perciles may by correct and then he may not. After you finish rolling on the floor, please get up and tell him, and everyone, what Obama has done to make the USA more Islamic.
*snicker* No, all you have shown that you can actually do, is name call. Carry on with what you do best and I will carry on with what I am doing. Exactly who did the massacring here is still a matter of debate. The only thing that everyone seems to agree on is the death toll: four ATF agents and 80 followers of Vernon Howell, a.k.a. David Koresh, and his splinter group of Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists. It happened in early 1993 when the ATF raided, then besieged, then attacked the fortified compound that the Koreshians called Mount Carmel. All that was left was a smoking ruin. There are no signs of the compound any more; the only remnant is a hole, formerly a swimming pool that was used as a bunker during the siege. A little chapel has been built out by the road by the Koreshians and their supporters, incorporating an infrequently-open museum of Davidian history that censures everyone for the bloodshed. Up a dirt road is a grove of young trees planted in rows, one for each Branch Davidian killed. For several years each had a little granite marker at its base with a victim's name and age and the same date of death: April 20, 1993 (The stones were later mortared into a single memorial). When we visited, a rusting motorcycle stood off to one side, choked with weeds -- David Koresh's? We couldn't say, because our only company was a friendly dog and a lot of grasshoppers. The surviving Koreshians have erected monuments to everyone who died, to eliminate any lingering animosity. Across the dirt road from the trees is a memorial to the ATF officers who were killed in the February 28, 1993 raid, which kicked off the 51 day siege and the eventual storming of the compound. And there's another monument to the people who died in the Oklahoma City bombing, two years to the day after the massacre at Mount Carmel. According to John Anderson, who we encountered at his House Of Horrors attraction north of town, "Some folks believe Oklahoma City happened because of Waco." He also told us that the current Branch Davidian leader, Charles Pace, runs the local health food store, and that the Branch Davidians are "very peaceful people." This may be true, but we were getting this information from a guy who runs an attraction with a giant, laughing skull on the side of its building. Pace has organized about a dozen surviving Davidians into a new church: The Branch, The Lord Our Righteousness. For years he has been trying -- thus far without success -- to turn the massacre site into a visitor destination, with an amphitheater, a biblical petting zoo, a museum and gift shop, a wellness center, a deli, an organic farm, and a model of the tabernacle that housed the Ten Commandments. The intent has always been to de-emphasize the massacre. All parties seem to want very hard to forget about the whole thing. Show where any of this is wrong.
SPEAK, MAN! Defend your divisive ways, your socialist-statist-fascist propaganda, your obvious (compensated) task as a forum-kindler of trollish proportions. Are you compensated with little multi-colored shiny stars to stick on your bulletin board? Or just, "ATTA BOY!!"? Tick-tick....
Which...is obvious. Show where any of this is wrong. The part where YOU are posting...and baiting. This "hobby" of yours -- what kind of personal satisfaction do you dervive from it?
“We have already seen a number of Christian atrocities, not only in considering the Crusades and other wars including wars fought on God's behalf, but in considering forced conversions, Christian vandalism, persecution and slavery . Christians also have a poor record in facilitating the worst forms of colonialism. Here we look at just one example, probably the most extreme: The Congo Free State.” Source: http://www.b ad newsaboutchristianity.com/gh5_atrocities.htm. Did this NOT happen?
VERY nice...VERY believable. *cough* (The explanation point at the end wuz a nice touch)
Thank you for digging your hole deeper. I'd drop you a rope, but you'd only tie it into a noose.
On, you only want to censor my posting...I get it. You have disputed not one of the documented atrocities. all you have done is get upset when some facts are presented to you that you refuse to consider. His name was Jesse Washington, a 17-year-old black youth who was born in rural Texas in 1897. He worked on a farm outside Waco which belonged to George and Lucy Fryer. In May, 1916, Washington was convicted in City Court of murdering Lucy Fryer. During the proceedings, he apologized and confessed to the crime. At the end of the trial, Washington was sentenced to death by hanging. Residents, however, were already in an uproar over the crime. A black man who attacked a white woman in any way whatsoever during that era in the South evoked little sympathy from the public. Within five minutes of the sentencing, dozens of court spectators jumped the railing, fought with officials and seized the terrified defendant. He was immediately set upon by a vicious gang using clubs, shovels and bricks. He was stripped naked and dragged kicking and screaming to the lawn directly in front of City Hall. Townspeople had already built a giant bonfire underneath a large tree. The crowd was later estimated to be as large as 15,000 people. Included in the cheering multitude was the Police Chief and the Mayor of Waco. Other police officers also stood by during the sickening ordeal which played out in the symbolic shadow of City Hall (Dallas Morning News, June 2, 1998). Washington was immersed in coal oil, hoisted up onto the tree and slowly lowered into the fire. Some of the spectators cut off fingers and toes from the corpse as souvenirs [1]. His remains were dumped into a burlap bag and hung from a pole while many in the crowd cheered [2] The Waco lynching focused national attention, once again, in 1916 on the problem of lynching: a systemic, persistent and horrifying practice that was rampant throughout the South for decades. These killings were often committed with the full knowledge, and sometimes with the active assistance, of law enforcement people. Lynchings were also treated as entertainment events and like the Waco incident, often attended by thousands of onlookers. Most took place in the Deep South but lynchings were common and recorded in over 26 states, including Illinois and North Dakota (Cleveland Gazette, January 8, 1898, p. 2). The problem became so widespread that it was addressed by several Presidents and eventually the Supreme Court. However, rather than condemn lynch law, the Supreme Court seemed to effect rulings that reaffirmed a segregated America. Court decisions during this era perpetuated the atmosphere of violence, fostered the notion of white supremacy and cultivated mistrust of Washington. But the origins of lynching do not rest in federal court, nor can it be blamed, as Southern newspapers often reported, on government's failure to apply justice. Lynching arose from the ashes of a ruthless and costly war that pitted brother against brother and father against son. The Civil War left a trail of blood and bitterness that twisted its way through successive generations and set the stage for a frenzy of so called mob justice that killed thousands of men, women and children, most of them black. And between the years 1880 and 1905, a period of twenty five years, not one person was ever convicted of any crime associated with these killings. Lynchings are, in effect, the most extensive series of unsolved murders in American history. http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/lynching/index_1.html.
Perciles may by correct and then he may not. After you finish rolling on the floor, please get up and tell him, and everyone, what Obama has done to make the USA more Islamic. Yea, after I laughed at the idea that Murron thinks Obama enacted Sharia law of some such I also await to hear how Obama has made America Islamic.
I'd drop you a rope, but you'd only tie it into a noose. Just show me where any of this is wrong. Why is that so hard for you to do?
The Belgian Congo was a horrible episode in human brutality carried out by Christians but not for religious reasons. The atrocities carried out were not part of a Christian rule book for punishments nor done to get Africans to become Christians. The Belgian/Europeans worked the local population to death and to get those that did not want to live as slaves they enacted brutalities to make sure they broke resistance. ISIS maybe bad or good Muslims depending on what version of Islam you follow but clearly their agenda is for a theocracy based on their view of Islam. The Congo state existed to make the Belgian king richer.
VERY nice...VERY believable. *cough* (The explanation point at the end wuz a nice touch) You do not agree that "(Obama) has shown no behaviors that many of the American people can trust to their Commander- in-Chief. His remaining time as Commander- in-Chief and President is passing far too slowly!He has shown no behaviors that many of the American people can trust to their Commander- in-Chief. His remaining time as Commander-in-Chief and President is passing far too slowly?"
LOL... Aah, what a pitiful carnival barker you've become. I don't mean that in a bad way. Do you perform the shell game as well?
There was Christian brutality in whatever name it was conducted.
There once wuz a story of a boy who cried wolf. By the end of the story no one believes a word of his. If credibility were currency, you'd be...Dead Broke :-(
LOL... Aah, what a pitiful carnival barker you've become. I don't mean that in a bad way. Do you perform the shell game as well? Get lost, Punk. You are doing nothing here except trying to cause disruption. But thanks for providing me a platform from which to launch articles you have not disputed as inaccurate. Two more boys identified as three-year dig and investigation of the abuse inflicted on mostly black students at the now-closed Florida school nears final stages Forensic researchers sifting the grounds of a notorious Florida reform school at the centre of a decades-long abuse scandal have identified the remains of two more bodies from 51 recovered so far from unmarked graves. The investigative team has also revealed horrific new allegations about the extent of physical and sexual abuse inflicted on the mostly African American students at the now-closed Arthur G Dozier School for Boys in Marianna, including details of a secret “rape dungeon” where victims younger than 12 were taken to be molested. The revelations come in an interim report submitted to Florida’s senior politicians by Tampa-based anthropologists from the University of South Florida as they prepare for the final stages of their three-year dig at the school in the spring and early summer. The team’s leader, Erin Kimmerle, said that while charges against the perpetrators were unlikely due to the deaths of many former staff members and the statute of limitations on crimes that took place up to a century ago, their work was important to the survivors and victims’ families. “After three years our focus is more than ever on the present, educating the living about what happened in the past, mourning with families of those who died at Dozier and supporting them as they seek justice,” she said in the report. “Even in cases where law enforcement and prosecutors are unable to file criminal charges, transparency and acknowledgement of the abuses are important components for reconciling conflict.” The researchers found that officials “consistently underreported” the number of deaths that occurred at the school between its opening in 1900 and 1960, the latest date for which records are currently publicly available, and that numerous bodies were buried with slack or missing documentation outside the marked cemetery known as Boot Hill. One set of remains was found with what appeared to be a shotgun pellet, Kimmerle said, while others showed signs of blunt force trauma and “substantial evidence” of malnutrition, infections and a near-total absence of dental care. Among the allegations of a group of survivors known as the White House Boys, nicknamed for the building in which they say they suffered the worst abuse, are accounts of youths being beaten unconscious while chained to walls or beds, raped by staff and other students in a basement or simply disappearing after excessive punishments for minor infractions such as smoking or truancy. The USF report contains details of a six-year-old boy who died after being sent out to work as a houseboy, and a teenager who was found shot to death and covered by a blanket after running away from the school. “It’s been exciting to get a picture of these children, and their lives, from the science,” Kimmerle said. “[But] it’s sad the way people treated each other. It’s a window on a period of a lot of change from the early [20th] century to the 1960s.” The university team has now positively identified five bodies from those recovered, either through DNA or contextual evidence. The latest two are Sam Morgan, who spent at least two spells at the school following his first arrival, aged 18, in September 1915, and Bennett Evans, an adult school employee believed to have died in a dormitory fire in 1914. Last August, Ovell Krell, the sister of the first victim to be identified, George Owen Smith, who disappeared from the school in 1940 at the age of 14, told the Guardian of her relief at the solving of a 74-year mystery. “It’s been an emotional journey and now I can finally get some closure, some peace of mind,” she said. State lawmakers approved grants of almost half a million dollars to fund the USF investigation shortly after the school was closed, for financial reasons, in 2011. A year earlier a report by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, which recorded only 32 graves, concluded there was insufficient evidence to prove or refute the allegations of physical or sexual abuse. Kimmerle said that the researchers were working with the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office to find surviving family members of boys who attended the school who could provide DNA samples to match with unidentified remains. “There is a lot of work left to do, in the field, in the lab and filling in the gaps in the records and archives we have,” she said. Watch video about the investigation from August 2014 here.
You should take a few moments of your precious time and reflect upon yourself before pointing fingers.
Thanks, I just devoterd two seconds to that. Ah, I feel much better!!! Can you find anything incorrect in the articles?
You have a very short attention span. Maybe you should take a HUGE amount of time. I doubt it. You mean your attempt at spamming & flooding & phishing? Oh no, you are the best!
I don't know about you, but it seems to me that Gatlin has become an anti-Christian propagandist, but GOOD! And of course one of his go-to sources just happens to be the SPLC.
Wasn't that interview done by Brian Williams?
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Hmmmm, I wonder how many Muslims Obolo has brought into this country since he took office? Couple 100,000 or a couple million?
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
No, it is not contested among historians. All of the Middle East and North Africa were strongly Christian, prior to the time of Mohammed.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
self ping
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Hard to say. Too many though. Unfortunately, that process was started before he moved into the White Hut.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
"and tell him, and everyone, what Obama has done to make the USA more Islamic." Pericles, as long as you are watching obama's right hand, then you won't be bothered by what he's doing with his left~ No president, from the founding fathers of this nation, till today, has seen fit after Islamic barbarians committed savage, inhumane atrocities before the cameras of the world, Obama has. A sane person does not jump to the defense of evil doers, a sane person does not incourage them with praise for their KORAN, that leads them on to even more wholesale slaughter, while in the same breath, trash his own country, blame this country and our people for their acts of savagery in the name of their heathen god. These rabid animals have all the support and encouragement they need from the lips of Obama himself to continue, they don't need mine, and will never have it...NEVER! - jmho #1 “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” #2 “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer” #3 “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world — including in my own country.” #4 “As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam.” #5 “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.” #6 “Islam has always been part of America” #7 “we will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities” #8 “These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.” #9 “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.” #10 “I made clear that America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam.”
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
Very good post. Those that doubt Ovomit's support for Islam should read your post #44, several times!
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Yes, its premise of pretense of moral relevancy. Anyone can spin facts or selectively cherry pick facts to support an argument. But that does not give weight or validity to the agrument in the overall context of reality. The Crusades, Inquisition, the institution and justification of slavery in the name of Christ occured hunreds of years ago - in other words in the distant PAST. What is occurring in the name of Isalm around the glode (ISIS, Boko Haram, etc.) is happening NOW. People, societies, civilizations grow and mature, many to the point where the acknowledge and condemn past actions within their ranks and no longer tolerate it. Where is the KKK and its ilk these days? Christian America roundly and publically rejected these groups and told them you can't live with us and to get out of Dodge - or else. What is occurring in the name if Isalm is in real time, not hundreds of years ago BUT it isn't much different what was done in the name of Islam hundreds of years ago. One critical difference, if not the singular most important one, is that Muslims around the glode, en masse, clearly and loudly, not even Jordan yet, has told ISIS and its ilk to go away, you can't live with us, get out of Mecca - or else. Get it?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Put up a welcome sign for the migration of tens of thousands of muslims who are building mosques scattered throughout the country.
Can anyone claim that it is not the intent of Islam to impose Sharia Law as the only law around the globe? But even Mulsims know that this can't happene but in small steps. Our POS current POTUS has contributed more than his fair of these small steps to obtaining the true Muslim goal for the planet.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
How many hundreds of thousands of muslims did dubya grant political asylum in the USA? George W. Bush preaching at the mosque. "Islam is a religion of peace" (ROP). Obama is a F'n Bush clone, aka a REAL Republican!
It's not a lie. There are whole volumes of lynching photographs and postcards. The average was one every other day from 1880 to 1911. Many were by burning at the stake or other forms of burning alive. The Germans denied that anything was going on, and refused to believe until they saw. We have the pictures and CAN see our past, if we look. It's gruesome stuff. Don't be a German. Accept the ugly past, acknowledge that it was evil, and then look to make sure the present follows a different path from that our forebears.
Hard to say. Too many though. Unfortunately, that process was started before he moved into the White Hut. We are not allowed to keep count under a policy where elementary perception of destructive cultural or genetic differences detrimental to western civilization is a hate crime.
You miss the overarching point. Those who murder and enslave are not following Christ's commands. Jesus Christ preached the Law of Grace: Matthew 5: And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: 2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying, 3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. 5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. 6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. 7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. 8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. 9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. 10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. 12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you. 13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. 14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. 15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. 16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven. 17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
Well the above is true. However the interactions of Islam with the USA has always been negative. The Muslims in Africa captured and sold Blacks as slaves to Europeans and Americans. The Barbary pirates, Muslim also, attacked American ships. Then of course 9/11. Not a very "positive" part of America.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
It's not a lie. There are whole volumes of lynching photographs and postcards. "there were 4,743 recorded lynchings in the US..." Then you should have no problem posting the documentation of these lynches, all 4,743 people you're claiming were lynched at the hands of Christians. My post stands as is, unless you have something concrete to back what looks like decades/centurys (you have nothing more recent in this country?). But if you feel the need to conjure me again, leave the Germans out of this for another thread. Thanks! ************************* Please post documented facts for each one of these (4,743) 'alleged' lynchings. Thank you. alleged: adjective al·leged Y-Èlejd, -Èle-jYd : accused of having done something wrong or illegal but not yet proven guilty : said to have happened but not yet proven
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
In the Congo it was not done for religious reasons is what I am saying.
You mistake Obama for Bush.
"there were 4,743 recorded lynchings in the US..." Then you should have no problem posting the documentation of these lynches, all 4,743 people you're claiming were lynched at the hands of Christians. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/shipp/lynchingsstate.html We can argue if Protestants can be called Christians though. https://henriettavintondavis.wordpress.com/2008/08/01/black-women-who-were- lynched-in-america/ Mary Turner 1918 Eight Months Pregnant Mobs lynched Mary Turner on May 17, 1918 in Lowndes County. Georgia because she vowed to have those responsible for killing her husband arrested. Her husband was arrested in connection with the shooting and killing Hampton Smith, a white farmer for whom the couple had worked, and wounding his wife. Sidney Johnson. a Black, apparently killed Smith because he was tired of the farmer’s abuse. Unable to find Johnson. the killers lynched eight other Blacks Including Hayes Turner and his wife Mary. The mob hanged Mary by her feet, poured gasoline and oil on her and set fire to her body. One white man sliced her open and Mrs. Turner’s baby tumbled to the ground with a “little cry” and the mob stomped the baby to death and sprayed bullets into Mary Turner. (NAACP: Thirty Years of Lynching in the U.S. 1889-1918 )
You mistake Obama for Bush. And you have a reading comprehension problem, that is not my post, francis!
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
You miss the overarching point. Those who murder and enslave are not following Christ's commands. Jesus Christ preached the Law of Grace… So those who called themselves “Christians” and committed atrocities that solely occurred on “command of church authorities” or were committed in the name of “Christianity” were deemed NOT to be “Christians....by whom? If it is to accepted that those who committed heinous barbaric acts deemed themselves to be “Christians” but were not really “Christians”….can it not also be said that those who deem themselves to be “Muslims” and commit violent acts are not “Muslims?” That be the case, then why do so many have so much trouble with Obama’s regime refusing to use the term or categorize the radical extremists: “Islamic Terrorists?” Supposedly to fight communism, thousands of buddhist protesters and monks were imprisoned in "detention camps." Out of protest dozens of buddhist teachers - male and female - and monks poured gasoline over themselves and burned themselves. (Note that Buddhists burned themselves: in comparison Christians tend to burn others). Meanwhile some of the prison camps, which in the meantime were filled with Protestant and even Catholic protesters as well, had turned into no-nonsense death camps. It is estimated that during this period of terror (1955-1960) at least 24,000 were wounded - mostly in street riots - 80,000 people were executed, 275,000 had been detained or tortured, and about 500,000 were sent to concentration or detention camps. [MW76-89]. For quite some time I heard only rumours about Catholic clergy actively involved in the 1994 Rwanda massacres. Odd denials of involvement were printed in Catholic church journals, before even anybody had openly accused members of the church. Then, 10/10/96, in the newscast of S2 Aktuell, Germany - a station not at all critical to Christianity - the following was stated: "Anglican as well as Catholic priests and nuns are suspect of having actively participated in murders. Especially the conduct of a certain Catholic priest has been occupying the public mind in Rwanda's capital Kigali for months. He was minister of the church of the Holy Family and allegedly murdered Tutsis in the most brutal manner. He is reported to have accompanied marauding Hutu militia with a gun in his cowl. In fact there has been a bloody slaughter of Tutsis seeking shelter in his parish. Even two years after the massacres many Catholics refuse to set foot on the threshold of their church, because to them the participation of a certain part of the clergy in the slaughter is well established. There is almost no church in Rwanda that has not seen refugees - women, children, old - being brutally butchered facing the crucifix. In connection with these events again and again two Benedictine nuns are mentioned, both of whom have fled into a Belgian monastery in the meantime to avoid prosecution. According to survivors one of them called the Hutu killers and led them to several thousand people who had sought shelter in her monastery. By force the doomed were driven out of the churchyard and were murdered in the presence of the nun right in front of the gate. The other one is also reported to have directly cooperated with the murderers of the Hutu militia. In her case again witnesses report that she watched the slaughtering of people in cold blood and without showing response. She is even accused of having procured some petrol used by the killers to set on fire and burn their victims alive..." It is said: “As can be seen from these events, to Christianity the Dark Ages never come to an end....”
And you have a reading comprehension problem, that is not my post, francis! I don't think Obama brought that many compared to Bush, Jr.
Put up a welcome sign for the migration of tens of thousands of muslims who are building mosques scattered throughout the country. Nah! You have Ted Kennedy to "thank" for getting the Hart-Celler Immigration Bill passed into law on Oct. 3, 1965. That legislation, which phased out the national origins quota system first instituted in 1921, created the foundation of today's immigration law. And, contrary to anything Barack Obama does, that law inaugurated a new era of mass immigration which has affected the lives of millions.
The Barbary slave trade refers to the white slave markets that flourished on the Barbary Coast of North Africa, or modern-day Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and western Libya, between the 16th and 19th centuries. These markets prospered while the states were nominally under Ottoman suzerainty, but in reality they were mostly autonomous. The North African slave markets traded in European slaves. The European slaves were acquired by Barbary pirates in slave raids on ships and by raids on coastal towns from Italy to Spain, Portugal, France, England, the Netherlands, and as far afield as Iceland. Men, women, and children were captured, to such a devastating extent that vast numbers of sea coast towns were abandoned. Ohio State University history Professor Robert Davis describes the white slave trade as minimized by most modern historians in his book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast and Italy, 1500-1800 (Palgrave Macmillan). Davis estimates that 1 million to 1.25 million white Christian Europeans were enslaved in North Africa, from the beginning of the 16th century to the middle of the 18th, by slave traders from Tunis, Algiers, and Tripoli alone (these numbers do not include the European people which were enslaved by Morocco and by other raiders and traders of the Mediterranean Sea coast),[1] and roughly 700 Americans were held captive in this region as slaves between 1785 and 1815.[2] 16th- and 17th-century customs statistics suggest that Istanbul's additional slave import from the Black Sea may have totaled around 2.5 million from 1450 to 1700.[3] The markets declined after the loss of the Barbary Wars and finally ended in the 1830s, when the region was conquered by France.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/bar1796t.asp So Obama is stating what the Founding Fathers stated.....
Okay, thank you for that.
yea, Obama spoke some nice words about Islam same as George "9/11 happened on my watch" Bush who said Islam is a great religion and a religion of peace. I guess Bush made America Islamic? I am still waiting for Murron to tell me what laws Obama passed that made the USA more Muslim. If anything I would thing the Fundamentalist right wing would cheer the banning of abortions, the banning of alcohol sales, punishing gays and forcing women to be subservient to men. But all I see is Obama pushing laws Muslims would hate like gay marriage and equal rights for women.
I can post the documentary evidence of about 98 of the most gruesome of them in the form of photographs…if I had a scanner to do so, knew how, and felt like it. There was a museum display in New York City at a holocaust museum of the lynching area in America, with photos and various other artifacts. It was a very somber thing, like a holocaust. A documentary was done on it, and a book published called "Without Sanctuary" that gives plenty of details and photographs, for those with a strong stomach. It's bad stuff, and the rate of it: one every other day, was one of the things that drove the Great Migration of blacks from the deep south to the Northern industrial cities.
So when Clinton and george Bush helped create a Muslim Bosnian and Kosovo and overthrew a secular Iraq it was also Obama's fault? It is just stupid logic from the American right wing which is why I lament the stupidity of the American right - especially those that make this claim and support the Iraq war to this day.
The Muslims in Africa captured and sold Blacks as slaves to Europeans and Americans. The Barbary pirates, Muslim also, attacked American ships. Then of course 9/11. Don't forget that most Muslim countries were allies with the Nazi's during WW-2.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
An easy mistake to make when it comes to policy. You can tell them apart,though. Boy Jorge is the smart one.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Why Obama Is Right to Avoid a Double Standard on Modern Christian Atrocities. President Obama, speaking on Thursday at the National Prayer Breakfast, condemned religious extremism in the Muslim world, noting that it is the work of twisted individuals rather than being intrinsic to the religion. He then added, “And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.” It is actually amazing that Southern Christianity does not get called out more often for its role in slavery and racial discrimination in the United States, especially since its churches are still for the most part segregated! I mean, don’t people know why there is a Southern Baptist denomination in the first place? Why not just “Baptist?” The US History website notes: The southern Christian churches conducted something like a genocide against the slaves. British North America and then the USA kidnapped and enslaved about 500,000 persons from 1600 to 1808. In addition, the North American slavers killed off about 200,000 Africans trying to capture people in Africa or let them die in the unsanitary holds of the Middle Passage across the Atlantic. Once they were on the plantations, the slaves were often worked to death; in 1830-1860 only 10 percent were over 50 years old. Their children were kidnapped from them and sold. Women and men who formed common law unions were separated and sold. Ten to 20 percent of what became over time 4 million slaves had been Muslim but their religion was stolen from them and they were forcibly converted to Christianity. Southern Christian seminaries produced an endless stream of theological writing upholding all these criminal acts. It was done very much in the name of the Bible. Other Christians worked for abolition, so all this support for enslavement was not intrinsic to Christianity; it was a matter of a particular interpretation of Christianity. Slavery was widespread in the world, but Southern American plantation slavery was called the ‘peculiar institution’ for a reason– much slavery elsewhere was household slavery, as in most of the Muslim world. It was no fun to be someone’s property in a household either, but plantations (and this was true of Brazilian plantations as well) were particularly deadly, often killing the workers by age 40. As for Jim Crow, the American version of South Africa’s Apartheid wherein African-Americans could not so much as drink from the same fountain as whites, Colin Chapell writes of Carolyn Renée Dupont’s Mississippi Praying: “Dupont demonstrates that defenders of Mississippi’s segregated society turned early and often to evangelical theology in order to justify their views on race . . . her work unequivocally shows the religious commitment to segregation among white evangelicals. The white evangelical commitment to individualistic theology also led the way for an understanding of the world in which the disadvantages facing African Americans in the South were a result of their own failings rather than any structural stumbling blocks.” On the order of 2 to 3 African-Americans were lynched every week under Jim Crow segregation, or up to 12,000 or so wantonly murdered by Christians during these 80 years. But Obama could have mentioned other modern Christian atrocities. Christians often blame Christian violence on secular nationalism so as to dissociate themselves from the some 100 million persons mown down by those of white Christian heritage from Europe and the US in the 20th century. But many of those millions were killed by believing Christians on behalf of explicitly Christian states. I figure that Muslims killed about 2-3 million in the same period, though again, many of those were killed for secular nationalist purposes, not Islam per se. Take Croatian Catholic nationalism in the 1930s and 1940s. It gave rise to the Ustashe movement. . (In the former Yugoslavia, Croats are largely Catholic, Bosnians mostly Muslim and Serbs for the most part Eastern Orthodox). If Ustashe had merely been a form of secular nationalism, it would not have demanded that Serbs convert to Catholicism from Eastern Orthodoxy, which it did. It was a sectarian Christian movement, not a secular one. Catholicism was just deeply intertwined with Croation identity. Ustashe killed 30,000 Jews, 40,000 Roma and about 500,000 Serbs (hint: Yugoslavia was not very populous– these are massive numbers). While the Catholic Church in Croatia was deeply divided on the movement, many in the lower level clergy actively supported it, and [pdf] and Franciscans provided some of the more enthusiastic executioners in the camps. Or in Spain in the 1930s, the Catholic Church was closely allied with Gen. Francisco Franco and declared the struggle against the Spanish left in the civil war a “Crusade.” Franco’s Crusade against the Left probably left on the order of 200,000 dead (some historians say twice that). These 200,000 individuals were killed (yes, Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin) in the name of Christ. I don’t mean to pick on the poor Catholics. The Dutch Reformed Church was not innocent in the imperial wars in what is now Indonesia nor in the Afrikaners’ Apartheid. There is plenty of killing in the name of Christ to go around. The outrage on the right about Obama’s entirely correct observations derives from a kind of Christian nationalism, in which Christians can do no wrong or are not responsible for the wrongs done by other Christians. The point is, that may be so, but neither are Muslims responsible for the loonier of their coreligionists. Those complaining about a “false equivalency” are just using a meaningless buzzword. Here’s a better one: what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Yeah,if you can't trust the Tan Klan to tell the truth about race issues,who can you trust,right?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You mistake Bush for Carter.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Did George Bush Lie About America Being Founded on Christian Principles? “The lesson the President has learned best—and certainly the one that has been the most useful to him—is the axiom that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. One of his Administration’s current favorites is the whopper about America having been founded on Christian principles. Our nation was founded not on Christian principles but on Enlightenment ones. God only entered the picture as a very minor player, and Jesus Christ was conspicuously absent.” Thus begins an article by Brooke Allen that was posted on the website of “The Nation” on February 3, 2005.1 It’s obvious that Allen has not done a thorough study of American history as it relates to its founding documents. There is much more to America’s founding than the Constitution. America was not born in 1877 or even in 1776. The Constitution did not create America, America created the Constitution. More specifically, the states created the national government. The states (colonial governments) were a reality long before the Constitution was conceived, and there is no question about their being founded on Christian principles. Here is Allen’s first assertion: “Our Constitution makes no mention whatever of God.” “No mention whatever” is pretty absolute. Given this bold claim, then how does she explain that the Constitution ends with “DONE in the year of our Lord”? “Our Lord” is a reference to Jesus Christ. This phrase appears just above the signature of George Washington, the same George Washington who took the presidential oath of office with his hand on an open Bible, the same George Washington who was called upon by Congress, after the drafting of the First Amendment, to proclaim a national day of prayer and thanksgiving. The resolution read as follows: That a joint committee of both Houses be directed to wait upon the President of the United States to request that he would recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging, with grateful hearts, the many signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a Constitution for their safety and happiness. * Pennsylvania’s 1790 constitution declared, “That no person, who acknowledges the being of God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this commonwealth.” * The Constitution of Massachusetts stated that “no person shall be eligible to this office, unless . . . he shall declare himself to be of the Christian religion.” The following oath was also required: “I do declare, that I believe the Christian religion, and have firm persuasion of its truth.” * North Carolina’s 1868 stated that “all persons who shall deny the being of Almighty God” “shall be disqualified for office.”5 The 1776 constitution, that remained in effect until 1868, included the following (XXXII): “That no person, who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.”6 North Carolina describes itself as a “Christian State” in the 1868 constitution (Art. XI, sec. 7). If, as Allen maintains, “God only entered the picture as a very minor player, and Jesus Christ was conspicuously absent,” how does she explain these state constitutional provisions? If the federal Constitution nullified these state constitutional mandates, then her point would be valid. The thing is, God was a major player in the founding of America for more than 150 years before the Constitution was drafted. The statement in question was to assure a radically religious (Muslim) government that America would not depose that government and impose Christianity by force. A single phrase ripped from its historical context does nothing to nullify the volumes of historical evidence that Christianity was foundational to the building and maintenance of this nation. The 1797 treaty constantly contrasts “Christian nations” (e.g., Article VI) and “Tripoli,” a Muslim stronghold that was used as a base of operations for Barbary pirates. Muslim nations were hostile to “Christian nations.” The Barbary pirates habitually preyed on ships from “Christian nations,” enslaving “Christian” seamen. “Barbary was Christendom’s Gulag Archipelago.”10 In Joseph Wheelan’s Jefferson’s War, detailing America’s first war on terror with radical Muslims, we learn that Thomas “Jefferson’s war pitted a modern republic with a free- trade, entrepreneurial creed against a medieval autocracy whose credo was piracy and terror. It matched an ostensibly Christian nation against an avowed Islamic one that professed to despise Christians.”11 Wheelan’s historical assessment of the time is on target: “Except for its Native American population and a small percentage of Jews, the United States was solidly Christian, while the North African regencies were just as solidly Muslim—openly hostile toward Christians.”12 In 1822, the United States, along with Great Britain and Ireland, ratified a “Convention for Indemnity Under Award of Emperor of Russia as to the True Construction of the First Article of the Treaty of December 24, 1814.” It begins with the same words found in the Preamble to the 1783 treaty: “In the name of the Most Holy and Indivisible Trinity.” Only Christianity teaches a Trinitarian view of God. The 1848 Treaty with Mexico begins with “In the name of Almighty God.” The treaty also states that both countries are “under the protection of Almighty God, the author of peace. . . .” 1 Brooke Allen, “Our Godless Constitution,” The Nation website (February 3, 2005). www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050221&c=1&s=allen “Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Did you plagerize the contents of your post? If not, how long did it take you to type all of that stuff? If so, where is the source weblink?
The post came from my Logos Bible Software, and permission for me to use the material is contained therein. For your information I have 7,515 resources in the program.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Instead of challenging his source, why can't you tell us what you agree with or disagree with in his post? Is anything included that is untrue?
There was no direct source to the material presented, other than some resources from the original author. Why is it that some posters don't summarize their thoughts and support their ideas with direct refernces so that any reader can evaluate the concepts in a more objective fashion? OOPPSS, I forgot (just briefly) that I posed a question to you, Gatlin aka spammin' man. Sure. I don't believe any of the "stuff" presented. It is basically hogwash.
I have ministered in the field of apologetics for over 40 years. I have a doctorate in theology, and those who know me on this and other sites are acquainted with my long posts.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Despite your extensive "ministry," at the end of the day, all you can ever perform is to defend your belief system. I remain unconvinced about any of your belief system when all you can ever truthfully suggest is: it is mystery and a wonder.
United States Congress (June 4, 1805), during Thomas Jefferson’s presidency, drafted a Treaty of Peace and Amity with Tripoli, ratified April 12, 1806, in order to prevent the pirates of the North African Barbary Coast from seizing American ships, confiscating their cargo, and selling the crews and passengers as slaves. The United States had made a previous treaty with Tripoli and paid large sums of extortion money, but it failed when war broke out in 1801. Lieutenant Stephen Decatur (1779–1820) won famed by stealing into the Tripoli harbor on the small vessel Intrepid, February 16, 1804, burning a captured ship and escaping unharmed amidst fierce enemy fire. British Admiral Horatio Nelson called it the “most bold and daring act of the age.” In April of 1805, the U.S. Marines seized the Barbary harbor of Derne, Tripoli, the daring act of which is remembered in the Marine Hymn “From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli.” The June 4, 1805, Treaty of Tripoli, did not include a phrase that had been questionably inserted into the previous Treaty with Tripoli, June 7, 1797, that the United States “is not, in any sense founded on the Christian Religion …,”2207 (an insertion intended to clarify that the American government was not like the Mohammedan, Buddhist, or Hindu governments which controlled the religious life of its citizens and “that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”) This phrase was not in the Arabic version of the 1797 treaty,2208 and appears to have been an insertion by Joel Barlow (1754–1812), the American consul at Algiers who oversaw the translation process from Arabic to English. ,(Joel Barlow’s position as American consul to Algiers was originally intended for the naval hero John Paul Jones, but he died before he could fill the appointment.) The original Arabic translation of the 1797 treaty stated: Glory be to God! Declaration of the third article. We have agreed that if American Christians are traveling with a nation that is at war with the well- preserved Tripoli, and [the Tripolitan] takes [prisoners] from the Christian enemies and from the American Christians with whom we are at peace, then sets them free; neither he nor his goods shall be taken.… Praise be to God! Declaration of the twelfth article. If there arises a disturbance between us both sides, and it becomes a serious dispute, and the American Consul is not able to make clear his affair, and the affair shall remain suspended between them both, between the Pashna of Tripoli, may God strengthen him, and the Americans, until Lord Hassan Pashna, may God strengthen him, in the well-protected Algiers, has taken cognizance of the matter. We shall accept whatever decision he enjoins on us, and we shall agree with his condition and his seal; May God make it all permanent love and a good conclusion between us in the beginning and in the end, by His grace and favor, amen!2209 William J. Federer, Great Quotations: A Collection of Passages, Phrases, and Quotations Influencing Early and Modern World History Referenced according to Their Sources in Literature, Memoirs, Letters, Governmental Documents, Speeches, Charters, Court Decisions and Constitutions (St. Louis, MO: AmeriSearch, 2001).
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
It shouldn't be too hard for you to find the different treaties online, examine them, and see what is true.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Reflecting on The Skeptics Demand for Proof by Gary Butner, Th.D. One day it occurred to me how to answer a skeptic's mocking demand for proof of the Life and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Christians cannot present a mountain of evidence for every fact in the Bible they are certain is true. Additionally, they cannot prove to a closed mind the Gospel is true, and that is due to the distinction between proof and evidence. Proof is subjective, whereas evidence is objective. The skeptic has to decide if the evidence he has been presented with rises to a level he considers proof. Christians have already made that decision and walk by faith in Jesus Christ based on the preponderance of evidence they have examined and found to be true. Yes, at times Christians entertain doubts, and there are areas of the Bible of which they are ignorant; however as their faith grows based on accumulating more and more evidence; doubts fade and their faith transforms from ideas and opinions into beliefs, and finally into certitudes. The gatekeeper guarding the skeptic's mind blocks them from honestly examining the very same evidence Christians are certain is true, and that is why the skeptic remains blind, sitting in deep darkness, and shackled by his sins for lack of faith.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
For many of the nation's founders, they practiced Christianity not because of their convictions but because it was a method of communication to local towns folk; basically, attendance at a church was conveyance to say, "we are together." So, local politics were stimulated by not necessarily deep convictions of or about religious faith but nothing more than a sales card for political office. Don't get all enthused about TJ being mentioned in your article because it was offered on a Christian CD which you seem to enjoy.
And how are you so certain of the Founding Fathers motives?
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Your research doesn't seem to have much impact, does it? Similarly like all the research of historical evidence about various Constutional Amendments attempting to redress grievances or nullify the process. Within any nation, once a document is signed and accepted it is cast as a permanent boat anchor around your neck.
Most of the founders were Deists. They could give a "hoot" about Christianity primarily because of the many wars in Europe over the Catholicism/Protestant debate, which still rage, albeit not so violently. The founders probably enjoyed a Sunday church chicken dinner, though. And an apple pie desert besides finding a pretty young girl to enjoy a private moment with behind closed doors.
Is that true? Are you certain about that or is it rhetoric you have chosen to believe? http://www.evidenceforjesuschrist.org/Pages/christian-nation/declaration-of- independence-signers.htm There is more. http://www.evidenceforjesuschrist.org/Pages/christian-nation/america-menu.htm
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Well, Obama was stupid in mentioning the past. he should have mentioned the Christian Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), in Africa that is as brutal as Boko Haram and are fighting for religious reasons. But Obama has to dumb stuff down for Americans to get a point across and that is Obama's weakness because while Clinton was good at dumbing down his points so the yokels could get his message, Obama never understood Joe Blow Americans and how to talk to them.
Well, let us say that the American nation is imbued in Christianity. Yet, the founders made no direct excerpt about those same convictions forming the US Constitution or otherwise. You have to realize that Christianity in America was fairly strict about the human spirit, especially about the sexual nature of mankind. There were many kinds of codes for proper behavior. But, the founders (at that time) realized that the real issue were principles not beliefs that formed the US. In many cases, those principles were in alignment of Christian dogma no matter the local chusrch content.
To Dr. Thomas Cooper Monticello, February 10, 1814 For we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of Magna Charta, which terminates the period of the common law, or lex non scripta, and commences that of the statute law, or Lex Scripta. This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century; the conversion of the first christian king of the Heptarchy having taken place about the year 598, and that of the last about 686. Here, then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it. .............. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
It does not matter if it was in the original Arabic or not (I can't verify since this claim is found only in Fundie sources who are clearly freaked out this passage exists) because the Senate ratified and was read the English language version and the English language version is the law of the land. No one from that era of our Founding Fathers found any problem with the wording or concept either - it was unremarkable to them to consider the USA was NOT a founded on Christian principals. Including President Thomas Jefferson who in a private letter also stated he did not consider English Common Law was based on Christian principals either.
Substitute the word "religion" in the argument with the word "politics". Look at how many people have been murdered over the course of modern history for POLITICAL reasons! My goodness, this thing, politics, must be incredibly evil in and of itself, for it causes men to become mass murderers. Why any rational human being would want to believe in, support or participate in POLITICS, given the incredible record of evil and death that politics has caused is a real question: look at the body count! We cannot overlook it. Politics has driven virtually all of the genocides and all of the slavery of the past century. Rational, educated men should not become involved in violent superstitions such as politics. Politics in ever age have led to nothing but destruction. People need to move past politics and become apolitical, for whoever is devoted to a political cause may become a fanatic, and the next thing you know, the storm troopers are goose-stepping down the Champs- Elysees! Politics: just say no. The parallel is perfect.
You mistake Carter's Cubans for Bush's Muslims.
Until it's thrown off.
Vicomte13: Until it's thrown off. It is rare to have any outrage of or by the American People in the USA. Today, all the People do is watch TV, pay their taxes and thank God that they don't have to pay more. They are silly, spineless, docile idiots that vote for the same thing everytime.
Yes. That is the strangly absurd meme that's been promoted. Has anybody ever been able to discern an iota of documentation from the Kenyan's writings or evidence that supports "constitutional scholar"? Maybe Brian Williams has seen it.
They are silly, spineless, docile idiots that vote for the same thing everytime. Perhaps they are rationally apathetic. There are only so many things that people can worry about, and sensible people focus on those things they can change. Large numbers of Americans have observed over their lifetimes that the parties rotate, leaders come and go, but the song remains the same. Therefore, they have rationally concluded that the political system is broken, corrupt and a waste of time to engage with. In this, they may well be right. From their perspective, those people who take the time to become politically active, who study the issues and become passionate about things they cannot change, and who then become whipped into a frenzy of emotion over the outcome of rigged elections - those people are the fools. The ones who don't waste their time studying politics because they know that it's as real as Professional Wrestling: far from being silly, may be the wisest of all.
One can believe the truth or believe a lie. There is more at stake in this than what appears on the surface, because once a man chooses to believe a lie he has departed from reality. He thinks he can contain the lie in a dark corner of his mind, but in reality it infects the totality of his being.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Where? Will you be performing next at the Big Top? (Don't forget your clown shoes) You're welcome, Hambone. But then you should thank A K A Stone for lending you a temporary platform from which to launch/spam your propaganda, red herrings and strawmen. (you get 2 red stars for your work here thus far. And a cookie.)
Yes. He has written at least one document that you should be able to identify: It is admired by all scholars and US Constitional lawers and governance as a whole.
By Christ Jesus: Matthew 25: 32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. 41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
LOL. THAT is precious. Thought the above line from the forum-spamming Carnival Barker ought to be isolated -- just for further S&G.
I am curious about your intent of the above post that I quote. Are you saying that "belief" is tied to "reality?" If so, how do you explain "animism" and the perpetual belief systems thereof? What about "luck" at a casino in Las Vegas?
(BOGUS BC) HA! Well then -- that's enough "scholarship" for me. Make 'em the Chief Justice of SCOTUS. Or Generalissimo. OR Burger KING.
Thanks. Another portion of world history Obola has no clue of.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
So you deny your own post that I quipped earlier. In the real world, you are a scoundrel, a "flip-flopper" a fish out of water. You have subdued your own argument by intent!
The person to whom you first addressed Matthew 25:23-46 is not so much interested in the actual definition of "Christian" as per Jesus' own quotes, but in cloaking His truth in the rags any counterfeit religion that bears His name. One may of course ask why Gatlin feels compelled to indirectly slander the Christianity of Jesus Christ. However, I'm afraid we know the answer.
Of course, the man is backed by his wife Michelle. I understand she actually wrote his community organizer leaflets that he handed out at Church on Sunday.
The only finger Gatlin is pointing is his middle finger. To EVERY poster and lurker here who knows the truth of the matter, and the carnival games Gatlin plays in defense of Islam which are in defense of the Great Pretender's warring words.
Sir William Blackstone, (born July 10, 1723, London, England—died February 14, 1780, Wallingford, Oxfordshire), English jurist, whose Commentaries on the Laws of England, 4 vol. (1765–69), is the best-known description of the doctrines of English law. The work became the basis of university legal education in England and North America. He was knighted in 1770.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Too bad Gatlin wasn't there; He have run those leaflets all over DC in his all-weather golf cart. "Neither snow nor rain..." Btw, I wonder if the First Wookie's hoof wuz affected by writer's cramp?
What about "luck" at a casino in Las Vegas? I'd have fun answering those questions, but I'd be butting on a conversation between you and GarySpFc.
Ah, I feel much better!!! What a stud!!
I have been reading some of the many threads Gatlin has posted upon. Wasn't his original monicker "tater?" Why in the world would anyone choose that monicker?
Be my guest. I tire when arguing with brick walls.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Feel free pal; I have a few hours this evening to watch and learn from you. I caution you to be careful, though. You could become bruised by my retorts.
You mean your attempt at spamming & flooding & phishing? Oh no, you are the best! Heh-heh... Yup. The Gatlin is the very best!! If the ACLU/SPLC is paying him by the cut & paste (or laffs), they're getting their money's worth.
Yes, it is believed that the "tater" moniker wa Gatlin's. Before it was mashed. Why in the world would anyone choose that monicker? Because it dwells underground, frightened of the light?
You have subdued your own argument by intent! Not so much. For one thing, I wasn't MAKING an argument in my last post. Just posting an observation. Perhaps it will help if I label what I am doing at each step, so that it will be clear. (RETORT, CONTAINING A SUBTLE AD HOMINEM) You made a statement about the bulk of the American people that was quite harsh. I replied with a statement about the motivation of some of them that was more generous as to their motives and reasoning. (THEORETICAL MUSING) And I acknowledge that maybe they're right. Our political system is extraordinarily corrupt, and has produced terrible results over and over again. Apathy might be a better approach to it than the one I have followed. I keep having hope in its reform, but in that respect I may be a fool. (ANSWER TO ACCUSATION, CONTAINING A MIXTURE OF FACT AND LIGHT SARCASM.) In the real world I am not a scoundrel. I am a man, not a fish. I change my mind when I am persuaded of facts, but I form my beliefs on facts and don't change my mind without a good reason. (TRUISM) A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. (SARCASTIC CLOSING STATEMENT) There is not, in fact, an "argument" in this post.
(IRONY) Ok, then, this should be fun,
You sound like Jesse Ventua.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
With forty years of defending Christianity (based on your posts this evening) you are all of a sudden tired? How is that? What happened to your "divine" inspiration to spread the good word? You muist realize, when you profess credentials (earlier up the thread) and can not support your own work by thoughts, words, deeds and actions you look like a fool to the viewing audience besides myself.
Indeed, BUT good! For whatever rea$on, Major Tater has not only become a spam-baiting propagandist of anti-Christian propaganda at LF, but a proponent of subversive socialist-statist-Muslim causes.
Jesse, this may be hard for you to understand, but I have Parkinson's disease, and typing is very difficult for me.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
If Williams was conducting it, he'd also have covered for America's First Mooselum President, but alas was beaten to the punch by former Klintoon Operative, and now Dem Operative at NBC, George Stephanopolous. Cranky has probably already answered this...
You have become too defensive already and I still have a few hours remaing to undertand what you actually are trying to say. Look, get to the point!
And exactly what logic would that be?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
No way of knowing, but considering Team 0bolo has been at war with the USA for 6 years, the number -- anecdotally speaking -- must be astronomical. Add to that number, the number of known radical Mooslimbs, AND Messican gang members and MS-13.
That would be left-wing/anti-America "logic" from Destro's/Gatlin's alternative universe. (IOW, get ready for a spin in the red-zone.)
I don't want you to be or feel unconfortable. I wish you no pain or suffering at all. But you must change your suggested credentials from your stated background; I take you at your word. You really have no legs to stand on and you know the same.
No, the quesion was yours, namely "Can you find anything incorrect in the articles?" To which I relpied in #46: Yes, its premise of pretense of moral relevancy. Anyone can spin facts or selectively cherry pick facts to support an argument. But that does not give weight or validity to the agrument in the overall context of reality. The Crusades, Inquisition, the institution and justification of slavery in the name of Christ occured hunreds of years ago - in other words in the distant PAST. What is occurring in the name of Isalm around the glode (ISIS, Boko Haram, etc.) is happening NOW. People, societies, civilizations grow and mature, many to the point where the acknowledge and condemn past actions within their ranks and no longer tolerate it. Where is the KKK and its ilk these days? Christian America roundly and publically rejected these groups and told them you can't live with us and to get out of Dodge - or else. What is occurring in the name if Isalm is in real time, not hundreds of years ago BUT it isn't much different what was done in the name of Islam hundreds of years ago. One critical difference, if not the singular most important one, is that Muslims around the glode, en masse, clearly and loudly, not even Jordan yet, has told ISIS and its ilk to go away, you can't live with us, get out of Mecca - or else. Get it?" It is cyrstal clear that you do not get it.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Absolutely!!! It may be a revelation to Americans in the conservative and religious right movement, but truth means being in accord with facts or reality, or fidelity to an original standard or ideal. It is not a complex concept to comprehend, especially for the evangelical right that embraces the Ninth Commandment of the Decalogue that forbids “bearing false witness” (lying) leading one to believe that every Christian embraces truth. In fact, the Christian religion’s namesake, Jesus Christ, is renowned for saying “the truth shall set you free” in John 8:32. The point is that all Christians should advocate and revere the truth with religious fervor; unless it is uttered by President Barack Obama at which point they “can’t handle the truth.” Although the President stated the truth during that bizarre event in a secular nation, the National Prayer Breakfast, this week, he violated that unspoken American rule that at no time will any American utter an untoward remark about the Christian religion whether it is the gospel truth or not. The fact is that in stating an irrefutable truth about Christianity, the President grossly understated the reality that throughout history, there has been much more violence and killing in the name of Christianity as in the name of Islam. The truth of the matter is that despite the recent death and violence at the hands of radical Islamists such as the Islamic State (ISIS, ISIL, or IS), it pales in comparison to the history, including very recent history, of violence wrought on humanity by Christians in the name of Christianity. The President infuriated the Christian right during the National Prayer Breakfast when he said that no particular religion “has a monopoly on violence.” His exact words were, “And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place – remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. Slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.” Of course the President spoke the truth, albeit a grossly understated truth, but it incited the Christian right to apoplexy as if he had insulted their god almighty to his face. The tea party claimed the President “threw Christians under the bus,” dirty Rush Limbaugh said the President’s remark was “an insult to Christianity” and the Daily Caller was certain the President’s truth was a ploy to put a halt to real Americans’ well-intentioned “criticism of radical Islamists.” None of the criticism is even remotely true, because all the President did was acknowledge that in the same way ISIS uses the Muslim faith to rally followers to, and advance, its violent agenda, radical fundamentalists in the Christian faith have done exactly the same thing throughout world history to horrific effect. The President could, and should, have just uttered Jesus Christ’s words and told Christians so ardently critical of Islam that “whosoever is without sin, let him cast the first stone,” but one thing the extremist right will not countenance is President Barack Obama citing a scripture or Jesus Christ’s words from “their” precious Caucasian bible. Where the President held back in speaking “pure truth” was his reluctance to cite that “Christianist violence” was not just reserved to the Crusades and Inquisition, slavery, or Jim Crow. It has continued unabated and in nearly every instance it is just as violent as images and reports of ISIS atrocities. It is why Christians cannot possibly criticize the Muslim religion, or condemn all of its devotees, as violent monsters when their religion has been, and still is, responsible for unrivaled violence from the Old Testament to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and every era in between. It may be a hard truth to handle, but it is a historically verifiable truth nonetheless and unfortunately for the faithful, Christianity’s violence has a scriptural basis permeating the Christian bible from start to finish. It is important to note that although Jesus preached to love your neighbor, he also instructed his followers to go and “make disciples” and that whoever rejected his message was doomed to a violent death by his own hands in A Revelation 19:11-16. Besides the extreme violence under the direction of the god of the Old Testament, the Christian Crusades and Inquisitions, during the 20th Century alone, while Muslim violence claimed the lives of around 2 million people during the Iran-Iraq war and the war in Afghanistan, violence by Christians claimed the lives of close to 100 million people. These acts of religious violence include the “ World Wars, the Holocaust, the colonial wars in Southeast Asia and Africa, and the sectarian warfare in the Balkans including ‘an explicit genocide‘ against Muslim Bosnians by Serbian Orthodox Christians.” As Middle East historian Juan Cole notes, regardless the mass violence perpetrated by Christians may not have been directly in the name of Christianity, in “every conflict the combatants were overtly religious, and invoked their religion as part of their military campaigns.” This is particularly true of evangelical Christian George W. Bush’s 2003 “righteous crusade” in invading Iraq replete with “ biblical verses engraved on weapons” that claimed the lives of ov er 655,000 innocent Iraqi civilians; nearly all devotees of Islam. Many of the Islamist warriors in ISIL are fighting to reclaim their homes and place in Iraq society after Christian Bush helped drive them out of their own country; not just because of religion. But as Cole points out, “they are organized around groups that share a common religious and cultural background;” not unlike America’s military forces that invaded, conquered, and killed hundreds-of-thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan under direct orders from their commander in chief; evangelical fundamentalist George W. Bush. For many Americans, the idea of a National Prayer Breakfast is abominable, but for once President Obama made the most out of a bizarre event and put Americans in the religious right and conservative movement who portray all Muslims as violence-prone monsters in the proper perspective; they are rank hypocrites. Now, it is no more truth that all Christians are violent monsters because of their religion’s incredibly violent history than devotees of the Muslim faith are due to a terrorist criminal attack on America or ISIL militants reclaiming their homes, but it was refreshing to see President Obama, a Christian adherent, utter the truth to make a very prescient point at a multi-faith religious function. Of course, one cannot possibly expect the evangelical or conservative extremists in this country to accept what they know to be true, because it is like that adage; “the truth hurts.” However, for some Americans being bombarded daily with Fox News and conservative lies that all Muslims are violent due to their religion, it is possible they will take the President’s truth to heart and acknowledge that in the same way all Christians are not violent monsters based on the faith’s precedent-setting historical violence, all followers of Islam are not members of ISIS or prone to violence. It was a truth Americans desperately needed to hear and one religious and conservative extremists can’t handle; especially because President Barack Obama had the courage to utter it in a highly religious public forum the nation’s faithful were paying attention to. From a secular humanist’s perspective, it was long overdue and a stroke of genius from a dying breed of American; a Christian humanist. http://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/07/radical-cant- handle-truth-president-obama.html.
No, it is not contested among historians. All of the Middle East and North Africa were strongly Christian, prior to the time of Mohammed. Good simple, honest rebuttal, Gary... Gatlin means to say, his liberal/left-wing sources of revisionist history don't much like the truth of the matter. It also underscores the fact that Islam has now been engaging in ("provocation" -- HA! Is that how he characterized it?) invasion, murder, and convertion by the sword for almost a thousand years and counting.
Nice cut & paste spam. Can you whiddle that Alpo/red herring down to a teaspoon? Oh...pardon while I get up and take a "tater." At ease, Spammeister.
You make sense, SOSO. Now, what do you really intend by stating within your tagline, "потому что Бог хочет это тот путь" It seems you don't know what you say.
These rabid animals have all the support and encouragement they need from the lips of 0bama himself to continue... #1 “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” #2 “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer” #3 “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world — including in my own country.” #4 “As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam.” #5 “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.” #6 “Islam has always been part of America” #7 “we will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities” #8 “These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.” #9 “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.” #10 “I made clear that America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam.” GAME. SET. MATCH. Good nite everybody! But oh wait:
Tater, 0bama is watering don the world wide issues of thousands of years of enmity between the Christians and Muslims. Don't you understand what politicians do to take your focus off current events?
By Christ Jesus: If it is to accepted that those who committed heinous barbaric acts deemed themselves to be “Christians” but were not really “Christians”….can it not also be said that those who deem themselves to be “Muslims” and commit violent acts are not “Muslims?” That be the case, then why do so many have so much trouble with Obama’s regime refusing to use the term or categorize the radical extremists: “Islamic Terrorists?”
Again, total BS. Christianity cleaned up it act hundreds of years age. With Islam it is still the same old same old from hundreds of years ago. Modern day Christianty is not committing savage and barbaric acts in the name of its God, and hasn't for hundreds of years. Modern day Islam is still committing savage and barbaric acts in the name of its God just the same as Islma did hudreds of years ago. Christianity did something to clean itself up. Christians not only acknowledged the wrongs of the past in Christ's name but put an end to it with no degree of uncertainity. The same cannot be said for Islam as it still is tolerating savagery, cruelty, slavery, murder, barbaric acts againt children , etc., etc., etc. in the name of Allah, especially if such acts are committed on infidels. Jordan's response proves this to be true. It was just fine to behead infidels, no venegance required here. But harm a Jordanian Muslim in a brutal manner? Well, there shite hits the fan and venegance is theirs (so they say). Jordan's response is a pure act of revenge demanded by the tribe of the murdered pilotr not a moral act of rejection of ISIS and for all that it stands. If you and pericles still do not understand this then you are being willfully ignorant and/or intellectually dishonest.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Yes, its premise of pretense of moral relevancy. Anyone can spin facts or selectively cherry pick facts to support an argument. But that does not give weight or validity to the agrument in the overall context of reality. Nice BULLSEYE, SOSO. Indeed: "IT IS THE PREMISE OF PRETENSE OF MORAL RELEVENCY." I wouldn't give a feather's worth of weight to Gatlin-the-Lightweight's argument. Only the Left and carnival barkers are willing to wade into this kind of absurdity. The Left (like this poster) are merely trying to create a red herring. Remember the title of this thread? Gatlin hopes you've long forgotten: 0bama Rips Bible, Praises Koran
And you have NOT proven one single thing to be INCORRECT...rant on...Snarky!!! Obama riles right with accurate remarks at Prayer Breakfast By now, you’ve probably seen the headlines and the emails from your wacky uncle who watches Fox News all day. President Obama, as he’s done every year, spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast yesterday, enraging his conservative critics for reasons that don’t make a lot of sense. http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/obama-riles- right-accurate-remarks-prayer-breakfast.
Obama WROTE this? You are sick!!!
You have not proven anything to be untrue...what are you doing here?
I hear your cry for help, but I don't want your Muslim house negroes, thank you. You're not a "cracka" unless you have cotton pickin' field nigaz. Maybe you can trade your house negroes off at your Mosque?
If POTUS is the Great Orator of the US Constitution, why is he bringing religious values into a debatable position while denying current events?
Slander...where? I only asked that you show where Obama lied and where anything I have posted on this thread is a lie. Why can't you do that?
What is the TRUTH of the matter? Where did Obama lie?
Agian, total BS. Obama is total BS, a total fraud. Wake up. Obama played the useful idiots by telling them what they wanted to hear. He knew that he could not get elected on a pro-life and anti-gay marriage message. In the meantime time he has done evertything he can to misdirect attention from the true agenda of Islam and ignoring modern day Islamic terrorism and brutality. He goes out of his way to avoid using the term Islamic terrorism, he can't even same Islamic extreism. I can understand why he goes so far up his ass to portect his agenda. I can't understand why you do.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Along with being a highly intelligent, strikingly handsome, emotionally stable, financially independent person with a heart of gold, too.
Here's are the bigger questions: 1) What compels you to conflate Christendom's defense of its people and lands with Islam's attempt at invasions and a Caliphate whether one thousand years ago OR just yesterday? 2) Islam's tenets command its adherents to murder "In the name of Allah." Have you missed that memo, and why? 3) Thread Title: 0bama Rips Bible, Praises Koran. Yet instead of addressing IT, you instead post miles of cut & paste propaganda on Slavery. Slavery that's NOT taken place in Africa, Asia, or anywhere else, but America. And on other incidential acts of violence oupon blacks in America that haven't transpired in a half century. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY?? What have your tangential red herrings to do with the Title, Thread Vampire?
Tsk. Haven't you learned your lesson yet, Wolfgang?
Gatlin, maybe you will understand this: Lee, Robert Edward (January 19, 1807–October 12, 1870), was a Confederate General during the Civil War. He was the son of the Revolutionary leader, “Light-Horse Harry” Lee, and the son-in-law of George Washington’s adopted son, George Washington Parke Custis. Robert E. Lee and his wife, Mary Ann Randolph, inherited the 1,100 acre Washington estate directly across the Potomac from Washington, D.C. Tutored and home-schooled as a child, Robert E. Lee excelled at West Point, and distinguished himself in the Mexican-American War. From San Antonio, Texas, he engineered the American troops’ passage across the difficult Mexican mountains so they could quickly take Mexico City. Lee was against slavery and a number of years before the war he freed his own slaves. He was so highly respected, that when war looked imminent, President Abraham Lincoln offered him the Field Command of the U.S. Army. He struggled all night with his decision, finally resolving to the obligation of loyalty to his home state and the South. He resigned from the U.S. Army and in a letter to his sister, explained: With all my devotion to the union and the feelings of loyalty and duty of an American citizen, I have not been able to make up my mind to raise my hand against my relatives, my children, my home. On December 27, 1856, Robert E. Lee wrote to his wife: Slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil in any country.… I think, however, a greater evil to the white than to the black race … The doctrines and miracles of our Saviour have required nearly two thousand years to convert but a small part of the human race, and even among the Christian nations what gross errors still exist! General Robert E. Lee’s His military expertise was so formidable that, for the first two years of the Civil War, it looked as if the South had won. General Stonewall Jackson’s repeated victories kept pushing the North back until Lee’s troops were dangerously close to attacking Washington, D.C., itself. On December 25, 1862, General Robert E. Lee wrote to his wife from Fredericksburg, Virginia: My heart is filled with gratitude to Almighty God for his unspeakable mercies with which He has blessed us in this day. For those He granted us from the beginning of life, and particularly for those He has vouchsafed us during the past year. What should have become of us without His crowning help and protection? Oh, if our people would only recognize it and cease from self-boasting and adulation, how strong would be my belief in the final success and happiness to our country! But what a cruel thing is war; to separate and destroy families and friends, and mar the purest joys and happiness God has granted us in this world; to fill our hearts with hatred instead of love for our neighbors, to devastate the fair face of this beautiful world! I pray that on this day when only peace and good-will are preached to mankind, better thoughts may fill the hearts of our enemies and turn them to peace. On May 31, 1863, General Robert E. Lee wrote to his wife as he prepared the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia for its next major northern thrust: I pray that our merciful Father in heaven may protect and direct us. In that case I fear no odds and no numbers. On April 8, 1864, General Robert E. Lee issued orders for his troops to observe the Day of Fasting, Humiliation and Prayer that had been proclaimed: Soldiers! Let us humble ourselves before the Lord, our God, asking through Christ, the forgiveness of our sins, beseeching the aid of the God of our forefathers in the defense of our homes and our liberties, thanking Him for His past blessings, and imploring their continuance upon our cause and our people. General Robert E. Lee wrote: Knowing that intercessory prayer is our mightiest weapon and the supreme call for all Christians today, I pleadingly urge our people everywhere to pray. Believing that prayer is the greatest contribution that our people can make in this critical hour, I humbly urge that we take time to pray—to really pray. Let there be prayer at sunup, at noonday, at sundown, at midnight—all through the day. Let us pray for our children, our youth, our aged, our pastors, our homes. Let us pray for our churches. Let us pray for ourselves, that we may not lose the word “concern” out of our Christian vocabulary. Let us pray for our nation. Let us pray for those who have never known Jesus Christ and redeeming love, for moral forces everywhere, for our national leaders. Let prayer be our passion. Let prayer be our practice. General Lee once remarked to Chaplain John William Jones regarding the Bible: There are things in the old Book which I may not be able to explain, but I fully accept it as the infallible Word of God, and receive its teachings as inspired by the Holy Spirit. General Robert E. Lee was visited in his tent by Chaplain J. William Jones and General Stonewall Jackson’s Chaplain, B.T. Lacey. They told the General that all the chaplains were praying for him. As Jones recorded, tears came to General Lee’s eyes as he said: Please thank them for that, sir—I warmly appreciate it. And I can only say that I am nothing but a poor sinner, trusting in Christ alone for salvation, and need all of the prayers they can offer me. One night around the campfire, Chaplain Jones overheard some soldiers discussing the recent invention of the theory of evolution, when one soldier replied: Well, boys, the rest of us may have developed from monkeys; but I tell you, none the less than God could have made such a man as Marse Robert. Near the final end of the War, after such a tremendous loss of life, one of Lee’s generals suggested rallying more recruits to the Confederate cause. General Lee responded: General, you and I as Christian men … must consider its effects on the country as a whole. Already it is demoralized by four years of war. If I took your advice, the men … would become mere bands of marauders, and the enemy’s cavalry would pursue them and overrun many wide sections.… We would bring on a state of affairs it would take the country years to recover from.2244 General Robert E. Lee surrendered to General Ulysses S. Grant on April 9, 1865 at Appomattox, Virginia. Lee took off his sword and handed it to Grant, and Grant handed it back. The next day, April 10, 1865, General Robert E. Lee issued his final order from his headquarters to the Army of Northern Virginia: After four years of arduous service, marked by unsurpassed courage and fortitude, the Army of Northern Virginia has been compelled to yield to overwhelming numbers and resources.… I have determined to avoid the useless sacrifice of those whose past services have endeared them to their countrymen. By the terms of the agreement, officers and men can return to their homes.… I earnestly pray that a merciful God will extend to you His blessing and protection. Robert E. Lee confided: In all my perplexities and distresses, the Bible has never failed to give me light and strength. In a church service on June 4, 1865, as reported by Colonel T.L. Broun, there was a shock when a Negro advanced to the communion table. But then: [General Robert E. Lee] arose in his usual dignified and self-possessed manner … and reverently knelt down to partake of the communion, not far from the Negro. In June of 1865, Robert E. Lee was indicted for treason by the U.S. Grand Jury in Norfolk, Virginia. When some friends voiced their indignation, Lee calmly responded: I have fought against the people of the North because I believed they were seeking to wrest from the South dearest rights. But I have never cherished toward them bitter or vindictive feelings, and have never seen the day when I did not pray for them. After the war, a southern clergyman spoke critically of the recent actions of the federal government. Following a pause, Robert E. Lee asked: Doctor, there is a good old book which … says “Love your enemies.” Do you think your remarks this evening were quite in the spirit of that teaching? William J. Federer, Great Quotations: A Collection of Passages, Phrases, and Quotations Influencing Early and Modern World History Referenced according to Their Sources in Literature, Memoirs, Letters, Governmental Documents, Speeches, Charters, Court Decisions and Constitutions (St. Louis, MO: AmeriSearch, 2001).
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
The opposite of anything you say, claim, or cut & paste. Where did 0bama lie? HA! Did you trip on your big fat red clown shoes and fall into a vat of Metamuecil?
Examples from the web for tater:
At everything I do...always have been, always will be!
Don't get all cuddled because you posted a link. You are a liar, a thief and a charlatan.
Aaw, has your integrity been challenged? Don't worry -- it's on its way to the municipal water treatment plant to be processed...
Are you always this nice to traitors?
No. I want see traitors hung by the neck until dead. If you can find a judge, we can accomplish this mission goal.
*cough, hack* Rachel Maddow? Stop smokin', snortin', shootin', poppin', sniffin', gulpin', swallowing whatever meds you're doing. Immediately... ...RESUME the Sterno.
Don't forget he could be suckin' the yukon pipe and *is* his catcher.
You having a "melt down"... Earlier today President Obama spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast, where he discussed freedom of expression along with highlighting the many acts of barbarism that are happening now and have happened throughout the centuries which were justified under the guise of religion. He also explained in depth about how as Christians, we can overcome these perversions of religion. President Obama spoke for about thirty minutes and used almost three thousand words today, but the only part of the speech the right wing media is focusing on is when he brought up the Crusades. Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ. Michelle and I returned from India -- an incredible, beautiful country, full of magnificent diversity -- but a place where, in past years, religious faiths of all types have, on occasion, been targeted by other peoples of faith, simply due to their heritage and their beliefs -- acts of intolerance that would have shocked Gandhiji, the person who helped to liberate that nation. How dare the president put into context the historical atrocities performed over centuries in the name of God! As usual the Catholic League's Bill Donohue took front and center stage on Fox News and was fuming because Obama dared to mention Christ and demanded that he apologize. Neil Cavuto actually defended Obama for the most part which kind of surprised me, but Donohue, the pedophile priest apologist didn't. Cavuto: Bill Donohue called that an insult to all Christians and said the president needs to apologize, but I think what he said Bill, obviously you're worked up over it, "look, what's done in the name of religion has often caused some heinous acts," you argue he hasn't said this enough about Islam. Donohue: I'm saying this, had he said just said that, that people have killed in the name of their God and it's not unique to one religion, who could argue with that? But he didn't do that, did he? He spoke with specificity. he singled out the Crusades and the Inquisition. There's so many myths about.. What Donohue is actually demanding is to be the president's speech writer/approval monitor. Bill has no problem with the speech except when Obama mentions acts of brutality perpetrated by Christians and Catholics. he immediately tries to rewrite history and said that the atrocities happening name in the name of Islam far outweigh anything that happened in the history of the world. After he bloviated for a while, Cavuto cut in. Cavuto: Stepping back for this he is saying what's done in the name of God, his name or whatever deity you believe that we take it too far? Or you're not giving him the benefit of that.. Donohue: I think he should have said that. I think you're being exculpatory here. Another real problem for the Donohues of the world is that they refuse to admit that Barack Obama is a Christian and will never allow him to discuss religion on those terms. Bill continued, "We have a problem with Islam. Not just with Islamists, but a problem with Islam." For some reason the right has focused on Obama for not constantly bashing the Muslim religion, as Bill Donohue does in this interview, but then they demand that Muslim countries join us in fighting groups like ISIS. Do they not understand the fallacy of their reasoning? More of Obama's speech, which appears to make Donohue's whining completely unfounded. But we also see faith being twisted and distorted, used as a wedge -- or, worse, sometimes used as a weapon. From a school in Pakistan to the streets of Paris, we have seen violence and terror perpetrated by those who profess to stand up for faith, their faith, professed to stand up for Islam, but, in fact, are betraying it. We see ISIL, a brutal, vicious death cult that, in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism -- terrorizing religious minorities like the Yezidis, subjecting women to rape as a weapon of war, and claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions. http://crooksandliars.com/2015/02/right-wing-melts-down-over- obamas-comments.
Plenty of those still around, strangulating America. They're the same ones who defend Mooselimbs who every single day stack their victims and burn them on six continents.
Lol, what they do in the privacy of their own igloo is nobody's business.
Yea, where did Obama lie?
*laughing* Do you really think ANY one is reading your neatly boxed cut & paste propaganda??
*Yeah, but I'm still laughing* (AT YOO)
(I WON'T CONTINUE WITH THE HEADERS.) Your question was directed to some comment that Gary made. I'm not sure about what that comment was, so I'll start by defusing the lead in - I'm not answering whatever issue you were debating with him. Rather, I am addressing the questions directly put: (1) "Is 'belief' tied to 'reality'? (2) "If so, how do you explain 'animism' and the perpetual belief systems thereof?" (3) "What about 'luck' at a casino in Las Vegas." I will answer the first and third questions directly in this missive. To answer the second question I will need you to define for me what you specifically mean by "animism". When I hear the word "animism", I think of the belief among various tribes that all things, be they animals or trees or rocks, have individual spirits that are perceptive and aware, and that have the power to interact with men and the world. That's what I think of what I think of "animism", and given my use of the word, I would find the second question a non-sequitur: what one thinks about beliefs and reality is unrelated to the question of whether rocks and trees have intelligent souls. Obviously you have something different in mind when you use the word "animism" here, such that the question flows logically from the answer to the first question. Please supply your definition of animism, so that I can see what your second question is aimed at, and I will happily answer (NO IRONY INTENDED). As it is, I can't answer because I'm not sure what you are asking. Now then, to return to the first question: "Is 'belief' tied to 'reality'?", to answer it I have to define three words: "belief", "tied" and "reality". These words have varied meanings in different people's mouths and minds, so I have to tell you what I mean by each word to be able to answer it. Depending on the precise meanings of each word, the answer could be "yes", "no", "yes and no", or "maybe". So let's get precision. "Belief" can mean a lot of things. When I use the word, it is a noun for of the verb "to believe", and refers to a mental state in which a person thinks that something is true. Whether or not the thing thought really IS true is dependent upon reality external to the mind of the individual, but belief, as I use the term, does not speak to the ultimate truth of the thing believed, only to the fact that the person doing the believing thinks that the thing is true, or is probably true. The third word "reality", I take to mean "objectively true", something that exists, that IS. The real key word, then, is "linked", because in this context it COULD mean many things. There is a philosophical link called "truth" between a thing that is believed and reality then the thing believes is externally, objectively true. If the thing believed is not objectively true, then the philosophical link between the belief and the reality is that the belief is untrue, or that there is a true belief in something that is unreal. I think that your use of the word enters a different realm of philosophy, and raises the question of subjectivism: does belief in a think CAUSE IT to be real. In such a case, the link would be causation. To that, I would answer that I do not believe it to be so that human beliefs, on their own, cause things to be real. To quote an old Irish proverb: "You don't plow a field by turning it over in your mind." That said, I do think that human beliefs can unleash events that brings a state of reality into being that did not exist before. But in these cases it is because the belief triggered a man to act in some way that changed external reality. Certain realities are themselves internal: for example, to enter into a state of hypnosis does result in a change in brainwave pattern on a monitor, and this is the result of an internal mental state. It is a case where a belief itself induces a change of state in the mechanism by which belief happens: the internal activity of the brain, bringing about a concrete reality. The same thing is true when a human thought causes an arm to reach out and do something. There, the link between the belief and the reality is direct, and it is caused by mental will, although that will is then mechanically translated down a system of nerves to cause the action to be. Simple thought initiates physical reality in such a case. Nevertheless, for humans a physical conveyance mechanism is required. For gods, such a conveyance mechanism may or may not be required. For God, as I use the word, mental will itself creates reality and there is no need for a mechanism. So, the link between belief and reality exists, but the nature of that link is dependent on who is doing the believing, and what the thing is that is believed. To move, then, to the Las Vegas question: Does a person really wanting to roll a 7 cause, in any way, to 7 to be rolled? Only to the extent that it causes the hands to throw the dice. But beyond that, what the dice DO is a matter of external reality, not the internal mental state of the believer, however fervent the desire. In the physical universe, if the dice are honest, how they turn up is a matter of randomness. There is a grand philosophical debate as to whether TRUE randomness exists, or whether if one had all information about all of the forces that impinged on the dice, one could demonstrate that the fall of the dice is an utterly foregone conclusion by the mechanism of physics. While the debate has raged, there is an apparent answer to the question, and it is that the fall of dice, while affected by many inputs, is truly random because there are chaotic elements among the forces that are themselves random and not predictable. Of course, all of this assumes that the dice are honest. Beyond the philosophical question of whether the dice are random (if they are honest, they are), there is the question that you're asking, which is whether mental state can cause the dice to fall a certain way. The answer to that is "no" when referring to human beings. But when speaking of God, the answer is "yes" - yes, God determines the outcome, or perhaps God CAN determine the outcome, if he chooses, but he may simple decide to leave the outcome to the function of the random elements that he has built into the universe. Then we come to the linking question: can a man's prayer and belief about God cause God to effect the outcome of a dice roll in Las Vegas. The answer to that is that it can, of course, logically, for God is God. However, the answer may be that the outcome effected may not be good. The next logical question is "How do you know there is God at all?" But the answer to any question like that should wait until we've first clarified your second question and answered it.
Of course, and to Obama's credit (as much as I hate to give him credit for anything>...look at what he has everyone talking about right now. Playing the Right Wing and the Media like a multimillion-dollar Stradivarius!
Whoever said he was?
Your political party.
Translation for that means: "You can't answer my question!" 10 point penalty...failed deflection!
What lesson?
Translation for that: "You are totally frustrated because you can't handle me!"
Slander...where?
0bama has no credit other than subversion of America and taking advantage of weak-kneed little WhiteHouse worshippers such as yourself. He didn't change the the gist of ISIS controversy other than display his ignorance in obvious emphasis towards applauding Muslims and yourown agreement as a cheerleader. So you say .. communist.
I think you are AFRAID to...check that, I know that you are AFRAID to. I know that you can't handle the TRUTH!
Where in the world are Christians creating violence? Show one place anywhere around the world today; infact, go out of this world in your usual blather.
Because that is the only thing you can do since you cannot answer face truthful reality. Keep on laughing, bro...
http://www.juancole.com/2015/02/standard-christian-atrocities.html The source for Gatlin's anti-Christian post #71, is Juan Cole "The New Arabs". The jist seems to be... it was OK for Muslims (and Yankees) to have house slaves, but evil for Southern Christians to have them in the field. It's "progressive" so it doesn't have to make sense!
UN: Muslims ethnically cleansed in CAR UN report says Christian militias engaged in ethnic cleansing of Muslims in ongoing Central African Republic civil war. Christian militias in Central African Republic have carried out ethnic cleansing of the Muslim population during the country's ongoing civil war, but there is no proof there was genocidal intent, a United Nations commission of inquiry has said. "Thousands of people died as a result of the conflict. Human rights violations and abuses were committed by all parties. The Seleka coalition and the anti- balaka are also responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity," the inquiry said on Thursday. "Although the commission cannot conclude that there was genocide, ethnic cleansing of the Muslim population by the anti-balaka constitutes a crime against humanity," the report said. The final report of the inquiry, which was submitted to the UN Security Council on December 19, said up to 6,000 people had been killed though it "considers that such estimates fail to capture the full magnitude of the killings that occurred". The mostly Christian or animist "anti-balaka" militia took up arms in 2013 in response to months of looting and killing by mostly Muslim Seleka rebels who had toppled President Francois Bozize and seized power in March the same year. The UN Security Council established the commission of inquiry in December 2013. Preventing violence In September 2014, the International Criminal Court opened an investigation into allegations of murder, rape and the recruiting of child soldiers in the Central African Republic. Some 5,600 African Union peacekeepers, deployed in December 2013, and about 2,000 French troops have struggled to stem the violence in the impoverished landlocked country of 4.6 million people. The United Nations took over the African Union peacekeeping mission in September and is mandated by the Security Council to double its size to nearly 12,000 troops and police. The UN commission of inquiry said the deployment of the African Union peacekeepers, French troops and then the UN peacekeeping mission (MINUSCA) had "been primarily responsible for the prevention of an even greater explosion of violence".
Thank you all...and to all, Good Night!
Your sources are not authenticated by crediable sources. Case dismissed!
I have many MORE... YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH! Good Night, Loser!!!
When you bring the UN into the discussion/argument, there must be a reason why your supporting evidence for your argument is dismissed, IMMEDIATELT!
What religious reasons would that be?
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
The answer is no. Christ never gave the sword to evangelize the Gospel. Secular European kings and emperors falsely assumed the sword under the name "Christian." However, in Islam the sword was preached by Muhammad. There is only One Christ Jesus. There are two Muhammads.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
Thomas Jefferson thinks otherwise and his thinking and that of his contemporaries was what held sway. You argue the point for someone who Jefferson was against because of modern American Fundie attempts to hold onto their modern myths of Protestant Fundie America's origins.
Absolutely!!! One example is Obama pronouncing Pakistan in the correct way of "POK-istan" rather than how most Americans pronounce it as "Pak-istan" like in the Packers football team. Reminds me of Hispanic reporters that over enunciate Hispanic names or pronounce Mexico and Mehico. Obama doing it sounds pretentious to Joe Blow American ears and Obama is just not able to 'dumb' it down for them. He does not have that skill which is what I think Obama was referring to when he said he should appoint Clinton as head of "explaining stuff". If Obama used the more accurate "Lord's Resistance Army" example to show how Christian terror groups fighting for religious reasons in the modern world are also doing ISIS level depravities (as are Buddhist and Hindu terror groups until recently in Sri Lanka - the Hindu Tamils invented suicide bombers and there were cases where Sikhs blew up airplanes as well) most Americans would have scratched their heads having never heard of them. So he has to reach back to the Crusades and the Jim Crow era. That Americans kind of remember he figures.
Obama has killed more terrorist with drones than even Bush while depriving the terrorists of easy to target Americans on the ground. I ask again, what Muslim agenda has Obama enacted in the USA? Are women whipped for leaving their men? Is abortion banned? Is sex outside marriage grounds for execution? Is Obama urging the faithful to kill gays? You are making it sound like I am supporting Obama - I don't - I just want people like you in the right wing to end your stupidity and in being kooks like thinking Obama is making America Muslim. Just by associating with your nuttiness taints the right wing.
Lee actually freed his slaves before Grant freed his.
What religious reasons would that be? Google works as well for you as it does for me for you to look up what LRA does in the name of their version of Christ. And if you argue they are not 'real Christians' that is what Muslims say about ISIL, al-Qaeda, etc. I don't like Muslims. I have a long posting history of supporting wars against Muslims even moderate Muslims like in Bosnia and Kosovo. That does not mean I have to make myself as stupid as a FOX news viewer in discussing the issues.
The only myth is the leftist, atheist secular myth that the founders were deists. 93% of the Founders were Trinitarian Christians of the Protestant or Reformed type. 56 signers of DoI church affiliation On the "Fundie" issue...What? You don't hold to the 5 basic Christian fundamentals handed as the rule of faith since the apostolic era?: 1. The Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; John 20:28; Hebrews 1:8-9). 2. The Virgin Birth (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:27). 3. The Blood Atonement (Acts 20:28; Romans 3:25, 5:9; Ephesians 1:7; Hebrews 9:12-14). 4. The Bodily Resurrection (Luke 24:36-46; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, 15:14-15). 5. The inerrancy of the scriptures themselves (Psalms 12:6-7; Romans 15:4; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20) So the above was embraced by Christians at the turn of the 20th century to distance themselves from the dead liberal churches and theological centers promoting a false gospel. Thus they were called fundamentalists.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
I did not mention that at all. I showed where Thomas Jefferson stated flat out that English Common Law was not based on Christianity and predated it - he mentions the fact that the British establishment always claims their laws are Christian based and he disagrees. And Jefferson did not hide his views - they were very open. Imagine the modern uproar if an American president said this? Also, the Treaty Of Tripoli which the Senate ratified for Jefferson flat out stated that the USA was not founded as a Christian nation and not one noted comment of shock, dissent, etc to the wording of that treaty which was published in the newspapers back then for all to read. That tells me this was an unremarkable view by Americans at the time of the Founding Fathers regardless of their individual faiths.
No they don't. Frankly Muslims say nothing as they know Muhammad preached proselytizing by the sword. He demonstrated such. There are two Muhammads and Muslims will tell you the Muhammad of Medina is the one they follow. That would be when he came to political and military power.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
LMAO. Yeah, I am about as right wing as Obama. Just because someone recognizes Obama's Muslin empathies and reluctance to even call a spade a spade doesn't make one a right winger. Get a grip, Dude. Let's get this straight, there is no difference between the extremes at both ends of the political spectrum. Both ends are dangerous whackos. "I ask again, what Muslim agenda has Obama enacted in the USA?" The same agenda he has to destroy the white U.S. middle class. The same as his agenda to give cover to the racial pimps like Sharpton. It's the same old same old about calling a person a racist because they disagree with Obama. And more significantly naming an AG that doesn't mind breaking the rules, if not the law, to promote Obama's vision of fundamentally remaking America. It's the same agenda that leads Duke to allow the Muslim call to prayer from its Chapel tower. It's the same agenda that led to a Federal court to rule that barring Sharia law in the U.S. is unconstitutional. And on the foreign policy side, his not so veiled hatred for Israel and willingness to allow Iran to acquire nuclear capabilities. Guess what the Arab nations in the region will want when Iran goes nuke? Guess who will give it to them? So go ahead, continue your stupidity, take you next shot and call me Islamophobic. You will retain your card as a useful idiot.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Is that why he didn't bomb the sh*t out of ISIS when they were mobilizing in the open desert? Is that why he allowed ISIS to sweep across Syria and Iraq? Oh, wait......they were just the JV.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Sir William Blackstone The Blackstone Institute honors Sir William Blackstone (1723-1780). Blackstone was the great Eighteenth Century English legal scholar whose philosophy and writings were infused with Judeo-Christian principles. The Ten Commandments are at the heart of Blackstone's philosophy. Blackstone taught that man is created by God and granted fundamental rights by God. Man’s law must be based on God’s law. Our Founding Fathers referred to Blackstone more than to any other English or American authority. Blackstone’s great work, Commentaries on the Laws of England, was basic to the U. S. Constitution. This work has sold more copies in America than in England and was a basic textbook of America’s early lawyers. It was only in the mid-Twentieth Century that American law, being re-written by the U. S. Supreme Court, repudiated Blackstone. An attack on Blackstone is an attack on the U. S. Constitution and our nation’s Judeo- Christian foundations. The Blackstone Institute is committed to reviving the Constitution and its Blackstonian foundations. Bashing Blackstone: The Reconstructionists’ Attack in America’s Culture War [An initial version of this article was published in Rare Jewel Magazine, March-April 2005] Sir William Blackstone, the eminent Eighteenth Century English law professor and author of Commentaries on the Laws of England, has wielded incalculable effects on law in America for the past 225 years. His Commentaries were the law textbook in Great Britain and the United States well after their initial publication. “Bashing Blackstone” is an invisible but critical dimension of the Reconstructionists (liberal/activist) attack in American’s Culture War. We Constitutionalists must therefore arm ourselves with a basic knowledge of Blackstone and his Commentaries. I. Why Study Blackstone’s Commentaries? Commentaries on the Laws of England (published between 1765 and 1769) by Sir William Blackstone (1723-1780) has been abandoned in the Humanistic jurisprudence (legal and constitutional philosophy) that permeates contemporary anti-Judeo-Christian judicial decisions.1 Blackstone also is virtually absent from American legal education today. What, then, is the significance of Blackstonian thought to today’s law? The answer is simple. Blackstone’s Commentaries are one of the most complete, consistent, humanly authored expositions of the Judeo-Christian worldview of law ever written. Blackstone’s immeasurable influence on both English and American law was universally recognized until well into the Twentieth Century, although the “bashing of Blackstone” in America began after the Civil War. Christopher Columbus Langdell a militant evolutionist who became Dean of the Harvard Law School in 1870, thought Blackstonian principles had to be ripped from American law not because they were wrong, but because they were a bulwark of protection against the growing Humanistic movement headed by Langdell and other elitists.2 But Blackstone’s jurisprudential views were not quickly eliminated. In the views of distinguished observers, “The influence of Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England . . . was phenomenal and as great in American as in England”; 3 and “Upon Blackstone’s Commentaries, United States Supreme Court Justice John Marshall and other early American jurists built the American legal system.”4 Indeed, in the most notable of Marshall’s decisions, he cited Blackstone several times to advance the concept of Constitutional supremacy over the power of judges.5 This fact is especially important today since judicial supremacists still cite Marbury as the source of judicial power. We must forcefully and consistently insist that these judges exercise judicial review only if they understand and apply this power within the entire context of Marshall’s – i.e., Blackstonian – philosophy. Statistics also demonstrate Blackstone’s influence in America. Drs. Donald S. Lutz and Charles S. Hyneman analyzed the various sources read and cited by our Founding Fathers; Blackstone was by far the most-cited English/American scholar.6 The American Revolution was a revolt against the politics of English government, but not its legal foundations; the Commentaries, in fact, were cited nearly 10,000 times in the reports of American courts between 1789 and 1915.7 In the world of Humanistic scholarship today, these facts are ignored because history in general is scorned as central to the process of interpreting the US Constitution. But Humanists as well as the rest of us constantly cite history. The only question is whom they cite and when that which they cite occurred. The principles of Blackstone's CommentariesBlackstone’s Commentaries infuse our Constitution, and their revival deserves our most careful attention today. II. Who Was Sir William Blackstone? William Blackstone was born in 1723, several months after his father’s death. His mother died when he was 12 years old. Considered a poor orphaned boy, he nonetheless received an excellent education, supported by prominent individuals, and did well in his studies. The legal profession eventually claimed him; he was entered as a student of law in the Inns of Court at the Middle Temple8 ; and in 1746 he joined the bar. In 1750 Blackstone received the degree of Doctor of Civil Law and left the practice of law for academic life. In 1758 he was elected the first Vinerian Professor of Law at Oxford. Blackstone was highly regarded by his contemporaries who shared our Judeo-Christian worldview. Professor Frederic Maitland declared that “Bracton [“Father of Common Law”] 9 was rivaled by no English juridical writer till Blackstone arose five centuries afterwards. Twice in the history of England has an Englishman had the motive, the courage, the power to write a great readable, reasonable book about English law as a whole.”10 But his ideas drew some criticism, particularly from Jeremy Bentham, the empiricist whose views were antithetical to the Judeo-Christian worldview and significantly contributed to attacks on this worldview by later Humanists. Blackstone wrote the Commentaries to organize and explain English law as it had come to exist by the late 1800s. He desired to reach not only “the Profession of the Common Law; but of such others also, as are desirous to be in some Degree acquainted with the Constitution and Polity of their own Country”11 and “to render the whole [of his analysis of the Common Law] intelligible to the uniformed minds of beginners . . . .”12 Blackstone first presented his material as lectures, but after students sold notes purporting to be his thoughts, he published his own edition, in four volumes.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
You are in darkness. Go look up Sir William Blackstone.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
That would be article 11 of the treaty. Which some scholars note did not appear in the Arabic version of the treaty. Which is interesting. The treaty was renegotiated 8 years later after expiration. Article 11 was dropped in the English version ratified by the Senate. Historical context is important. The founders wanted no part of denominationalism defining the US government. The Barbary Muslims knew the various factions of Europe and their established churches. That was the clear message sent, the US was not a nation with an established church government. We were not Great Briton and her established church nor were we "Holy" Roman Empire subjects. That's the historical context of the treaty. There is a difference between establishing a religion or more accurately a denomination and the ideals in which this nation were founded. The early Americans were devoutly Christian. The Christian faith influenced our founding. Of which the first Great Awakening having the greatest influence.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
www.americanfreedombybarb.../05/eric-holders-justice- department-will.html">In case you missed it. "In its latest effort to protect followers of Islam in the U.S. the Obama Justice Department warns against using social media to spread information considered inflammatory against Muslims, threatening that it could constitute a violation of civil rights." "Over the years the Obama administration has embarked on a fervent crusade to befriend Muslims by creating a variety of outreach programs at a number of key federal agencies. For instance the nation’s Homeland Security covertly met with a group of extremist Arab, Muslim and Sikh organizations to discuss national security matters and the State Department sent a controversial, anti- America Imam (Feisal Abdul Rauf) to the Middle East to foster greater understanding and outreach among Muslim majority communities. The Obama Administration has also hired a special Homeland Security adviser (Mohamed Elibiary) who openly supports a radical Islamist theologian and renowned jihadist ideologue and a special Islam envoy that condemns U.S. prosecutions of terrorists as “politically motivated persecutions” and has close ties to radical extremist groups. The president has even ordered the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to shift its mission from space exploration to Muslim diplomacy and the government started a special service that delivers halal meals, prepared according to Islamic law, to home-bound seniors in Detroit. Who could forget Hillary Clinton’s special order allowing the reentry of two radical Islamic academics whose terrorist ties have long banned them from the U.S.?"
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
What reasons would that be? What part of the Gospel of Grace do the LRA preach?
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
Where in the world did you find that piece of garbage?
So you're trying to say Carter never crawled in bed with the Muslims in Afghanistan? Maybe this was his way of making up for abandoning the Shah.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Man, that was one HELL of a windy post! I use the term "animism" because in real life, a number of more primative peoples around the world (and yes, some still exist) describe a "god" as imbued in the world around themselves. There is no real diametric opposing force of "good vs. "evil" other than what promotes one's life. There is no "god" as "god" is everything around us; however, there are great gods and those great gods are meaningful as they helped in some way promote the survival of someone. The boy rises up, confident that the "tree god" has saved his life. Of course, the boy reports the story to his family and the story is magnified as many times as the story is repeated and as often as the story is repeated, the story becomes reality. There is no correlation of an "intent" by any god to save the boy's life. Yet, there is a belief that the tree god (or simply "tree") has saved the boy's life. The idea of "luck" is all there is to say about belief systems. That is the reason for asking the questions earlier up the thread. People are prone to move towards a belief system they trust that will promote their own survival; if an earlier belief system is not supporting their survival they will change towards something else; it happens all throughout human history whether you want to agree or not. Belief systems are entirely based on "luck" to include modern religions.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Kinda hard to tell that was George from the back, anyway it was the same result covering up for the phony.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Oh, I guess that is just oky doky fine to some of the "True Believers". After all it is just some necessary steps towards "Fundamentally Transforming The United States".
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Linking cultists to Christians that's low even for you but not surprising, and Kony is a Muslim.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Pericles: "Absolutely!!! If Obama used the more accurate "Lord's Resistance Army" example to show how Christian terror groups fighting for religious reasons in the modern world are also doing ISIS level depravities (as are Buddhist and Hindu terror groups until recently in Sri Lanka - the Hindu Tamils invented suicide bombers and there were cases where Sikhs blew up airplanes as well) most Americans would have scratched their heads having never heard of them. So he has to reach back to the Crusades and the Jim Crow era. That Americans kind of remember he figures". Lusifer (Satan), was the most beautiful angel in heaven, God loved him very much, maybe you Obama lackies can explain away, make excuses for the evils he has spread all over the world too, since our Father cast him out of heaven. OOPS! My bad. You already are, and doing a bang up job of it too, shoveling and spreading Obama's piles of sugar coated shite. But in the end, all you're going to be holding onto is a 'pile of Obama's/satan's Shite!~ jmho
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
I don't hardly know what to make of it, but I am rather surprised and puzzled at Gatlins sudden defense of Obama, and Muslims.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Why is that?
Just to be controversial, he likes the attention. (Along with a few others).
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
When I was a boy I dove headlong into a shallow lake and broke my neck and was paralyzed. God healed me and saved my life. Luck? No. Miracle. A belief system predicated on luck cannot explain true miracles.
It was "luck" that you survived and it was also "luck" that your health was restored. There are no controlled variables about your circumstances that show "God" or any "miracle" other than your belief.
Just did not figure him that way. For one thing, he has been so adamant about supporting the Republican nominee. Just seems strange to me. But then he is strange, LOL.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
LOL ! Yeah I think you are right. Most people that are big attention hogs do have mental issues, LOL!
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I'm curious as to how long his list is? BTA his shrink is probably just as bad so he gets told "There's nothing wrong with you sir, have a nice day" "Please pay the lady at the counter on your way out".
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
What Republican nominee? I didn't know there was one as of yet.
Luck? No. Miracle. " I agree! Over the years, I have witnessed many events that some would say was just luck, or coincidence. I have seen events that the only possible explanation was that they were miracles. Non believers can think what they want. I believe you experienced a miracle.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
It is. Vicomte13's personal experiences are nothing more than some good "luck." There was no intervention by a "god" to suggest that such a magnificient and spectacular event like that happened is pure bull shit.
There is not one, yet. But in case you did not see it, and apparently you did not, Gatlin stated on another thread that he would support whom ever was the Republican nominee.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I don't give a shit about Gatlin's beloved political party or any of his choices for a President. He has only one projected image: more bull shit.
Believe what you want tater.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
By all rights, I should not be here today, but by the Will of God, and my will to live, I am! The same goes for our son, who should have died in 1997, or sitting as a human vegetable for the rest of his life, but he is not, he is whole again, and his doctors do no understand, nor did they believe in 'miracles' either. They are witnesses to miracles everyday, yet some still believe there is no God...go figure~ jmho
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
The problem with your belief is that others have same or similar experiences and subscribe the nature of their recovery or later well-being with a "GOD." This belief system fosters incredable ramifications for soscieties as people tend to cling onto the right "belief." Within and without various societies, enmity occurs and ultimately war. War seems to be a method of describing all these miracles, doesn't it?
Explain yourself.
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
Sure. Different societies have varying cultures for ensuring survival skills for the benefit of all within that same society. Just as social-economics, language, customs and traditions make up a culture so do local customs for various belief and systems of belief. Using religious models for Christianity is an interesting approach to social migration of belief systems. Also using Muslim models for belief systems are interesting to study. Both models have different cultures and beliefs but both cultures have statification about their respective belief systems. It is impressive to view these fragmented systems because at the end of the day, there is no real god; there are only beliefs about a REAL GOD.
Was not our Founding Father.
The only people who claim this are Fundie revisionists trying to grasp at straws. Even if true (I Don't read Arabic) it matters not at all because the Senate ratified the English language treaty. As for ideals - Jefferson flat out stated the ideal were not connected with Christianity when it came to English common law.
Carter started it but Reagan expanded it.
Kony is not a Muslim.
Pericles: Was not our Founding Father. Gary is a little daffy at times.
God healed me and saved my life. Luck? No. Miracle. A belief system predicated on luck cannot explain true miracles. I went to the grave of a saint and prayed for my back to heal - minor slipped disk kind of injury. Nothing happened. It was injured on t he trip to Europe. I endured for a month in pain. Went back to the States a doctor said it was pretty bad might need surgery and physical therapy. I was given some anti inflammatories and made an appointment for the following month. Within days of that my pain and injury went away. I went to the doctor he did an X-Ray and said in a paraphrase of his own words "It was miraculous and he had never seen similar injury heal up so fast on its own". So despite my doubts I was granted mercy and healed.
I am still waiting for evidence Obama made America more Islamic. All I get is Obama hired Arabs in govt. Not buying the demented right wing paranoid stupidity on Obama does not mean we are defending Obama or like Obama in any way. I think Obama is a war criminal for example.
No problem at all. The issue is the rapid rise of Muslim populations in America within a short amount of time:
There is one variable: as I was on my back, paralyzed, my nose filling up with water, I asked: "Please". And then I was healed. I stood up. I told nobody. Then there were two separate occasions: little animals that were quite dead held in my hands. And I said "Father, you can do anything. Please." And he did. Both times. The animals came back to life. Luck? No miracle. Then there is the Shroud of Turin. The image on it is on both faces. It is formed by Maillard Reactions. It is not painted on. It is not of human artifice. We cannot control Maillard Reactions with precision today, let alone back then. It is a chaotic process. The image cannot exist, not with that exquisite level of detail, even of inorganic matters (the lettering of the coins is transmitted also). It can't exist, but it does. A tangible, physical miracle that has been scrutinized by forensic scientists. Luck cannot paint the Mona Lisa. Random processes cannot sculpt the Statue of Liberty. But human hands cannot today make the image on the Shroud, and never could: it exceeds our capacity to control nature. But there it is. A true miracle. And look at WHO it is. There is the face of the God who controls your "luck". Res ipsa loquitur.
Even within your belief system, there is a real god. Your god is the laws of nature themselves, including the law of entropy, of randomness, which gives rise to luck. That is your god. You believe that the laws of nature apply everywhere: they are omnipresent. You believe that the laws of physics apply to every speck of matter and energy: they are omnipotent. You believe that these laws of nature have always applied: they are eternal. So, you have an omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal god. The only difference between you and the Christians or Muslims or Jews is that you do not think that nature is omniscient. Your god is natural law, which is all powerful but mindless. And that may be so…except that it's obviously not COMPLETELY mindless: you and I are speaking intelligently, and we are in no way external to nature. Nature is thinking about itself in our very conversation, and in all other exchanges of information. So, you must admit the existence of intelligence, of "science" within this omnipotent, omnipresent and eternal nature governed by its laws. You simply doubt that there is ultimately an intelligence driving it and making natural law BE law. You would have to allow that intelligence - science, currently limited - could EVOLVE within your system to be omniscient, given enough time. There's nothing in the natural law that prohibits that. And if there is enough dark matter to close the circle and cause a gravitational Big Crunch to succeed the Big Bang, it is possible that sufficient time will have run for the evolved intelligence to imprint its opinions, its laws, upon the matter and energy such that they follow its directives in the Big Bang that succeeds the Big Crunch. And VOILA! Natural law, following a Hindu cycle of cycles. Now it's just a matter of finding enough gravity to close the system, and you not only know WHAT, but you know WHY and WHO.
They see miracles, but they refuse to accept them as miracles. Reminds me of the people who opposed Galileo on the thought that the world revolves about the Sun. One can look at Jupiter and see the moons and see how it happens, but still refuse to accept the obvious out of stubbornness and cant of mind. Likewise one can look at obvious miracles again and again, and simply refuse to accept that they are miracles, because if one accepts that, one will have to change one's mind about something on which one has closed it. The good news is that the doctors and everybody else eventually do get the answer.
Man, not only are you windy but also revealing in your lack of capability to discern relevent questioning: Yup, just as I suspected: Begging for a little "luck" directed towards a higher power because of your own lack of self-responsibility. Nice belief system, there. Of course. You were embarrassed about your own shenanigans towards your own self. Are you a vetenarian to determine with absolute accuracy your whimsical observations? From being a medical doctor, you are now a professional physicist with certifications to make your opinions worthy of merit. Very cool. As I said earlier, you have a belief system. Nothing more or less. There are no miracles unless you believe in them. Since you are no young lad, your beliefs are like the tooth-fairy, the Great Pumpkin, Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Sometimes you win the luck of the draw, sometimes you don't.
We had best define the word miracle. A miracle is not luck. A miracle is something that cannot happen because it breaks the known laws of physics. Winning the lottery is really good luck. Spreading ones arms and flying, or walking on water, or rising from the dead - these things are not luck, because the probability of such things happening is zero: the laws of physics prevent them from happening at all. If they happen anyway, and people see it, there is one of two possible explanations: (1) fraud. Magicians apparently do impossible things all the time, but it's all mirrors and sleight of hand, or (2) True Miracle: the laws of physics have been nullified by an act of will. When bodies die, they rot. They might dry and mummify, but that, too is decay. So, if somebody dies, and does NOT rot or mummify or otherwise decay, does not enter rigor mortis - this would mean that the bacteria within the body and in the air also simply cease to function in contact with that body. And that is not possible by natural law. And yet there ARE people who died centuries ago but did not decay, or rot, or mummify. They are the Incorrupt, and they're all Catholic saints. If this were a RANDOM process, a matter of LUCK, they would not all be Catholic saints. Indeed, when the opened the graves of Paris and moved 16 million bodies into the Paris catacombs during the Revolutionary period, they would have found incorrupt bodies in some of those graves. Nope. All decayed. But there are the Incorrupt, undecided, dozens of them, all saints. To claim "luck" for that would be absurd. That's pretty selective, and persistent suspension of the laws of physics just for the most holy of ONE religion. The other claim would then be FRAUD. The problem with a fraud claim is that mankind doesn't have any means of making bodies not rot. We can embalm using modern techniques: the bodies still rot. We can mummify. The bodies then are mummies. The Incorrupt aren't frauds, because we can't MAKE frauds like that even if we want to. It vastly exceeds our technology. But there they are, accumulating in number over the ages. Dead people who look like they're sleeping. Some eventually decay. Eventually. Others don't. How? Miracle, obviously. No other explanation works. Luck doesn't. Fraud doesn't. What does that leave? Miracle. And look who the miracles all center around. Once again, we see the hand of God being exclusive in this form of "luck".
Served to you while it's still steaming for your instantaneous gratification...since it is obvious from your stalking that you cannot get enough. Bon Appetit!!!
I've worked as a veterinary tech in two veterinary hospitals. I know what dead is. And in these two cases, the animals were not a little dead. They were very dead. it would have been obvious to you too.
There was no "hand of God" about your screw up in life. Get over it. You made mistakes and are "lucky" for no other reason but by sheer happen-stance random events.
OMG! This is a miracle!
And the earth does not revolve around the Sun unless you believe it does.
I find your post completly unacceptable: morbid and unbelievable. You are an outright sociopathic liar or a drug crazed lunatic. You pick your preferences, it means nothing to me.
Ridiculous! Spinal cords don't fuse by luck. They don't fuse at all. You snap it, you're paralyzed. The beauty of our argument here is that of course it is impossible for ME to persuade you, as I cannot perform miracles for you on demand. But you will die, and then you will find yourself alive, and in your life review you will encounter this very discussion, and all others. You will relive this discussion again one day, in the course of a miracle. And in that moment…you certainly won't be worrying about ME or about the content of this discussion, but dealing with the reality of the situation and your position in it. Until that day, I guess there's not much more for us to discuss on this topic. Your mind is made up that miracles don't exist and God doesn't exist. I have experienced miracles and talked to God and seen many things. I've shown you physical artifacts that, if you take the time to go study your physics and biochemistry and really look at them, you will discover are true miracles: they break the laws of physics and they cannot exist. And I've answered your assertion about "luck" by pointing you to miracles that have no Muslim or Hindu or Animist counterpart. They are all Christian. In fact, they're almost all Catholic/Orthodox. (There is one Lutheran incorrupt). You can look at a 100 things that all break the laws of physics and say they're all luck, and then you can look at the fact that they only happen to Catholics and say "luck piled on luck". But the coincidence would shake even your confidence, if you looked at it. You won't, so all there's left is a shoulder shrug. There are none so blind as they who refuse to see. And that's all there is to say about this with you on this thread. You'll see it all someday and you'll know I was telling you the truth. And I'll have to be content with that. Good luck.
Lying is a sin in my religion. Every word I have told you is true. Every word of it. You are confronted with a fact set that you reject because it is against your own religion. Therefore, you vilify the messenger. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. And the day will come when you stand next to a God you don't believe in and review this very thing, and will know you are wrong - wrong in the rejection, wrong in the accusation, wrong in the closing of your eyes. But, since you find the discussion distressing, this is a good time to end it. Good Luck.
Probably within your own professional veterinarian's hands or, as you say ... move your job hat to your professional physicist hands. But you won't revive me. You shall relish in your own mind the day you elicted some sort of personal power about mircles for some little creature.
No problem at all. The issue is the rapid rise of Muslim populations in America within a short amount of time: I recall this fear going back to the Clinton era where Jews were afraid that Muslims will equal the number of Jews in the USA and surpass them. Most Muslim rise in the USA is from birth rates not immigration.
STATS, please. Support your opinion with meaningful stats.
""I ask again, what Muslim agenda has Obama enacted in the USA?" The same agenda he has to destroy the white U.S. middle class. The same as his agenda to give cover to the racial pimps like Sharpton. It's the same old same old about calling a person a racist because they disagree with Obama. And more significantly naming an AG that doesn't mind breaking the rules, if not the law, to promote Obama's vision of fundamentally remaking America. It's the same agenda that leads Duke to allow the Muslim call to prayer from its Chapel tower. It's the same agenda that led to a Federal court to rule that barring Sharia law in the U.S. is unconstitutional. And on the foreign policy side, his not so veiled hatred for Israel and willingness to allow Iran to acquire nuclear capabilities. Guess what the Arab nations in the region will want when Iran goes nuke? Guess who will give it to them?" " In case you missed it. "In its latest effort to protect followers of Islam in the U.S. the Obama Justice Department warns against using social media to spread information considered inflammatory against Muslims, threatening that it could constitute a violation of civil rights." "Over the years the Obama administration has embarked on a fervent crusade to befriend Muslims by creating a variety of outreach programs at a number of key federal agencies. For instance the nation’s Homeland Security covertly met with a group of extremist Arab, Muslim and Sikh organizations to discuss national security matters and the State Department sent a controversial, anti- America Imam (Feisal Abdul Rauf) to the Middle East to foster greater understanding and outreach among Muslim majority communities. The Obama Administration has also hired a special Homeland Security adviser (Mohamed Elibiary) who openly supports a radical Islamist theologian and renowned jihadist ideologue and a special Islam envoy that condemns U.S. prosecutions of terrorists as “politically motivated persecutions” and has close ties to radical extremist groups. The president has even ordered the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to shift its mission from space exploration to Muslim diplomacy and the government started a special service that delivers halal meals, prepared according to Islamic law, to home-bound seniors in Detroit. Who could forget Hillary Clinton’s special order allowing the reentry of two radical Islamic academics whose terrorist ties have long banned them from the U.S.?"
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
The immigration law is still the same so any future growth will be in the fact Muslims have more children than other religions - sort of like how Hasidic Jews have increased not from immigration but from population growth though immigration and conversions play a factor as well.
I hope you don't think that is some kind of revelation do you?
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
According to those who are close to him and have been captured by him he is.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
The same agenda he has to destroy the white U.S. middle class. So its just KKK like demagoguery? How is this any different than Bush allowing Saudis to be the only flights allowed to leave the USA after 9/11? America has been Islam's bitch since that retard Reagan armed jihadis in Afghanistan. Carter armed natives of Afghanistan but Reagan authorized the CIA to bring in jihadis from around the world. Bush, Jr supported the Clinton war on Serbia in favor of Muslims. Bush, Jr made Kosovo an independent state in Europe - another Muslim nation born in Europe. So spare me that this is proof somehow America will become Islamic - it is a foreign policy tactic for the USA to be linked to jihadis.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/Vox-News/2012/0309/Why-did-Rush- Limbaugh-defend-Joseph-Kony-and-Lord-s-Resistance-Army-video Why did Rush Limbaugh defend Joseph Kony and Lord's Resistance Army (+video)? Rush Limbaugh criticized Obama last October for sending US troops to kill Joseph Kony's 'Christian' fighters. When apprised by listeners of the LRA's record, he expressed surprise. Last October, Rush Limbaugh on his radio show defended Joseph Kony’s Lord’s Resistance Army, the Uganda guerilla group that is now infamous around the world thanks to a viral video from the Invisible Children organization that has exposed Kony’s cruel and murderous ways. Why in the world would Limbaugh do that? One reason is that he was not so much promoting the LRA as questioning the Obama administration’s decision to send 100 elite US troops to the area to help quell fighting. “Lord’s Resistance Army are Christians. They are fighting the Muslims in Sudan. And Obama has sent troops, United States troops to remove them from the battlefield, which means kill them,” Limbaugh said last Oct. 14, according to a show transcript.
You sure are being nice to him, kinda makes me wonder if you don't know him. Or are you going to stick with the story it's Izzy?
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Jefferson was respected in his day, but his belief system was not.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Nonsense! Total nonsense!
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
I am leaning towards "Bucky" fight now...Izzy has never displayed such intelligence, that caused me to pretty much rule him out.
That's Pantheism, which is just another form of atheism. In reality your god manifests himself in a mirror.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
You misunderstand me completely. I can't revive anybody. If I could, and you died and I knew about it, I would. I would, and after that you would know and you would become an ally of God forever. I don't relish in the raising of those animals. I recount those stories because they are the TRUTH, and they were part of the in-my-face PROOF to me that God IS, the things that leave ME with no mental dodge, because I know. Hearing voices? I could be crazy. Seeing things? I could be crazy. Dead animals rising? That's not crazy. There it is. It's a fact, part of a fact pattern that I can't deny. The external miracles, Shroud and Incorrupt and Lanciano - they confirm to ANYBODY these things are so. What happened was a MIRACLE. That was the point: MIRACLES happen. Laws of physics are broken by a overarching mind that rules nature too. The point of studying them is to see it, to know it, and to bend the neck and the knee to reality. I'm not a Catholic because I LIKE it. I don't, actually. There's plenty that I'd prefer not be so. I'm a Catholic because it's TRUE.
I have to disagree with you on this. I myself was a scientific pantheist until God grabbed my face. Pantheism is the belief that Nature is God. The physicist would express it that the laws of nature are God. It isn't atheism, at least my form of it wasn't. Atheism is the belief that there is no god at all. Pantheism is a form of paganism.
Prove it! Quite frankly if there is no God it follows good and evil are only relative terms. If there is no God, then a man shouldn't care if his mother is chased down the street like a bitch in heat by a pack of men or dogs. You really have no basis whatsoever for your morality.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Was not our Founding Father. So? He was well known and studied by them. There wasn't a lawyer in the Colonies and later in the States who didn't have a copy of Blackstone on their desk.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
It is all perspective - I consider Islam a form of early protestant Christianity.
Perhaps the other major reason Limbaugh made this faux pas was that he was just talking too fast about stuff of which he knew little. Today over 50 million people have seen the Invisible Children video, which documents such LRA abuses as its kidnapping of children for use as soldiers. But Limbaugh’s discussion of the group occurred long before it became so well known. In fact, as his broadcast progressed last October, Limbaugh obviously began receiving reports from listeners of the LRA’s real nature. Near the end of the show he said, “Is that right? The Lord’s Resistance Army is being accused of really bad stuff? ... Well, we just found out about this today. We’re gonna do, of course, our due diligence research on it. But nevertheless we got a hundred troops being sent over there to fight these guys – and they claim to be Christians.” At the time, the broadcast created an uproar among those who knew of the LRA’s actions. The next day conservative Sen. James Inhofe (R) of Oklahoma went on the Senate floor to set the record straight, noting that Joseph Kony was in no way a Christian, and that he had been disavowed by the Ugandan Catholic Church". The CSM also said the above. BTA Sudan is backing Kony and Sudan is 97% Muslim. Hmmmmmmmmm.......
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
I seem to remember somebody trying to con me by claiming they were Bucky, you remember that?
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
GarySpFC: Prove it! Quite frankly if there is no God it follows good and evil are only relative terms. If there is no God, then a man shouldn't care if his mother is chased down the street like a bitch in heat by a pack of men or dogs. You really have no basis whatsoever for your morality. Gary, I hate to break my perspective to you but you can not second guess GOD. God is a mystery. The creation of all about us is a mystery. There is not much more than that perspective at this time in mankind's quest for knowledge to understand himself and the world around himself.
What piece of garbage?
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
Pantheism identifies the universe with God, but their God is "not a personal being", who involves Himself in the affairs of men. Deism admits there is a personal being, however he no longer has a relationship with man. Both are forms of atheism, and especially the former.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Tell it lady. :)
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
Your post @#195: The only myth is the leftist, atheist secular myth that the founders were deists. Feel free to defend or argue or substantiate your own silly post. You are a damed liar.
Your God is a mystery. Better yet, you have an unknown God. Your faith is a leap into deep darkness. The Christian faith is a walk with a God Who has revealed Himself in Scripture, and every day is a great adventure for Christians.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Nope...
Faith? Isn't that term nothing more than a literal or juxtaposed transition of "belief?" If so, you agree with me. If not, you and I are at great odds.
It gets so tiring listening to irreligious zealots claim that the United States was not founded as a Christian nation. The fact is that we were founded by a preponderance of men who had a clear and concise understanding of Christianity; and, who viewed the principles of Christianity as essential in forming a new government. This is not to imply that they wanted to form a theocracy. Our founding father new all too well what happens when a government is allowed to fall under man’s concept of religious control. Yet, our founding fathers were Christians and they wanted to live in a country where the government tempered man’s ambitions and desires with Christian principles. They did not, however, want to have a secular government which was subject to undo influence from any single Christian denomination. Therefore, it is imperative that when we highlight our founding fathers desire to separate religion and government it was separation of Christian denominations and government … it was not a desire to have an irreligious libertine government. Yes, our founding fathers wanted a secular government, but they also wanted a government that adhered to generic Christian values and principles. We can say, without equivocation or mental reservation, that America was founded as a Christian nation. A close look at our founding fathers will reveal their Christian values and beliefs. A survey of 52 founding father’s statements about God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, Christianity, the gospel message, and the bible revealed them to be rather devout Christians. It was discovered that 77% of these founding fathers clearly acknowledged a belief in Christianity. Another 10% expressed a belief in God and Jesus but did not actually profess Jesus to be savior. In all probably we would be justified, however, in assuming that their acknowledgement of Jesus infers a belief in Jesus as savior. All of the remaining men expressed a belief in God but they did not come out and declare any belief that would led us to think they were a Christian. Thus, we can say with a great deal of certainty that over 80% of our founding fathers were Christians; and, we can say with a great deal of confidence that over 90% of our founding fathers were religious. In fact, if we restrict our survey to just the signers of the Declaration of Independence we will find that they all belonged to a major Christian denomination. So you see, it is absolutely ludicrous to believe that our founding fathers were not heavily influenced by Christian principles. The next time you are confronted by an irreligious libertine, who claim that the United States was not founded as a Christian nation, tell them to examine the evidence. It is absolutely impossible to deny that the vast majority of our founding fathers were Christians. Based on the statements they have made, and the religious organizations they belonged to, it is obvious they were strongly influenced by Christianity. Even those who may not have had been very religious were influenced by Christian teachings. And, it is a fact that we Christians tend to weave Christian principle into the fabric of social and organizational governance. Yes, we were not founded as a theocracy, but we were founded as a nation anchored in Christian principles and teaching. We were founded as a Christian nation and we were blessed by God.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
No. The entire article 11 is spurious in nature. Even if it was included in the English version before the Senate, eight years later when the treaty was renegotiated the language did not appear. So the revisionism of the secular muhammadan left in the US grasps at straws to include an article of a treaty, a spurious one at that, to conclude Americans were secular and the government somehow knew what that meant at the time. We know whatever was put before Adams was signed. Yet Adams would be one of the last people to declare the USA did not hail from Christian roots. He was clear on this matter: The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite, and these Principles only could be intended by them in their Address, or by me in my Answer. And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity, in which all those Sects were united: And the general Principles of English and American Liberty, in which all those young Men United, and which had United all Parties in America, in Majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her Independence. Now I will avow, that I then believed, and now believe, that those general Principles of Christianity, are as eternal and immutable, as the Existence and Attributes of God; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System. I could therefore safely say, consistently with all my then and present Information, that I believed they would never make Discoveries in contradiction to these general Principles. "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
The Christian faith is an action or a readiness to act based on the confidence one has is the object of their belief. Basically, faith is a verb. The Christian faith is based on a KNOWN God, and the idea of it being a leap into the dark is total nonsense.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
I can't see what difference it makes. Everyone sees what they want to see in the founders. If you look at the peoples actions, there attitudes towards one another, it wasn't and isn't a christian nation. Anyways, there probably isn't even such a thing. Certainly God never set out to have one.
"The Hand of providence has been so conspicuous in all this, that he must be worse than an infidel that lacks faith, and more than wicked, that has not gratitude enough to acknowledge his obligations." George Washington's letter of August 20, 1778 to Brig. General Thomas Nelson "Almighty and eternal Lord God, the great Creator of heaven and earth, and the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; look down from heaven in pity and compassion upon me Thy servant, who humbly prorate myself before Thee." George Washington's prayer at Valley Forge "No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency...We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of heaven cannot be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which heaven itself has ordained." -- George Washington in his Inaugural Address, April 30, 1789 "Such being the impressions under which I have, in obedience to the public summons, repaired to the present station, it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being, who rules over the universe, who presides in the council of nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States.." "...Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency" From President George Washington's Inaugural Address, April 30th, 1789, addressed to both Houses of Congress. "Let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion."--George Washington, ca. 1789, Maxims of Washington, ed. John F. Schroeder (Mt. Vernon: Mt. Vernon Ladies Association, 1942), p. 106. "And now, Almighty Father, if it is Thy holy will that we shall we shall obtain a place and name among the nations of the Earth...:grant that we may be enabled to show our gratitude for Thy goodness by endeavors to fear and obey Thee." George Washington
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: 'It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity." President Adams, July 4, 1821 "The general principles, on which the Fathers achieved independence, were . . . the general principles of Christianity." John Adams, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 28, 1813, The Adams-Jefferson Letters,ed. Lester J. Cappon (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1959), vol 2, pp. 339-40. "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams from his Oct. 13, 1789 address to the military.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
"God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever; That a revolution of the wheel of fortune, a change of situation, is among possible events; that it may become probable by Supernatural influence! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in that event." President Thomas Jefferson --Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, p. 237.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
""I ask again, what Muslim agenda has Obama enacted in the USA?" The same agenda he has to destroy the white U.S. middle class. So its just KKK like demagoguery? No,it is an actual fact. Basically,thanks to blacks being placed in the Dim Plantation after 1964 there are virtually no middle-class blacks left in this country that don't have AA jobs in government or corporations with government ties,so that leaves the whites. Which includes Jews as well as some His and Her Panics. How is this any different than Bush allowing Saudis to be the only flights allowed to leave the USA after 9/11? It's not. This is one reason why I call Obomber Bush 4.0. America has been Islam's bitch since that retard Reagan armed jihadis in Afghanistan. > Proving once again that you are educated beyond your ability to comprehend. We have been Islams servants ever since Rockefeller and Kennedy got involved in the oil business. Poppy Bush and Boy Jorge Bush are just two more US functionaries in the long line of Muslim employees.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, James Madison proposed the plan to divide the central government into three branches. He discovered this model of government from the Perfect Governor, as he read Isaiah 33:22; “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us.” [Baron Charles Montesquieu, wrote in 1748; “Nor is there liberty if the power of judging is not separated from legislative power and from executive power. If it [the power of judging] were joined to legislative power, the power over life and liberty of the citizens would be arbitrary, for the judge would be the legislature if it were joined to the executive power, the judge could have the force of an oppressor. All would be lost if the same … body of principal men … exercised these three powers." Madison claimed Isaiah 33:22 as the source of division of power in government See also: pp.241-242 in Teaching and Learning America’s Christian History: The Principle approach by Rosalie Slater] "Before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe. And to the same Divine Author of every good and perfect gift [James 1:17] we are indebted for all those privileges and advantages, religious as well as civil, which are so richly enjoyed in this favored land." James Madison "Cursed be all that learning that is contrary to the cross of Christ." James Madison - America's Providential History p. 93.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
A "verb" based on a belief. Thank you for clarifying the detail that I have been suggesting all along this thread.
I have no idea who Joseph Kony is or why you care or pay attention to what Rush Limbaugh says. Remind me again,what elective or cabinet office he holds in government.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
"When we view the blessings with which our country has been favored, those which we now enjoy, and the means which we possess of handing them down unimpaired to our latest posterity, our attention is irresistibly drawn to the source from whence they flow. Let us then, unite in offering our most grateful acknowledgments for these blessings to the Divine Author of All Good." --Monroe made this statement in his 2nd Annual Message to Congress, November 16, 1818. "The liberty, prosperity, and the happiness of our country will always be the object of my most fervent prayers to the Supreme Author of All Good." March 5, 1821 in his Second Inaugural Address
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
"The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were.... the general principles of Christianity. President John Quincy Adams "My custom is to read four or five chapters of the Bible every morning immediately after rising... It seems to me the most suitable manner of beginning the day... It is an invaluable and inexhaustible mine of knowledge and virtue." President John Quincy Adams "The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity." - John Quincy Adams, July 4, 1821
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
The majority of the founders were not deists. That's a leftist lie.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
"We shall not fight alone. God presides over the destinies of nations, and will raise up friends for us. The battle is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave . . . Is life so dear, or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" Patrick Henry, in a speech March 23, 1775. "Whether this [new government] will prove a blessing or a curse will depend upon the use our people make of the blessings which a gracious God hath bestowed on us. If they are wise, they will be great and happy. If they are of a contrary character, they will be miserable. Righteousness alone can exalt them as a nation [Proverbs 14:34]. Reader! Whoever thou art, remember this, and in thy sphere practice virtue thyself and encourage it in others." Patrick Henry, Written on the back of Henry's Stamp Act "Amongst other strange things said of me, I hear it is said by the deists that I am one of the number; and, indeed, that some good people think I am no Christian. This thought gives me much more pain than the appellation of Tory; because I think religion of infinitely higher importance than politics; and I find much cause to reproach myself that I have lived so long, and have given no decided and public proofs of my being a Christian. But, indeed, my dear child, this is a character which I prize far above all this world has, or can boast." Patrick Henry, from a letter to his daughter in 1796 "The Bible is worth all other books which have ever been printed." Patrick Henry, Wirt Henry's, Life, vol. II, p. 621
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
"Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Beside, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of Nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us." Patrick Henry John Jay "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers. And it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest, of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." First Chief Justice of Supreme Court John Jay to Jedidiah Morse February 28, 1797 "God's will be done; to him I resign--in him I confide. Do the like. Any other philosophy applicable to this occasion is delusive. Away with it." John Jay, first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, in a letter to his wife, Sally Jay, April 20, 1794, reprinted in The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, ed. Henry P. Johnston (New York, NY: Burt Franklin, 1970), vol. 4, p. 7. "I have long been of opinion that the evidence of the truth of Christianity requires only to be carefully examined to produce conviction in candid minds . . ." John Jay, in a letter to Rev. Uzal Ogden, Feb. 14, 1796, in CPPJJ, vol. 4, p. 203. "While in France . . . I do not recollect to have had more than two conversations with atheists about their tenants. The first was this: I was at a large party, of which were several of that description. They spoke freely and contemptuously of religion. I took no part in the conversation. In the course of it, one of them asked me if I believed in Christ? I answered that I did, and that I thanked God that I did." John Jay, in a letter to John Bristed, April 23, 1811, in CPPJJ, vol. 4, p. 359. "The same merciful Providence has also been pleased to cause every material event and occurrence respecting our Redeemer, together with the gospel he proclaimed, and the miracles and predictions to which it gave occasion, to be faithfully recorded and preserved for the information and benefit of all mankind." John Jay, in an address to the American Bible Society, May 9, 1822, in CPPJJ, vol. 4, p. 480.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
The Christian faith is based on EVIDENCE, NOT YOUR LEAP INTO THE DARK.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
How much more rope do you need?
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
The KKK is watching professor Obama, and taking notes. He's taken race pimpin' to a whole new level! The D&R party neocon jihadis are pumping the mooselimb ((( FEAR ))) propaganda to keep any sane American from getting elected president. They want the sheeple to panic, and stampede towards a Clinton, or a Bush globalist swine. 8 more years of parasitic feasting on a dying America, is the D&R partys fondest hope. You must be at great odds with this world then. Faith is not the same as a "belief." Faith is something you demonstrate everytime you drive thru a green light, knowing cars will have stopped at the red light; Faith is sitting in your chair, knowing its four legs will support you; Faith is leaping into bed, knowing it will be soft, and won't collapse under your weight. Faith in the irrefutable evidence for and of God is so overwhelming that it is easy to believe in God. Conversely, lacking faith in the face of the preponderence of evidence supporting His existence is...il-logical. God's hand is literally everywhere. The evidence? It's seen in Cause and Effect, Design, and Moral Law (where did you get your sense of Right and Wrong again?)
Wow... Was there actually someone on this thread who claimed the majority of Founders were Deists?
But...Hasn't man's quest for knowledge and understanding included satisfying his innate spiritual and emotional hunger for understanding and communicating with God? To accept God as nothing more than a mere "mystery," one would have to ignore how God assured man of the genesis of the universe, the geneology of man and God in the flesh, life's instructions to man on wisdom, love, and purpose. One would also have to dismiss the 300 or more fulfilled prophecies of Jesus Christ, as well as the Gospel and...The End Game. It's all there in the Good Book. We can't play dumb with God, son. Sure, many things about God will remain a "mystery," but what matters isn't.
"Revisionist"?? Lol... Aren't you one of two posters on this thread requiring "proof" that Barry 0dinga has Muslified the USA?? You're like the bull who has already been festooned with dozens of darts by toreadors, snorting, "Hit me just once!"
"The general Principles, on which the Fathers Achieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite, and these Principles only could be intended by them in their Address, or by me in my Answer. And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity..." Now I will avow, that I then believed, and now believe, that those general Principles of Christianity, are as eternal and immutable, as the Existence and Attributes of God; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System. Adams tees this one up and aces a hole in one in broad daylight, doesn't he? The Deist/Atheist/Agnostic Brigade will deny America's Christian heritage until they are blue in the face. Why is this the case? Because NONE of Founders (nor even the Deists) would have put up with their idea of God-less, Christian-less America. Moreover, any historical reference that fails to note America's "Christian" roots and Biblical principles aren't "historical," but revisionist.
My problem with all of the agina about a treaty concluded in the 1790s and the early 1800's is this: does it matter? Does it matter at all? It sure seems to matter to a lot of people. And why would that be? And if it DOES matter, even though having been written so long ago, then why do treaties with the Indians written by the same government one hundred years later NOT matter? Why are we not permitted to demand the punctilious observations of THOSE treaties, while we look back to a defunct treaty with a defunct emirate and give IT such importance? The answer is that the Indian treaties will cost us a lot of MONEY if we respect them, and we will lose political control of quite a bit of land. So two hundred million people are willing to turn a blind eye to treaties that contain legal obligations they have no intention of upholding, because it's not to their benefit. But people who think that a treat from the 1700s is in their benefit will exalt it. To me, the incongruity makes a mockery of the whole exercise, and reduces it to hypocrisy. If the treaty with the Barbary Pirates is important because of it's language, then treaties ratified one hundred years later with the Indians on our territory, tribes that are still here, are much MORE important, and ought to be respected to the letter. So, will the folks doing deep exegesis of the treaty with a defunct emirate devote that energy to upholding the honor of the nation by insisting on the full contractual rights under the Indian Treaties? Of course not. Forgive me for not caring what the Founders thought. Nobody cares what the politicians of a hundred years later when THEY bound the nation too. Americans only obey old laws and edicts that they find are beneficial. They ignore everything else.
So its just KKK like demagoguery? I gave you nine points and all you can muster is a BS feeble response to just one? Way to go, Sparky, you sure are a persuasive devil.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Providence? Which pantheon of Gods is he from? Olympian? I recognize Jesus and call him by that name. Why is Washington averse to mentioning Christ?
Are you a grand kegel?
Yea, where is it? Did they ban alcohol while I was away? Insist that abortions be banned? Force women to wear the bee keeper outfit? What has become more Islamic about the USA since Obama became president? Has the Muslim president banned gay marriage? No? How unislamic of him.
Did you read this thread?? LOL
So the Constitution as written by the Founding Fathers means something different to you than what they had in mind?
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
It shows that whatever the faith the Founders had at home in private - they were animated by other ideologies for the public. I actually point out the Treaty Of Tripoli to show America is and has always been an anti-Christ country founded on anti-Christ principals of Luciferian rebellion and Free Masononry inspired ecumenism. If this is a Christian country where is the cross on the flag like in the UK? The UK's flag has 3 Crosses on it (The Cross of St. Andrew, The Cross of St George, and The Cross of St. Patrick) and the USA's has 50 pentagrams.
I agree with your definitions of pantheism and deism, but I disagree with your word "atheism". I was a scientific pantheist, and I definitely believed in a God. God was the Laws of Nature. God was omnipotent, omnipresent and eternal. But he was not yet omniscient. He was evolving to that. Once intelligence, which manifestly is within the universe, had evolved to the point that it could simultaneously comprehend and control all matter and energy and mind, then God would also be omniscient. The circle would be complete, and the only thing left to do would be to create anew. A Big Crunch would occur, and the God of the previous universe would imprint his commands on every piece of matter or energy. Thus, the Natural Law IS God in a young universe, and it DOES come from the mind of God in the new universe, but the mind of God itself vanished with the end of the old universe. Intelligence in the new universe is evolving towards omniscience again. Already God is omnipotent, omnipresent and eternal - three out of the four components of the definition of God. And in the universe there is already intelligence, there is already '-science'. It is evolving TOWARDS omniscience, but it is not there yet. That is not atheism. It is a strong theism, actually. It's not Abrahamic theism, but it's theism. It's not deism either, for there is no watchmaker, detached God in this. God is the omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal laws of nature. But he's not omniscient, not yet. He will be. Then the Big Crunch will happen, and the universe will be born anew, imprinted with the commandments of the Once and Future God. That's theism. That was my religion until God reached out of the air and grabbed my face and talked to me. Only then was I confronted with the reality that there exist invisible, intelligent beings capable of comprehending my thoughts and manipulating my physical body. And that plus the physical miracles God left identifying who he is are what forced me from my natural pagan Scientific Pantheism into Catholicism. Absent direct personal revelation, I would still be a proud, articulate, committed Scientific Pantheist - and I was DEFINITELY a theist. My God then was the same as yours in terms of power and presence, but lacked the PERSONALITY of yours. He showed me that he has those attributes too, and I had to adjust what I believed to fit the empirical reality that I now know. I was more comfortable as a pantheist, because of moral issues. Catholicism is uncomfortably strict. I don't adhere to it because I like it. I only follow it because it's True. But absent revelation, my pantheism was definitely theistic, and definitely not atheistic. I had a God. My God was the Natural Law. Now, the REAL God is also the Natural Law. The difference is that the real God also, right now, has a mind. That is the cardinal difference. But it's not true to call my old religion, my pagan Pantheism, atheism. I could never be an atheist, because there clearly ARE laws that govern every speck of matter absolutely. And THAT is certainly God. I was right about all of that too. Natural Law IS God. But it's the hand of God, on matter. God has a MIND, and THAT is the great revelation, to me, of God. The artifacts the thinking God left are all Christian, indeed Catholic, and that's why I am a Catholic: the evidence requires it. Obviously the Bible never comes into this at all at this level. It STARTS with the Physics book, the Chemistry book, the Astronomy book, the Biology book. And then it applies those to the artifacts and finds miracle. And notes the informational content of the miracle, and accepts that Physics is a Divine Law, from a mind, and not random. And the artifacts show us that the divine mind is associated with Jesus, for it is about him that all the miracles are left. To know what Jesus wanted, NOW we finally have to open the Bible, to the Gospels and Revelation, and look at what he said and did. HE pointed back to what God said and did in the Torah, so we have to look at that. And then there's all the rest in the Bible that he didn't say or God didn't say directly. All of that is wisdom and history and obiter dictum. Some of it conflicts with what Jesus or YHWH said. Where that happens, Jesus is divine and YHWH is God, and the other information comes from a man and has been a little garbled in transmission. I could never get to God through the Bible, because the Bible can't verify itself. I had to have miracles, and to really understand that a miracle is a miracle, I had to have decades of science. Pantheism isn't atheism. I wasn't an atheist before I was a Christian. I was a pagan who believed in a God. And in fact, I WAS looking at the real God, but I was focused on his hand and legs. In Christianity I now see his face. My pantheism was not an error. It was mostly True. But it was incomplete. The error in it was the one that Pridie.Nones makes: seeing luck, the randomness of entropy, where there is in fact conscious will. THAT is the grand difference.
Did you read this thread?? LOL And still waiting for how America has become more Islamic? I see America becoming more secular not more religious.
LOL. Boy, you REALLY don't like the US, do you?
Providence? Which pantheon of Gods is he from? Olympian? I recognize Jesus and call him by that name. Why is Washington averse to mentioning Christ? "Almighty and eternal Lord God, the great Creator of heaven and earth, and the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; look down from heaven in pity and compassion upon me Thy servant, who humbly prorate myself before Thee." George Washington's prayer at Valley Forge Reading carefully is not one of your better attributes, is it?
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Physicists now think the big crunch won't happen - we are in an ever expanding universe that will eventually fly apart in all directions and experience a heat death. The universe will not snap back and rexplode and renew itself.
DUH. That you even question the obvious Islamic influence of the US gubmint and projection of a pro-Muslim agenda and policy is the very definition of cognitive dissonance. The term "Islamic Terrorism" is not to be uttered. 0dinga's admin, 0dinga's State Dept, his and cabinet are crawling with Muzz-Symps. From Jarret to Brennan. There are countless others. Your hatred of America has lobotomized your brain.
Protestant lies about Washington because they realize he was a Satanic Free Mason. That prayer you cited was bullshit - an invention during the 19th century. http://www.ushistory.org/valleyforge/washington/prayer.html One of the legends or myths of Valley Forge is that Washington prayed for his country here. We do not say that he did not pray at Valley Forge, there simply is an open question as to how he did so and if he actually was witnessed in prayer.
In other words you slandered people because they have Muslim names and maybe they don't like Israel. I guess the FBI had to look the other way at their Islamic terror ties when they did their background check. Listen, this kind of 'evidence' may work on the rubes in fly over state but it's laughable to me.
Yes. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" is in play here. That mutual "enemy" is...Christianity. Islam isn't so much a "religion" as a cult. Just like secular humanism.
Whose words? Yours. Ok, that's clarified. Secondly, nice theory. That is IF you've been on a another planet since the year 900 A.D. You've conveniently ignore the goal of Islam, Why is that? Their goal: To turn the entire planet into a Caliphate, complete with Sharia Law. In the name of Satan, aka Allah. I guess the FBI had to look the other way at their Islamic terror ties when they did their background check. Thanks for adding 1+1. Listen, this kind of 'evidence' may work on the rubes in fly over state but it's laughable to me. Of course it's laughable to you -- you're clinically insane.
The Constitution as written was so dramatically altered by the post-Civil War amendments that it is, in effect, a new Constitution that just carries the window-dressing of the old. The Founders had three constitutions. The first was unwritten and ad hoc, and the country operated on it throughout the Revolution. At the end of the Revolutionary War, the Articles of Confederation were adopted. The war was WON before they were adopted. The Articles proved inefficient, so the Constitution of 1787, ratified in 1789, was put in place. It had its good points, but it ultimately failed because it could not address the evil of slavery. The country fell apart and war put it back together. To win that war, the Union broke the Constitution as necessary. After the war, Amendments were made, and realities of power were imposed, that made a new Constitution. Call it the Constitution of 1868. That's what we lived under until the 1930s. It ended up being morally compromised in two ways: the States were able to resurge and exert power to abuse the freed slaves to the point of disenfranchisement and apartheid, and the economic structure didn't work. With the Supreme Court, FDR got the Commerce Clause to mean plenary power for the federal government, and we have lived with that structure ever since. At each phase, the Constitution did mean exactly what its founders intended, but it didn't work. The first Constitution, the unwritten modus operandi of the Continental Congress, was sufficient to keep a regular army in being and in the field long enough to defeat the British and win independence, but it had no further governing power. And that was wholly insufficient for a new country of 13 states. The second, the Articles of Confederation, better coordination was got, but the fear of sacrifice of sovereignty was so great that it ultimately didn't work. It didn't even work for its amendment: the Constitutional Convention and ratification process violated the existing constitution (the Articles). The Constitution of 1787 sufficed for an expanding land power that engaged in shipping, but it could not address the evil of slavery, so it failed. The Constitution of 1868 addressed the evil of slavery, but could not deal with the corruption of crony capitalism. It failed in Plessy v. Ferguson and the Great Depression. FDR's Constitution of 1934 - the "West Coast Hotel" Constitution is what we are living under now. It concentrated power sufficiently to allow apartheid to be abolished, to win World War II and the Cold War, and to make America a middle class nation, but it is failing now, as there is no check against runaway government spending. It looks as though the check on THAT may well be Vladimir Putin. When the economic system comes unraveled, a new Constitution, our fifth, may emerge from the rubble. We COULD just amend the existing one through an Article V convention that sweeps away West Coast Hotel and Kelo, but it seems unlikely that we will. There is too much fear and too many vested interests. Same was true before the Civil War. So we'll have to actually get destroyed first, THEN new parties and interests will rise from the rubble. Maybe. Then again, Lithuania and Hungary were once the mightiest states in Eastern Europe, and Denmark made the West tremble. When they fell, they never got back up. We shall see. Truth is, the Constitution has written by the Founding Fathers stopped meaning anything in 1861. Now it's just like an old family crest. One wears it with pride and it shows the history, but the actual Constitution is what is really DONE, and the Founders' Constitution was set aside when it failed to address the evil of slavery. The current Constitution will be set aside because the concentration of government power without checks means inevitable national bankruptcy, driven by an unchecked government. If Putin goes to the gold standard, we will see dimly the shape of the 6th US Constitution. But the country may be so devastated by the economic collapse that it breaks up and regions go their separate ways.
That's right. But my pantheism was developed in the Physics of the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990's. God grabbed my face in July, 2001. Now the lack of the closed end makes the diesel-engine universe less plausible. But of course the universe isn't REALLY expanding at all. What is perceived as expansion is merely a misinterpretation of the quantum red-shift of light. Someday, somebody is going to turn the telescope lens around and realize that what they are seeing is the quantized SLOWING of light, consistently, over time. We think we're seeing down-doppler due to expansion. What we're actually seeing is down doppler due to light slowing down. But the world isn't ready for that yet, because we have our Ptolemaic system of today, which doesn't put the earth at the center of all and insist on epicycle, but which instead holds the speed of light constant and bends observations to fit that. The result is lots of "epicycles". They disappear when one stops arbitrarily putting light at the center and realizes that light has demonstrably slowed, and still is slowing. But that is not for today. That is for two decades hence. For now, we just have to observe that the physics are cracking up.
The Founders had three constitutions. The first was unwritten and ad hoc, and the country operated on it throughout the Revolution. At the end of the Revolutionary War, the Articles of Confederation were adopted. The war was WON before they were adopted. Spoken like a Frenchman! I doubt any Anglo will admit the reality, the USA has had several constitutions - while pretending they still live under their original one. Americans don't even acknowledge the presidents under the Articles Of Confederation except in special circumstances. It's as if the education myth industry does not want to obscure the myth that George Washington was the first president.
---------------------------- That might make a sane mind suspicious. Incidently I noticed you switched terms and substituted Arab for islamic to obscure your opponent's arguments while making your's seem more acceptable.
They might not be Arabs but I assume they are by their names and their pictures. I have zero evidence they are Islamists or even Muslim (they can be atheists for all I know). I assume that these are actual people not fake names and pictures. How can we verify? There is a lot of manipulation of the right by these kinds of propaganda campaigns and this is said by someone like me who considers Obama a war criminal. That is what happens to credibility when the right wing hangs out with birthers and it does not help that birther types also push this line of thought. http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/m/muslim-brotherhood-in-white-house- 050813.htm#.VNgC-PnF__E Summary of the eRumor: This is a forwarded email with the title of "White House Staff" or "New In The White House" that alleges that six American Islamist Activists who work with the Obama Administration are Muslim Brotherhood operatives influencing American policies. The Truth: This eRumor is an unproven conspiracy theory.
All nations have their myths. The American national myth has been a good one for uniting people from many disparate European lands, people who did not find peace with one another in Europe until the post- World War II order, in which Western Europe, land of all the hateful harpies (England, Germany, the Vikings, the Spanish, the Portuguese, the Dutch and the French), was finally put together in real peace and openness, thanks primarily to the stability of American legions sitting there ending the concern of defense against each other. Denizens of all of those hostile nations came to America, and did not continue the fight here. I myself am descended from people on both sides of two religious civil wars: the Irish, and the French, and of Dutch too, perennial victim of the French at the time of the immigration of my Dutch ancestors. My ancestors were on seven different sides in European conflicts in the same century. Seven. And those nations have continued on opposite sides in some thing to this day. Ireland is STILL divided. But in America, the civic myth forged these hostile elements into something new. It worked exceedingly well for Europeans, and for old line Hispanics too. A bit more unevenly for Asians, and not all that well for blacks. Indeed, the problem of the Blacks is the fly in the chardonnay, truth be told. Still, we must not hate the Americans for their national myths. The Russians have theirs also, and the Serbs, and the Greeks. Everybody has them. There are always grains of truth in them and always exaggerations. I seek to be objective about these things. I also seek to demote American (or any other) national political documents from a place on the altar with the Bible. Constitution and Magna Carta do not belong on the altar alongside the Bible. It's idolatry to speak of them in terms of service and reverence due only to God. I am certainly French, and Irish, and Dutch, and Scandinavian. And "French" means a lot of things because France itself is a melting pot of very different regional cultures. I embody at least three of those six. But I am most of all American. After all, I was born in the American Midwest, of American parents of American parents. 14 of 16 great-grandparents were American-born. 26 of 32 great-great-grandparents also. I'm American. But I'm not American uber alles. "My country, may she always be right, but my country, right or wrong" is a dramatically patriotic statement. It is also idolatrous and immoral. My country comes third. My family comes second. God comes first. There are many Americans who think that America should come first: that's a very sinful thing, to put country above God, and a foolish thing, to put something that is really just a thought construct over one's own flesh and blood. God first. Family second. Country third. Some would say that within the rubric "country" that Constitution comes first. That's what the various oaths would seem to say. That's pretty treacherous ground, though, because the real constitution of today is FDR's Constitution, the West-Coast-Hotel + Brown v Board of Education + Roe + Kelo Constitution. That constitution is not only taking the country to bankruptcy, but also imposes death on millions of innocents. For the good of the country, we should be trying to get RID of the current constitution to get something more moral and more sustainable, and less abusive and lopsided in place. To think that the Constitution of 1787 actually still rules the roost in America is a pious fantasy. Pious fantasies are fine in casual social settings, but in actual discussion, they're simply delusions at best, or lies, and nothing good is ever built on lies. To save this country, we desperately need a new constitution. And it's not going to be able to look like the old ones: they all failed because of identifiable weaknesses. The first three were too weak. The 1868 Constitution leads to too much corruption. The FDR Constitution is too strong. Finding the Goldilox Constitution will be tough, and won't happen in the current environment. Unfortunately, we are going to have to have some Schumpeterian chaos to get to something new. And unfortunately, there is little taste for talking about these things seriously among those who worship an idol fashioned by human hands in 1787, and who do not see that it has been superseded twice already and we don't live under it anymore.
I don't believe your neck was really broken. It's a frightened little kid's reaction to getting knocked in the head. Now you're trying to make a heroic and authoritative lifetime career out of a passing hallucination produced by a bumped head. Grow up!
You also do not believe that two dead animals were raised by God in my hands. Or that God grabbed my face. Or that a holy dove flew into my face and drove me to the ground. Or that I saw a demon. Or that I saw the city from below and afar, or that In was plunged into the black abyss, or that I felt the heat of the flames of Gehenna beneath my feet, or that I was embraced by Jesus. You think that the Shroud of Turin, the Lanciano Eucharistic Miracle, the dozens of Incorrupt bodies of saints and the healings at Lourdes are all frauds too. And you think yourself entitled to reply to a man who describes them with snarling condescension. I haven't "made a career" of these things. In fact, I made a career of the military, and then passed through a veterinary training period before settling on a career as a lawyer. I brought these things up in specific answer to somebody who said that there is no evidence of anything supernatural. I gave the evidence, and it makes you nasty. What you wrote is wrong, and condescending. So let's not talk to each other, because you think I'm a child, and I think you're an ass.
Seems to be where the convo is going. My original comment was it is a leftist, secular atheist myth the founders were deists.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
You also do not believe that two dead animals were raised by God in my hands. Or that God grabbed my face. Or that a holy dove flew into my face and drove me to the ground. Or that I saw a demon. Or that I saw the city from below and afar, or that In was plunged into the black abyss, or that I felt the heat of the flames of Gehenna beneath my feet, or that I was embraced by Jesus. ---------------------- I was embraced by Jesus. I believe you were embraced by hysteria and insanity. At this point it's apparent you think you are someone who has been given hypothetical special powers and insights and are intractable. A blessed miracle worker without a church or following.
I see your perception is up to your usual standards of incompetence and confusion.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Nine points to nil SOSO. Claim victory over the community college MSNBC crowd.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
I think you fell off of one of Decker's threads. There's a nice one on white aliens you can comment on. You are showing your socialist Euro side with the Free Mason fairy tales. Those conspiracy theories are as credible as the Dan Brown Da Vinci code fables. Here's the reality. No matter the foundation of a nation on Christian principles, fallible men and women will fail and do evil. Just look at Rome and Byzantium under so called "Christian" emperors and kings.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
#335. To: Pericles, GarySpFc, liberator, Destro, SOSO, Bucky, A K A Stone (#312) What makes you think Pridie.Nones is Bucky?
Must have been an old autocorrect. You know these devices are so super smart these days.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. " (Romans 1:16-17)
Got it...
Yup. It's an absolute myth and revisionist history perpetrated by secular-humanist atheists... Even as there were a smattering of well-known Deists (Jefferson, Franklin), common knowledge and history demonstrates that even they were adament about crediting God and Providence for America's blessings and liberty in word and deed.
BTW, *everyone* unmasked you. BTW2 -- could you please toss my LF newspaper on the front porch? Thanks -- here's a nickel.
Still sitting on you ass collecting your welfare check I see.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
God is I AM! He cannot be anything less than all that He is, and lacking Omniscience that God would not be the God of the Bible. I agree that would not be atheism, however I doubt that it would properly be labeled pantheism. The God of becoming is what we label Process Theology.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
That nonsense is refuted by looking at the overall character of George Washington, a Christian. It is also refuted by the testimony of his family that he was a Christian.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
So, who is Kony ?
Si vis pacem, para bellum
The truth is you believe in a living Constitution, whereas I believe in a written one. Yes, errors were made in the past and in the present, but the Constitution is still a written document, with the shortcomings of a corrupt court translating it. I do not believe in relativism.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
"There are no miracles unless you believe in them. Since you are no young lad, your beliefs are like the tooth-fairy, the Great Pumpkin, Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny". Yes, Virginia/Pridie.Nones, There is a God In 1897, Francis Pharcellus penned a famous response to eight-year-old Virginia O'Hanlon confirming the existence of Santa Claus. In light of the many recent attacks by anti-Christian and atheist groups on God, Jesus Christ, and the Bible, I thought it would be worthwhile to revisit the piece and update it for our time. There's no telling how many children have driven by a billboard that denounces Christianity as a lie or have viewed a television ad poking fun at their faith. These children deserve the same affirmation that Pharcellus gave young Virginia so many years ago. **************** Dear Mr. O'Leary, I am nine years old. Some of my friends in school say there is no God and that Jesus Christ is a myth. They get this information from TV and so do my two little brothers who are six and seven. My brothers have been so upset seeing the billboards on TV. They don't like that their Christmas parades and parties have been changed to winter parades and winter parties. What is so wrong about Christ or Christmas? My father has read your books and says if anyone can answer this for me it is you. So please tell me the truth. Is there a God? VIRGINIA O'HANLON/Pridie.Nones **************** VIRGINIA/Pridie.Nones, your classmates and your brothers have been made afraid by people who are angry at children who believe and at parents who have tried to raise their children in the best of moral ways. They have been taken advantage of by a small group of people who are affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age. They do not believe what they can't see. They think that nothing exists that is not comprehensible by their minds. All minds, Virginia, whether they be men's or children's, are little. In this great universe of ours, man is a mere insect, an ant -- in his intellect, as compared to the boundless world about him, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge. Yes, VIRGINIA/Pridie.Nones, there is a God. He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! How dreary would be the world if there were no God. It would be as dreary as if there were no VIRGINIAS/Pridie.Nones . There would be no childlike faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished. Not believe in God! You might as well not believe in fairies! You might get your dad to hire men to watch in the churches on Christmas Eve to catch a glimpse, but even if they did not see God, what would that prove? Nobody sees God, but that is no sign that there is no God. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that's no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders that are unseen and unseeable in the world. You may tear apart the baby's rattle and see what makes the noise inside, but there is a veil covering the unseen world which not the strongest man, nor even the united strength of all the strongest men that ever lived, could tear apart. Only faith, fancy, poetry, love, romance can push aside that curtain and view and picture the supernal beauty and glory beyond. Is it all real? Ah, VIRGINIA/Pridie.Nones , in all this world, there is nothing else real and abiding. No God! Be thankful! He lives, and he lives forever. A thousand years from now, VIRGINIA/Pridie.Nones, nay, ten times ten thousand years from now, he will continue to make glad the heart of childhood and guide us to salvation. **************** The Bible says that "the fool says in his heart, there is no God." Our founding fathers were not fools. But the Bible also says "You say you believe in God. Good. The demons also believe and tremble." Merely believing in God is insufficient evidence for demonstrating either Christian principles or that a person is a Christian. Perhaps, to start, it might be beneficial to remind ourselves of what a Christian might be: it is a person who has acknowledged his or her sinfulness, responded in faith to the person of Jesus Christ as the only one who can redeem him, and by so doing been given the Holy Spirit. http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2010/12/yes_virginia_there_is_a_ god.html Brad O'Leary is the author of America's War on Christianity and God and America's Leaders.
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
I don't believe in relativism either. But I also don't believe in totemism. I don't believe that by pointing at a physical object over and over again and ascribing powers to it, that those powers become real. The Constitution written in 1787 has not been followed since 1861. It was effectively rewritten in the period 1861 to 1868, through a series of amendments that create a federal override to everything. And the courts have come to interpret it just exactly that way, in time. Notably, from FDRs time onward, the Commerce Clause, which is in the Constitution, has been interpreted by the legitimately appointed Supreme Court, exercising its legitimate power of judicial review, to give the Federal government plenary power to do just about anything, because just about anything can be characterized as impinging upon interstate commerce. One can look back at a text that was meant a certain way and read a certain way for the first 72 years of its existence, note that it was changed, IN WRITING, and that the contents of the new writings effectively give a federal override...and go all the way back to Marbury v. Madison to find the founders themselves permitting judicial review as imagined in the Federalist papers. So, judicial review was an act of the Founders, the Constitution was amended, forcefully, in the 1860s to impart new principles that changed the balance of power to give a federal override on matters of personal liberty (from slavery) and due process of law, and the Supreme Court, exercising the judicial review power the Founders gave them, ratified this new expanded view. And they did it again with FDR's broad economic interventions. These are the realities of the constitutional structure, as written and in effect. It's not relativism to observe what is and say it is. It's realism. It's politics to try to freeze something written in time and claim that it has not changed and cannot change, because one likes it. But it's totemism to really believe it.
At this point it's apparent you think you are someone who has been given hypothetical special powers and insights and are intractable. A blessed miracle worker without a church or following. You're wrong.
Not believe in God! You might as well not believe in fairies! You might get your dad to hire men to watch in the churches on Christmas Eve to catch a glimpse, but even if they did not see God, what would that prove? Nobody sees God, but that is no sign that there is no God. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that's no proof that they are not there. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders that are unseen and unseeable in the world. Thank you for this wonderful post.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb." (Psalm 139:13)
You're welcome.
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
Curious comment that you posted. Your comment seems to suggest I stated something to the effect: there is no god. Nope, there is a god based on my opinion; God is a mystery; an unknowable being that is forever elusive in our personal lives outside of creating the matter-energy-space-time of the dimensions of the Universe. The creator also spawned consciousness in all living things. My problem is identifying which religion maintains the correct perception about a god or a REAL GOD as all basically play with silly historical traditions that seem to define the attributes of God but really are mind bending platforms to create a hierarchy of power. There is no TRUE religion in other words but there is a creator of this Universe; I am certain of creation about the Universe based on a God but I am completely skeptical that any religion holds the merits about the truth for the creation of the Universe. With some luck, the above shall make you feel better.
Gary - atheism is the belief there is no god or multiple gods. Pantheism is literally diametetrically opposed to atheism. I think you are trying to suggest that monotheism (a supreme god) is the only form of religion you may disscuss within your lexicon. Your pointed comment is true for every living, conscious, feeling being on this planet to include yourself as you cling to your 40 year dogma that must be right and divine within your own mind.
Were you an altar boy?
There are some 10,000 religions on the planet that profess understanding a "REAL GOD." Some of those religions are related to others, some competely exclusionary. All have a different perspective about GOD. I never suggested there wasn't a god. I said there is no REAL GOD based on a religious interpretations or beliefs. Good and evil are relative terms. Fortunately, only principled men and women can understand the difference between the two and to exercise actions based on life's circumstances. The unprincipled scoundrels that are the harbingers of uncertainty, here; typically, they are leaders or supporting bureaucrats in American politics and other significant governments. You didn't understand my earlier comments way up the thread at all. I never suggested there is no creator or a God. I said there are only [human] beliefs in a God. There is big difference.
"Almighty and eternal Lord God, the great Creator of heaven and earth, and the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; look down from heaven in pity and compassion upon me Thy servant, who humbly prorate myself before Thee." George Washington's prayer at Valley Forge "No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency...We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of heaven cannot be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which heaven itself has ordained." -- George Washington in his Inaugural Address, April 30, 1789 "Such being the impressions under which I have, in obedience to the public summons, repaired to the present station, it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being, who rules over the universe, who presides in the council of nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States.." "...Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency" From President George Washington's Inaugural Address, April 30th, 1789, addressed to both Houses of Congress. "Let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion."--George Washington, ca. 1789, Maxims of Washington, ed. John F. Schroeder (Mt. Vernon: Mt. Vernon Ladies Association, 1942), p. 106. "And now, Almighty Father, if it is Thy holy will that we shall we shall obtain a place and name among the nations of the Earth...:grant that we may be enabled to show our gratitude for Thy goodness by endeavors to fear and obey Thee." George Washington Nowhere within your post is there relevence to Jesus Christ. The founders did not specifically belong to a religion; they belived in a creator, however just not a religion.
Yup. And it is still misaligned. It can't happen. And as far as I am concerened, it shall never be. There is too much "luck" in the Universe that defines how the world operates. Yup. All you suggested was just one religious interpretation. What in the world does that comment mean?
Then explain what you posted below. Do you believe there is a one true Christian god, or not. This is a simple yes or no question. Sitting on a fence post, assuming 'something' created this universe is not an answer. ************************* #230. To: Murron (#229) Sure. Different societies have varying cultures for ensuring survival skills for the benefit of all within that same society. Just as social-economics, language, customs and traditions make up a culture so do local customs for various belief and systems of belief. Using religious models for Christianity is an interesting approach to social migration of belief systems. Also using Muslim models for belief systems are interesting to study. Both models have different cultures and beliefs but both cultures have statification about their respective belief systems. It is impressive to view these fragmented systems because at the end of the day, 'there is no real god; there are only beliefs about a REAL GOD'. Pridie.Nones posted on 2015-02-08 12:01:35 ET
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
Sure. I described "belief systems" in a god or a REAL GOD. I suppose you are confused? What is complicated about my choice of terms to elicit a concept.
Oh puleeeze, save the bureaucratic dump you just took and pawn it off on some poor shmuck who might fall for It, political BS has never impressed me, and neither do you. if you cannot give a straight, honest answer, to a legitimate question, then you will understand why I will no longer play your game. My time is limited, sorry.
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
OK, to use an age-old Kentuckian euphemism: "let's get to brass tax." God is not about religion. Religion is about God. Does that help clarify my perspective?
No. I was a scientific pantheist until God grabbed my face, at age 38.
LOL! Ok... Well now, you see, there is something you and I can agree upon. Although I do believe God is a Christian God, I also don't believe He is so much about religion, but more about a one on one relationship each of us have with Him. And I believe that without a personal relationship with our Savior, all the talk and arguing over religion, Christianity included, will help none of us get into the kingdom of heaven. The churches cannot save us, religion will save no one, only through Jesus Christ can we be saved. ~ jmho
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
There has been a movement amongst the fundies to fake histroy and plant quotes: http://fair.org/extra-online-articles/the-rights-library-of-fake-quotes/
The scriptural account of God’s relation to his creation is also distinct from pantheism. The Greek word Àᾶ½(PAN) (from ÀᾶÂ, G4246) means “all” or “every,” and pantheism is the idea that everything, the whole universe, is God, or is part of God. Pantheism denies several essential aspects of God’s character. If the whole universe is God, then God has no distinct personality. God is no longer unchanging, because as the universe changes, God also changes. Moreover, God is no longer holy, because the evil in the universe is also part of God. Another difficulty is that ultimately most pantheistic systems (such as Buddhism and many other eastern religions) end up denying the importance of individual human personalities: since everything is God, the goal of an individual should be to blend in with the universe and become more and more united with it, thus losing his or her individual distinctiveness. If God himself (or itself) has no distinct personal identity separate from the universe, then we should certainly not strive to have one either. Thus, pantheism destroys not only the personal identity of God, but also, ultimately, of human beings as well. Quotes: Saisset, Pantheism, 148—“An imperfect God, yet perfection arising from imperfection.” Shedd, Hist. Doctrine, 1:13—“Pantheism applies to God a principle of growth and imperfection, which belongs only to the finite.” Calderwood, Moral Philos., 245—“Its first requisite is moment, or movement, which it assumes, but does not account for.” Caro’s sarcasm applies here: “Your God is not yet made—he is in process of manufacture.” See H. B. Smith, Faith and Philosophy, 25. Pantheism is practical atheism, for impersonal spirit is only blind and necessary force. Augustus Hopkins Strong, Systematic Theology (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1907), 101. Pantheism has become the inheritance of every nation on earth and has cursed the streams of human thought beyond all estimation. It assumes the eternity of matter and the absurdity that matter has power to originate life and spirit. In its idealistic form it contradicts human consciousness and destroys the very ground upon which reason is based and the fundamental method of its own procedure. It breaks down the most essential distinctions between existing things, by which alone they are identified. According to pantheism, the potter and the clay are one and the same thing—if they exist at all. The promoters of these notions of necessity contradict in their daily lives the very speculations they propound. They cannot state a theorem, or even commence to do so, without departing from their major idea. Every effort to build this theory assumes the principle that destroys it. Attempting to support it, they dig down its supposed foundations. The theory obliterates all distinctions. It levels all elements to one item. There is no recognition of the fact that God is infinite while creation is finite; that God is omnipotent while creation is impotent; that God is immutable while creation is mutable; that God is eternal while creation experiences both birth and death. Error is incidental to other minds, but unavoidable and essential to the pantheistic teachers. Though it recognizes a god such as human speculation conceives, pantheism is the mother of atheism and the grossest idolatry. It is promoting the notion that matter is God and God is matter and it is a short step from this to the assertion of the fool that there is no God. It is but a step, likewise, to the worship of any inanimate or animate thing, since the theory contends that it is all a part of God. The system leads to blasphemy and licentiousness. The basis of every moral distinction is obliterated by it. If all nature is God, then human action is not distinct from God but is the very action of God. The whole category of human crime becomes as worthy as virtue itself. The terms by which evil is described are only conventional ideas. Reason is assassinated and virtue defamed. Such is the fruit of modern pantheistic philosophy current in educational centers today. The student of doctrine may well ponder the following utterance which is a normal offspring of pantheistic philosophy: “The belief in a personal living God is the chief foundation and origin of our worm- eaten social state; and further, that so long as mankind shall hang by a single hair to the idea of heaven, there is no happiness to be looked for on earth. Man himself is the religion of futurity. God stands in need of man, but man has no need of God” (cited by Cooke, ibid., p. 186). These revolting assertions are the very creed of atheism and communism, which are clutching the throat of the social interests of the world and which hate the things of God with a perfect hatred. Cousin says, “For the Ionic school in both its stages, there was no other God than nature. Pantheism is inherent in its system. What is Pantheism? It is the conception of the universe, Äὸ À±½, as alone existing, as self-sufficient, and having its explanation in itself. All nascent philosophy is a philosophy of nature, and thus is inclined to Pantheism. The sensationalism of the Ionians of necessity took that form; and, to speak honestly, Pantheism is nothing but atheism.”38 4. It is no extravagance to say that Pantheism is the worst form of atheism. For mere atheism is negative. It neither deifies man nor evil. But Pantheism teaches that man, the human soul, is the highest form in which God exists; and that evil is as much a manifestation of God as good; Satan as the ever-blessed and adorable Redeemer. Beyond this it is impossible for the insanity of wickedness to go. “Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
I never suggested there wasn't a god. I said there is no REAL GOD based on a religious interpretations or beliefs. That is nothing more than double-speak. Good and evil are relative terms. Fortunately, only principled men and women can understand the difference between the two and to exercise actions based on life's circumstances. The unprincipled scoundrels that are the harbingers of uncertainty, here; typically, they are leaders or supporting bureaucrats in American politics and other significant governments. So only principled men, in your view, can understand the difference between the two extremes. Are you one of the few members of the master race that can understand the difference between good and evil?
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Your post is dishonest in taking only one quote I posted and making it the foundation for your argument. I made many posts showing the Founding Fathers in referring to religion had Christianity in mind.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
The revolting assertions also give us hedonism and greed. Which are clear subsets of atheism and communism as well.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb." (Psalm 139:13)
Your site also attacks David Barton, but it fails to mention Barton recently won a major lawsuit for being slandered..
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2015/02/05/david-barton- distorts-things-even-when-he-wins/ David Barton Distorts Things Even When He Wins February 5, 2015 by Warren Throckmorton 9 Comments As I noted here previously, David Barton settled his defamation lawsuit out of court last year. Barton had been accused of being known for appearing at white supremacist rallies by two 2010 candidates for the Texas Board of Education. The Democrat candidates criticized their GOP opponent of relying on Barton who they implied was a white supremacist. Barton and his opponents settled with Barton gaining a financial settlement of an undisclosed amount and an apology. Here is the apology: During our respective campaigns in 2010 for separate positions on the Texas State Board of Education, we published a video entitled: ”A True Tale From Texas,” that created a false impression about David Barton. The purpose of that video was to discredit our Republican Party political opponents on the State Board of Education, and those on whom they relied, by depicting their position as politically extreme and detrimental to education. Thus, the video stated that David Barton, who advised the State Board of Education, is known for speaking at white supremacist rallies. We believed that statement had been fact- checked by our political consultant, Scott Garrison, who relied for confirmation solely on information provided him from The Texas Freedom Network. As professionals in education and the proper use of language, we understand that this statement suggested that David Barton is a white supremacist, and that the two organizations he is affiliated with, WallBuilder Presentations, Inc. and WallBuilders L.L.C., were associated with or supportive of white supremacists. After learning more about Mr. Barton, we realize this statement was false. We separately and jointly apologize to Mr. Barton for damage to him individually and to his two organizations as a result of that statement. There is nothing in this apology about Barton’s historical claims or status as an historian. The claim at issue related to white supremacy. Read more: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2015/02/05/david- barton-distorts-things-even-when-he-wins/#ixzz3RNM6KmVv
I don't think he's gonna touch that one, would take more effort than the usual BS he posts.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
In addition to being intellectual dishonest it appears that he is an intellectual coward as well.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Here, I shall provide all of you with a bit of comick relief:
I posted most, if not all of your quotes: no Jesus Christ references much less Christianity references. Sorry, Gary ... you lose.
Do you ever tire of proving yourself a total moron. "In fact, Jefferson was devoted to the teachings of Jesus Christ. But he didn’t always agree with how they were interpreted by biblical sources, including the writers of the four Gospels, whom he considered to be untrustworthy correspondents. So Jefferson created his own gospel by taking a sharp instrument, perhaps a penknife, to existing copies of the New Testament and pasting up his own account of Christ’s philosophy, distinguishing it from what he called “the corruption of schismatizing followers.” The second of the two biblical texts he produced is on display through May 28 at the Albert H. Small Documents Gallery of the Smithsonian National Museum of American History (NMAH) after a year of extensive repair and conservation. “Other aspects of his life and work have taken precedence,” says Harry Rubenstein, chair and curator of the NMAH political history division. “But once you know the story behind the book, it’s very Jeffersonian.” Jefferson produced the 84-page volume in 1820—six years before he died at age 83—bound it in red leather and titled it The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth. He had pored over six copies of the New Testament, in Greek, Latin, French and King James English. “He had a classic education at [the College of] William & Mary,” Rubenstein says, “so he could compare the different translations. He cut out passages with some sort of very sharp blade and, using blank paper, glued down lines from each of the Gospels in four columns, Greek and Latin on one side of the pages, and French and English on the other.” Much of the material Jefferson elected to not include related miraculous events, such as the feeding of the multitudes with only two fish and five loaves of barley bread; he eschewed anything that he perceived as “contrary to reason.” His idiosyncratic gospel concludes with Christ’s entombment but omits his resurrection. He kept Jesus’ own teachings, such as the Beatitude, “Blessed are the peace-makers: for they shall be called the children of God.” The Jefferson Bible, as it’s known, is “scripture by subtraction,” writes Stephen Prothero, a professor of religion at Boston University. The first time Jefferson undertook to create his own version of Scripture had been in 1804. His intention, he wrote, was “the result of a life of enquiry and reflection, and very different from that anti-Christian system, imputed to me by those who know nothing of my opinions.” Correspondence indicates that he assembled 46 pages of New Testament passages in The Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth. That volume has been lost. It focused on Christ’s moral teachings, organized by topic. The 1820 volume contains not only the teachings, but also events from the life of Jesus. The Smithsonian acquired the surviving custom bible in 1895, when the Institution’s chief librarian, Cyrus Adler, purchased it from Jefferson’s great- granddaughter, Carolina Randolph. Originally, Jefferson had bequeathed the book to his daughter Martha." Duh!!!!!! This is ample mention of Jesus by just one of the Founding Fathers. Sorry, you lose.......agin.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Nowhere within your post is there relevence to Jesus Christ. The founders did not specifically belong to a religion; they belived in a creator, however just not a religion. Blindness must be one of your attributes.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
He F'd with God, now he's dead. EOM There ya go.
Deists, pal .. most were are all Deists. Why? Because of philosophical ramifications of Humanist considerations, not religion. Do you know what you are suggesting? The US Government is not founded on Christianity or any other religion.
Sorry, Gary ... you lose. Only in your dreams.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
There ya go. LOL .. lqqks like all of us go the same way one way or another... unless you are special. Are you "special?"
And then there are these quotes from John Adams........yes a FF and our 2nd President." "The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God." "I have examined all religions, as well as my narrow sphere, my straightened means, and my busy life, would allow; and the result is that the Bible is the best Book in the world. It contains more philosophy than all the libraries I have seen." “We recognize no Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus!” {Though some claim that it was not Adams that said this but another contemporary}" But wait, there is more. Herer's some quotes from George Washington, aka a FF and the First President of the U.S. It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible." “What students would learn in American schools above all is the religion of Jesus Christ.” "It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favors." "The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country."" You may wish to reconsider you comment.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Adams' notes were not written into the US Consitution or any other document for or about the US. The entire CONCEPT and PRINCIPLE of the FIRST AMENDMENT was to ensure no European KING had influence over our sovereignty. England had a church. Elsewhere, in Europe the religion rage took a heavy toll on everyone. The founders were NOT influenced by manmade religions at all; with the exception of local church meetings on Sunday ...... if they attended at all.
It's more than a suggestion, Sparky, it's absolute proof that you are wrong in saying that the FF never referenced Jesus or Christianty or ever the Christian Bible. Such references are well documented a plenty. These quotes all support the notion that the respective individual understood that the U.S. Consitution was in fact steeped in, if not modeld after, Christian beliefs and values without ever having to specifically say so in the document itself. They truly believed in freedom of religion and in not having an offical government religion. Sorry, you lose........again.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
You have proved nothing more than you don't know what the HELL you are discussing. Calm down and retire for the evening, you need to take a breather.
Where is the cross in the American flag? On its symbols? Seals? I see it in European versions.
I never said they were written into the Constitution. But they certainly were written into documents (e.g. - letters amongst them) about the U.S. "The founders were NOT influenced by manmade religions at all;" Then what do you call all of the quotes I gave you from Jefferson, Adams and Washington about Jesus, Christianty and the Bible? Chopped liver? Only a total dolt can continue to deny that each of these men were profundly influenced by their respective understanding of Jesus and Christianty, even if only on a philosophical level. The all beleived in God. What their respective personal religion was is still open to debate. But it is crystal clear that a belief in God and belief in Christian moral philosophy shaped the drafting of the Constitution. If you still dispute this so be it. I am done with engaging you on this subject. You may have the last word.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
You remain a total moron.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Where is the cross in the American flag? On its symbols? Seals? I see it in European versions. What part of "They truly believed in freedom of religion and in not having an offical government religion." don't you understand?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Psst ... some of these devout "christians" on this thread do not understand the historical times about the founders; it was a time of enlightenment not necessarily anchored in religious beliefs.
Lets tally the number of "christian religions" for your take on the effort of "Christianity." How many religions are there? Which one is right? How man Bibles? Which one is right? Provide a number for both questions.
Geez, you have been reading my posts. I am faltered. Exactly, which one? There certainly were enough flavors of Christianity to accomodate each of our FFs. This argument rages on and will likley to do so for the foreseaable future. You may wish to reveiw this thread. Perhaps you can persuade the others on your points. I have been working on them for quite some time with some moderate success I beleive:) BTW, if you believe that I am a "devout" Christian, well.......you lose.......again. I have an abiding faith in God and Christ but an extremely dubious about the notion that every word in the translations of the Bible as used to preach the Word is to be taken literally or represents historical physical events.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
By some reckoning there are tens of thousands Christions denominations or sects world wide. In the U.S. by some reckoning a couple of score major ones. But who GAS? There are more than enough to validate the observation that there is no one Christian denomination but rather a really Big Christian Tent. "How many religions are there?" Do you mean formal organized relgions or personal religious beliefs? If the latter, probably 7 billion or so.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
There is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church and it is Orthodox.
Everyone else is going to hell?
Psst ... some of these devout "christians" on this thread do not understand the historical times about the founders; it was a time of enlightenment not necessarily anchored in religious beliefs. Before I begin I want to state I am not a Freemason conspiracists in that I don't accept the idea Freemasons are part of a modern conspiracy or evil or trying to take over the world. I just think Freemasonry is tied into the origins of this country and the founding ideology of the USA was tied to Freemasonic ideals. Many don't want to delve into when the split happened between the Founding Fathers version of America and that of the American people, who tended to be more religious but my thesis is something broke when the people turned against the Freemasons. Yes, not every Founding Father was a Freemason but Freemasonry's ideology was widely accepted. That is why in American culture they will accept a man of any faith as long has he has a faith. That is the old Freemasonry legacy in our culture. The reaction against Freemasonry happened in the 1826 Morgan Affair but I think anger at Freemasons was probably brewing for a long time under the surface. It was seen as the religion of the elite? Maybe. It is no accident the Second Great Awakening in the USA happened at the same time as the reaction against Freemasonry (and both were centered in New York state). It is no accident that the religious movement after they defeated the Freemasons (who had to go underground and almost did not recover and are now on their last legs in membership) sought to recast the Founding Fathers as some sort of Protestant holy men rather than what they were. This split back in the 1800s is why I think the USA has had a schizophrenic identity ever since.
Everyone else is going to hell? The Orthodox don't claim that. That is God's judgement. http://www.orthodoxconvert.info/Q-A.php?c=The+Church- Does+Orthodoxy+Really+Think+It+Is+the+True+Church It should be evident to most Orthodox, if they readily understand this divergence, why it so goes against most Protestants to say that the Orthodox Church is the fullness of The Church. On the one hand, to say that goes against the Protestant foundation of what it means to be the Church and is usually interpreted as "you are on the outside and will not be saved unless you join our group." For the others who believe they are the Church, it is like two children saying "I'm the Church," "No, I'm the Church!" These reactions, while understandable for one coming from a Protestant background, are reacting to Protestant understandings superimposed upon Orthodoxy, and not upon Orthodoxy's understanding of itself. So it is critical that we look at what the Orthodox understanding is. Before we do that, however, it will be helpful to look at what the Orthodox understanding of the Church does not say. When the Orthodox Church says that it is "The Church", they are making no pronouncement upon the salvation of anyone inside or outside membership in Orthodoxy. This may be hard for Protestants to grasp since being saved and being part of The Church is practically synonymous when linked to the spiritual Church. The knowledge that not everyone, let's say, in the Baptist Churches will be saved only serves to reinforce the fact that the Baptist Church cannot say it is "The Church". Yet, they also firmly believe that there are many who will be saved, so neither can one say that any other group is "The Church." While Orthodoxy does believe that ultimately to be saved means being in the Church and those outside the Church will not be saved, that issue is not fully decided until judgment day. Because salvation is not looked at within Orthodoxy as either an in or out position but a journey into God. We readily recognize that anyone inside or outside the Church at any particular point in time can be in the currents of salvation or not participating in it. Thus, there is no ability to point to any one person either inside or outside the visible Church and say they are saved or not saved. Whether any one particular person is going to make it to heaven we leave in God's hands. We cannot know the heart of the person, much less the disposition of God towards a particular individual short of God revealing that to us.
Take me off your blasphemy ping list. Thanks.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb." (Psalm 139:13)
Sorry, Gary ... you lose. Gary did not lose. But he caught you snoozing. John Adams SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; JUDGE; DIPLOMAT; ONE OF TWO SIGNERS OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; SECOND PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.1 Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company: I mean hell.2 The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity and humanity.3 Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited. . . . What a Eutopia – what a Paradise would this region be!4 I have examined all religions, and the result is that the Bible is the best book in the world.5 John Quincy Adams SIXTH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES; DIPLOMAT; SECRETARY OF STATE; U. S. SENATOR; U. S. REPRESENTATIVE; “OLD MAN ELOQUENT”; “HELL-HOUND OF ABOLITION” My hopes of a future life are all founded upon the Gospel of Christ and I cannot cavil or quibble away [evade or object to]. . . . the whole tenor of His conduct by which He sometimes positively asserted and at others countenances [permits] His disciples in asserting that He was God.6 The hope of a Christian is inseparable from his faith. Whoever believes in the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures must hope that the religion of Jesus shall prevail throughout the earth. Never since the foundation of the world have the prospects of mankind been more encouraging to that hope than they appear to be at the present time. And may the associated distribution of the Bible proceed and prosper till the Lord shall have made “bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God” [Isaiah 52:10].7 In the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior. The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity.8 Samuel Adams SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; “FATHER OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION”; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS I . . . [rely] upon the merits of Jesus Christ for a pardon of all my sins.9 The name of the Lord (says the Scripture) is a strong tower; thither the righteous flee and are safe [Proverbs 18:10]. Let us secure His favor and He will lead us through the journey of this life and at length receive us to a better.10 I conceive we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world . . . that the confusions that are and have been among the nations may be overruled by the promoting and speedily bringing in the holy and happy period when the kingdoms of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and the people willingly bow to the scepter of Him who is the Prince of Peace.11 He also called on the State of Massachusetts to pray that . . . the peaceful and glorious reign of our Divine Redeemer may be known and enjoyed throughout the whole family of mankind.12 we may with one heart and voice humbly implore His gracious and free pardon through Jesus Christ, supplicating His Divine aid . . . [and] above all to cause the religion of Jesus Christ, in its true spirit, to spread far and wide till the whole earth shall be filled with His glory.13 with true contrition of heart to confess their sins to God and implore forgiveness through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ our Savior.14 Josiah Bartlett MILITARY OFFICER; SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; JUDGE; GOVERNOR OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Called on the people of New Hampshire . . . to confess before God their aggravated transgressions and to implore His pardon and forgiveness through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ . . . [t]hat the knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus Christ may be made known to all nations, pure and undefiled religion universally prevail, and the earth be fill with the glory of the Lord.15 Gunning Bedford MILITARY OFFICER; MEMBER OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS; SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; FEDERAL JUDGE To the triune God – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost – be ascribed all honor and dominion, forevermore – Amen.16 Elias Boudinot PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS; SIGNED THE PEACE TREATY TO END THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION; FIRST ATTORNEY ADMITTED TO THE U. S. SUPREME COURT BAR; FRAMER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; DIRECTOR OF THE U. S. MINT Let us enter on this important business under the idea that we are Christians on whom the eyes of the world are now turned… [L]et us earnestly call and beseech Him, for Christ’s sake, to preside in our councils. . . . We can only depend on the all powerful influence of the Spirit of God, Whose Divine aid and assistance it becomes us as a Christian people most devoutly to implore. Therefore I move that some minister of the Gospel be requested to attend this Congress every morning . . . in order to open the meeting with prayer.17 A letter to his daughter: You have been instructed from your childhood in the knowledge of your lost state by nature – the absolute necessity of a change of heart and an entire renovation of soul to the image of Jesus Christ – of salvation through His meritorious righteousness only – and the indispensable necessity of personal holiness without which no man shall see the Lord [Hebrews 12:14]. You are well acquainted that the most perfect and consummate doctrinal knowledge is of no avail without it operates on and sincerely affects the heart, changes the practice, and totally influences the will – and that without the almighty power of the Spirit of God enlightening your mind, subduing your will, and continually drawing you to Himself, you can do nothing. . . . And may the God of your parents (for many generations past) seal instruction to your soul and lead you to Himself through the blood of His too greatly despised Son, Who notwithstanding, is still reclaiming the world to God through that blood, not imputing to them their sins. To Him be glory forever!18 For nearly half a century have I anxiously and critically studied that invaluable treasure [the Bible]; and I still scarcely ever take it up that I do not find something new – that I do not receive some valuable addition to my stock of knowledge or perceive some instructive fact never observed before. In short, were you to ask me to recommend the most valuable book in the world, I should fix on the Bible as the most instructive both to the wise and ignorant. Were you to ask me for one affording the most rational and pleasing entertainment to the inquiring mind, I should repeat, it is the Bible; and should you renew the inquiry for the best philosophy or the most interesting history, I should still urge you to look into your Bible. I would make it, in short, the Alpha and Omega of knowledge.19 Jacob Broom LEGISLATOR; SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION A letter to his son, James, attending Princeton University: I flatter myself you will be what I wish, but don’t be so much flatterer as to relax of your application – don’t forget to be a Christian. I have said much to you on this head, and I hope an indelible impression is made.20 Charles Carroll SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; SELECTED AS DELEGATE TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION; FRAMER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; U. S. SENATOR On the mercy of my Redeemer I rely for salvation and on His merits, not on the works I have done in obedience to His precepts.21 Grateful to Almighty God for the blessings which, through Jesus Christ Our Lord, He had conferred on my beloved country in her emancipation and on myself in permitting me, under circumstances of mercy, to live to the age of 89 years, and to survive the fiftieth year of independence, adopted by Congress on the 4th of July 1776, which I originally subscribed on the 2d day of August of the same year and of which I am now the last surviving signer.22 I, Charles Carroll. . . . give and bequeath my soul to God who gave it, my body to the earth, hoping that through and by the merits, sufferings, and mediation of my only Savior and Jesus Christ, I may be admitted into the Kingdom prepared by God for those who love, fear and truly serve Him.23 Congress, 1854 The great, vital, and conservative element in our system is the belief of our people in the pure doctrines and the divine truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.24 Congress, U. S. House Judiciary Committee, 1854 Had the people, during the Revolution, had a suspicion of any attempt to war against Christianity, that Revolution would have been strangled in its cradle... In this age, there can be no substitute for Christianity... That was the religion of the founders of the republic and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendants.25 John Dickinson SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF PENNSYLVANIA; GOVERNOR OF DELAWARE; GENERAL IN THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION Rendering thanks to my Creator for my existence and station among His works, for my birth in a country enlightened by the Gospel and enjoying freedom, and for all His other kindnesses, to Him I resign myself, humbly confiding in His goodness and in His mercy through Jesus Christ for the events of eternity.26 [Governments] could not give the rights essential to happiness… We claim them from a higher source: from the King of kings, and Lord of all the earth.27 Gabriel Duvall SOLDIER; JUDGE; SELECTED AS DELEGATE TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION; COMPTROLLER OF THE U. S. TREASURY; U. S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE I resign my soul into the hands of the Almighty Who gave it, in humble hopes of His mercy through our Savior Jesus Christ.28 http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=8755
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb." (Psalm 139:13)
Not historically accurate. The European enlightenment had little effect on the American colonists. However the First and Second Great Awakenings did impact them.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb." (Psalm 139:13)
I agree. Ideas stand on their own,and nobody owns them. Not even religions. The all beleived in God. And there is where your train leaves the tracks. Some did deeply,others claimed they did in order to do business and/or get elected,and some were atheists. Given the traditions and the mindsets at the time these men grew up when official proclamations in Europe and even personal letters started out with dates "in the year of our Lord" and you could be jailed for not believing,it shouldn't surprise anyone that everyone in the public eye played the word games.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
DITTO!
("We sing about God because we believe in Him. We are not trying to offend anybody, but the evidence that we have seen of Him in our small little lives trumps your opinion about whether or not He exists". ~ Jeff Foxworthy)
"For my own part, I sincerely esteem it a system which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interests." Alexander Hamilton "I have carefully examined the evidences of the Christian religion, and if I was sitting as a juror upon its authenticity I would unhesitatingly give my verdict in its favor. I can prove its truth as clearly as any proposition ever submitted to the mind of man.". Alexander Hamilton
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Did you know that 52 of the 55 signers of "The Declaration of Independence" were orthodox, deeply committed, Christians? The other three all believed in the Bible as the divine truth, the God of scripture, and His personal intervention. It is the same Congress that formed the American Bible Society, immediately after creating the Declaration of Independence, the Continental Congress voted to purchase and import 20,000 copies of Scripture for the people of this nation. Part of our commitment should be to raise Old Glory across the nation's flagpoles and be grateful we live in a nation committed to these ideals.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
"We shall not fight alone. God presides over the destinies of nations, and will raise up friends for us. The battle is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave . . . Is life so dear, or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" Patrick Henry, in a speech March 23, 1775. "Whether this [new government] will prove a blessing or a curse will depend upon the use our people make of the blessings which a gracious God hath bestowed on us. If they are wise, they will be great and happy. If they are of a contrary character, they will be miserable. Righteousness alone can exalt them as a nation [Proverbs 14:34]. Reader! Whoever thou art, remember this, and in thy sphere practice virtue thyself and encourage it in others." Patrick Henry, Written on the back of Henry's Stamp Act "Amongst other strange things said of me, I hear it is said by the deists that I am one of the number; and, indeed, that some good people think I am no Christian. This thought gives me much more pain than the appellation of Tory; because I think religion of infinitely higher importance than politics; and I find much cause to reproach myself that I have lived so long, and have given no decided and public proofs of my being a Christian. But, indeed, my dear child, this is a character which I prize far above all this world has, or can boast." Patrick Henry, from a letter to his daughter in 1796 "The Bible is worth all other books which have ever been printed." Patrick Henry, Wirt Henry's, Life, vol. II, p. 621 "The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." Patrick Henry
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers. And it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest, of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers." First Chief Justice of Supreme Court John Jay to Jedidiah Morse February 28, 1797 "God's will be done; to him I resign--in him I confide. Do the like. Any other philosophy applicable to this occasion is delusive. Away with it." John Jay, first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, in a letter to his wife, Sally Jay, April 20, 1794, reprinted in The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, ed. Henry P. Johnston (New York, NY: Burt Franklin, 1970), vol. 4, p. 7. "I have long been of opinion that the evidence of the truth of Christianity requires only to be carefully examined to produce conviction in candid minds . . ." John Jay, in a letter to Rev. Uzal Ogden, Feb. 14, 1796, in CPPJJ, vol. 4, p. 203. "While in France . . . I do not recollect to have had more than two conversations with atheists about their tenants. The first was this: I was at a large party, of which were several of that description. They spoke freely and contemptuously of religion. I took no part in the conversation. In the course of it, one of them asked me if I believed in Christ? I answered that I did, and that I thanked God that I did." John Jay, in a letter to John Bristed, April 23, 1811, in CPPJJ, vol. 4, p. 359. "The same merciful Providence has also been pleased to cause every material event and occurrence respecting our Redeemer, together with the gospel he proclaimed, and the miracles and predictions to which it gave occasion, to be faithfully recorded and preserved for the information and benefit of all mankind." John Jay, in an address to the American Bible Society, May 9, 1822, in CPPJJ, vol. 4, p. 480.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
John Marshall "The American population is entirely Christian, and with us Christianity and Religion are identified. It would be strange indeed, if with such a people, our institutions did not presuppose Christianity, and did not often refer to it, and exhibit relations with it." John Marshall, in a letter to Jasper Adams, May 9, 1833, JSAC, p. 139. Marshall was Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1801-1835.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Benjamin Rush "I have alternately been called an Aristocrat and a Democrat. I am neither. I am a Christocrat." Benjamin Rush "Let the children...be carefully instructed in the principles and obligations of the Christian religion. This is the most essential part of education. The great enemy of the salvation of man, in my opinion, never invented a more effectual means of extirpating [removing] Christianity from the world than by persuading mankind that it was improper to read the Bible at schools." Benjamin Rush, The Father of American Medicine, and the Father of American Psychiatry "The only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty- - -" Benjamin Rush, Letters of Benjamin Rush, L.H. Butterfield, editor, Princeton: The American Philosophical Society, 1951, Vol. I p. 414, "To the citizens of Philadelphia: A Plan for Free Schools", March 28, 1787 "It will be necessary to connect all these (academic) branches of education with regular instruction in the Christian religion." Benjamin Rush, Essays, Literary, Moral, and Philosophical, Philadelphia: Thomas & William Bradford, 1806, Ch. 'Thoughts upon Female Education' p. 82
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Joseph Storey "Christianity becomes not merely an auxiliary, but a guide, to the law of nature; establishing its conclusions, removing its doubts, and elevating its precepts." Joseph Story, "The Value and Importance of Legal Studies," a lecture delivered August 25, 1829 at his inauguration as Dane Professor of Law in Harvard University, cited in James McClellan, Joseph Story and the American Constitution (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma, 1971), p. 66. Story served as Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1811-1845, and founded the Harvard Law School. "My own private judgment has long been (and every day's experience more and more confirms me in it) that government cannot long exist without an alliance with Religion to some extent, and that Christianity is indispensable to the true interests and solid foundation of all governments. . . . I know not, indeed, how any deep sense of moral obligation or accountableness can be expected to prevail in the community without a firm foundation of the great Christian truths." Joseph Story, in a letter to Jasper Adams, May 14, 1833, in JSAC, p. 139. "One of the beautiful boasts of our municipal jurisprudence is, that Christianity is a part of the common law, from which it seeks the sanction of its rights, and by which it endeavours to regulate its doctrines. And, notwithstanding the specious objection of one of our distinguished statesmen, the boast is as true, as it is beautiful. There never has been a period, in which the common law did not recognise Christianity as lying at its foundations" Miscellaneous Writings, p.451,
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Noah Webster "The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His Apostles.... This is genuine Christianity and to this we owe our free constitutions of government." Noah Webster
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Daniel Webster "Finally, let us not forget the religious character of our origin." Daniel Webster "Our fathers were brought hither by their high veneration for the Christian religion. They journeyed by its light, and labored by its hope." Daniel Webster
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
The colonists were familiar with deist thinking. But deism never gained a strong foothold in America. The first Great Awakening, the religious revival of the 1740s, was partially responsible for cutting short the spread of deism, In many states at the time of the Constitutional Convention, confessed deists were not allowed to hold public office. Deism was generally held in low esteem, as such laws indicate. Additionally, Deism as practiced at the time of America's founding was far different from what we find in our country today, and it certainly was not atheism. As but one example, Benjamin Franklin at eighty, reminded his colleagues of the National Convention (in moving unsuccessfully that there should be daily prayers before business) how in the beginnings of the contest with Britain '' we had daily prayers in this room Do we imagine we no longer need assistance? I have lived now a long time, and the longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God rules in the affairs of men." That is hardly the statement of a modern Deist.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
The knowledge that not everyone, let's say, in the Baptist Churches will be saved only serves to reinforce the fact that the Baptist Church cannot say it is "The Church". I've never really heard that. Unless you are talking about cults like Jehovas Witnesses. There will be people of all denominations in heaven and hell. Even some who claim to be orthodox will go to hell.
Go back up thread if you want to see him trying to pass a cult off as Christians. chuckle.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
Are members of the Orthodox Church saved simply because it's the oldest? If age of an organization was what God was seeking He would have continued with Jewish worship in the Temple. No, He is seeking a people who love and seek Him with all their heart. Your extreme arrogance is diametrically opposed to the humility found in Jesus Christ as seen in Philippians 2, and clearly does not reflect His attitude.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
It is hard for Protestants to get this but (and this is using my terminology alone) Orthodoxy considers itself to be a boat sailing on the rivier of Jesus. It feels the boat is the best constructed (because it came from the source itself) to navigate the river. Other boats are floating on it too but have a rough time - hit shoals, etc. That does not mean these poorly crafted boats won't make it to the end of the journey upriver. http://www.orthodoxconvert.info/Q-A.php?c=The+Church- Does+Orthodoxy+Really+Think+It+Is+the+True+Church It should be evident to most Orthodox, if they readily understand this divergence, why it so goes against most Protestants to say that the Orthodox Church is the fullness of The Church. On the one hand, to say that goes against the Protestant foundation of what it means to be the Church and is usually interpreted as "you are on the outside and will not be saved unless you join our group." For the others who believe they are the Church, it is like two children saying "I'm the Church," "No, I'm the Church!" These reactions, while understandable for one coming from a Protestant background, are reacting to Protestant understandings superimposed upon Orthodoxy, and not upon Orthodoxy's understanding of itself. So it is critical that we look at what the Orthodox understanding is. Before we do that, however, it will be helpful to look at what the Orthodox understanding of the Church does not say.
I agree. So do the Pope and the Curia. Lots of Catholics probably don't agree, but that's because lots of Catholics don't really understand the teachings of the Church. You have put it very nicely. I will try to say the same thing a little differently, from the perspective that Westerners seem so obsessed with. When Jesus said: "None comes to the Father except through me" that is absolutely true. But that doesn't mean that only visible "Christians" can come to the Father (pass final judgment and enter the City of God). It means that Jesus is the judge.
I guess I shouldn't have said all. Geez!!!
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
14 “To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. The Holy Bible: New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), Re 3:14–22.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
I guess I shouldn't have said all. Geez!!! 52 is also wrong. I have no doubt a few were devout believers,but the vast majority were "Sunday Morning social Christians".
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
A Christian by any other name....... BTW, ALL of the signatories to the DI agreed that man's rights come from their Creator, i.e. their God (whichever they believed that to be). This discussion is really moot. Any fair minded study of the FF and the drafting of the Consitution leds to ther conclsuion that the document was heavily influenced by Christian mores and philosophy. There is no need to continue beaten this horse.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
I agree,but that doesn't mean we are a Christian nation or that the country was formed around biblical beliefs. What became known as "Christian mores and philoposy" mostly started out as something else and was adopted by early Christians. Not that there is anything wrong with adopting what works because there isn't.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I wonder how much of the founders talk of God was nothing more than politicians pandering to the masses. Kind of adopting what works for getting elected
It was more self-defense than it was pandering back in those days. Remember,you could go to prison or even be executed for not "playing the devout game" back then in the Europe they grew up in. Today it's just pandering,not self-defense.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Interesting.
A lot of quotes from the revolutionary era have been flying around. Here's a quote from a different revolutionary (a very successful one) who is never noted for his piety, yet who stopped revolutionary attacks on religion dead in their tracks. "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napoleon Bonaparte
Self defense? Benjamin Franklin- SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION; DIPLOMAT; PRINTER; SCIENTIST; SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF PENNSYLVANIA As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals and His religion as He left them to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see.29 "The body of Benjamin Franklin, printer, like the cover of an old book, its contents torn out and stripped of its lettering and guilding, lies here, food for worms. Yet the work itself shall not be lost; for it will, as he believed, appear once more in a new and more beatiful edition, corrected and amended by the Author." 30 (FRANKLIN’S EULOGY THAT HE WROTE FOR HIMSELF)
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
"There is no god but the Tzar" What does ZAR mean?
And those shouldn't be confused with... www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/fr...e/secrets-of-the-vatican/ ...the fraudulent eunuch beekeepers who've propped themselves up on the steps of their state-establishment in His name.
That's very true. It is the fear of burning in the eternal flames of Hell forever that keeps a lot of people in line,and this power is what got the Catholic Church a seat in the throne rooms of all of Europe,and even the ability to hold their own courts to try and even torture and execute citizens of European countries for breaking "Gods laws".
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I see Ben Franklin commenting favorably on Christian mores,not on Christianity itself. It's the system of civilization that was created by the Christian Churches that created customs and cultures he approve of that he believed in,which is not necessarily the same thing as saying old Ben was a Thumper. Even *I* think that in general,Christianity has had a mostly positive influence on the world in the last 200 years. Overlooking of course the bizarre brain farts of the dedicated fundies that want to bring back the "Old Time Religion" with religious laws and courts. Would you call ME a "Thumper"?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I see Ben Franklin commenting favorably on Christian mores,not on Christianity itself. It's the system of civilization that was created by the Christian Churches that created customs and cultures he approve of that he believed in,which is not necessarily the same thing as saying old Ben was a Thumper. Men change over time, and Franklin admits that in his prayer before Congress. Born in 1700 died 1790. Benjamin Franklin's Request for Prayers at the Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin July 28, 1787 The Constitutional Convention had been meeting for five weeks, and had hit a perilous deadlock. The large states were insisting that congressional representation be based on population; the smaller states wanted a one-state- one-vote rule. The entire effort to create a stronger union was in jeopardy. Eighty-one-year-old Benjamin Franklin, quiet during most of the deliberations, then addressed the group. According to James Madison's notes, here is what happened next. Mr. President The small progress we have made after 4 or five weeks close attendance & continual reasonings with each other-our different sentiments on almost every question, several of the last producing as many noes as ays, is methinks a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the Human Understanding. We indeed seem to feel our own want of political wisdom, since we have been running about in search of it. We have gone back to ancient history for models of Government, and examined the different forms of those Republics which having been formed with the seeds of their own dissolution now no longer exist. And we have viewed Modern States all round Europe, but find none of their Constitutions suitable to our circumstances. In this situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings? In the beginning of the Contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection.- Our prayers, Sir, were heard, & they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending providence in our favor. I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? or do we imagine that we no longer need his assistance? I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that "except the Lord build the House they labour in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest. I therefore beg leave to move-that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of this City be requested to officiate in that Service-
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Old and hedging his bets. If he was wrong,no harm done. If he was right,he might escape hell.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I really don't care what Orthodoxy thinks, because I believe for the most part it's a dead or dying church. I's nothing like the churches of Chrysostom or Athanasius.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
We shall see when Jesus comes. I am sure Jesus favors American super churches with their business growth strategies.
we get on our high horse and think that this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ. So it is not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us, a simple tendency that can pervert and distort our faith.
Charred corpse of Jesse Washington among the ashes (NAACP)
#2. To: cranky (#0)
"I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear".
#3. To: Murron (#2)
"And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear"
#4. To: cranky (#0)
#5. To: Gatlin, All (#1)
"there were 4,743 recorded lynchings in the US..."
#6. To: Gatlin (#4)
The President’s comments are, of course, accurate, and he went on to explain that his point was ultimately about maintaining religious humility.
#7. To: cranky (#3)
"And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear"
#8. To: Gatlin, Murron (#5)
"there were 4,743 recorded lynchings in the US..." This is just another bold-faced LIE, spread as gospel by this treasonous administration and their spineless lackies.
#9. To: cranky (#3)
" "And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear"
#10. To: Pericles (#7)
Obama's middle name is Hussein so there is that sympathy he may have for Islam
#11. To: cranky (#10)
#12. To: Stoner, All (#9)
"And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear"
#13. To: Murron (#5)
(Edited)
"there were 4,743 recorded lynchings in the US..."
This is just another bold-faced LIE, spread as gospel by this treasonous administration and their spineless lackies.
Please post documented facts for each one of these (4,743) 'alleged' lynchings. Thank you. Man to woman: Would you sleep with me for one million dollars?
Woman: Sure.
Man: How about for ten dollars?
Woman: What do you think I am?
Man: We've already established what you are. All we're doing is bargaining about price. From 1882-1968, 4,743 lynchings occurred in the United States. Of these people that were lynched 3,446 were black. The blacks lynched accounted for 72.7% of the people lynched. These numbers seem large, but it is known that not all of the lynchings were ever recorded. Out of the 4,743 people lynched only 1,297 white people were lynched. That is only 27.3%. Many of the whites lynched were lynched for helping the black or being anti lynching and even for domestic crimes. Source.
#14. To: Murron, Stoner (#12)
Obama is an insane loose cannon, brandishing a loaded cocked gun at the heads Americans who make any attempt at saving their families, or this once Great Free sovereign Nation! -jmho
#15. To: Pericles, cranky (#11)
Obama has not done one thing to make the USA more Islamic - if anything his policies like supporting abortion and gay rights is anti-Muslim.
#16. To: Gatlin, aka Dog Whistler (#1)
#17. To: Liberator (#16)
#18. To: Gatlin (#17)
#19. To: Murron, Pericles, cranky (#15)
Obama has not done one thing to make the USA more Islamic - if anything his policies like supporting abortion and gay rights is anti-Muslim. I'd love to play a few rounds of poker with you, boy(?).
#20. To: Liberator (#18)
(Edited)
Oh I'm sorry -- Am I actually suppose to respond to your Botware program?
#21. To: Gatlin (#20)
#22. To: Gatlin (#20)
Carry on with what you do best and I will carry on with what I am doing.
#23. To: Liberator (#21)
SPEAK, MAN!
Defend your divisive ways...
Tick-tick.... 
#24. To: Gatlin, Murron, Stoner (#14)
He has shown no behaviors that many of the American people can trust to their Commander- in-Chief. His remaining time as Commander-in-Chief and President is passing far too slowly!
#25. To: Gatlin (#23)
#26. To: Liberator (#22)
(Edited)
Show where any of this is wrong.
The part where YOU are posting...and baiting. Lynchings in America "American history is longer, larger, more various, more beautiful, and more terrible than anything anyone has ever said about it" James Baldwin.
#27. To: Gatlin, Murron, cranky (#19)
Obama has not done one thing to make the USA more Islamic - if anything his policies like supporting abortion and gay rights is anti-Muslim. I'd love to play a few rounds of poker with you, boy(?). LOL! I'm sorry, but there are just no more words left to define...STUPID!!!
#28. To: Liberator (#25)
Thank you for digging your hole deeper.
#29. To: Gatlin (#23)
“We have already seen a number of Christian atrocities, not only in considering the Crusades and other wars including wars fought on God's behalf, but in considering forced conversions, Christian vandalism, persecution and slavery . Christians also have a poor record in facilitating the worst forms of colonialism. Here we look at just one example, probably the most extreme: The Congo Free State.”
#30. To: Liberator (#24)
He has shown no behaviors that many of the American people can trust to their Commander- in-Chief. His remaining time as Commander-in-Chief and President is passing far too slowly!
#31. To: Gatlin (#26)
On, you only want to censor my posting...I get it.
#32. To: Pericles (#29)
The Belgian Congo was a horrible episode in human brutality carried out by Christians but not for religious reasons.
#33. To: Gatlin (#30)
#34. To: Liberator (#31)
(Edited)
On, you only want to censor my posting...I get it.
#35. To: Gatlin, Liberator (#34)
You are doing nothing here except trying to cause disruption.
#36. To: Pridie.Nones (#35)
(Edited)
You should take a few moments of your precious time and reflect upon yourself before pointing fingers.
#37. To: Gatlin (#36)
Thanks, I just devoterd two seconds to that.
Ah, I feel much better!!!
Can you find anything incorrect in the articles?
#38. To: Liberator (#24)
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#39. To: cranky (#10)
#40. To: Murron, Obolo Supporters (#15)
#41. To: Gatlin (#4)
And the argument that the Crusades — which resulted in the deaths of untold thousands — were only in response to Muslim provocation is highly contested among historians.
#42. To: stoner (#0)
#43. To: CZ82 (#40)
" Hmmmm, I wonder how many Muslims Obolo has brought into this country since he took office? Couple 100,000 or a couple million? "
#44. To: Gatlin, Pericles, cranky, All (#19)
(Edited)
"if anything his policies like supporting abortion and gay rights is anti-Muslim".
#45. To: Murron (#44)
#46. To: Gatlin, Pridie.Nones, Liberator, pericles, Murron, cranky, GarySpFc, Stoner, All (#36)
Can you find anything incorrect in the articles?
#47. To: Gatlin (#19)
After you finish rolling on the floor, please get up and tell him, and everyone, what Obama has done to make the USA more Islamic.
#48. To: Gatlin, Pridie.Nones, Liberator, pericles, Murron, cranky, GarySpFc, Stoner, All (#44)
#49. To: SOSO, *The Two Parties ARE the Same* (#48)
POTUS has contributed more than his fair of these small steps to obtaining the true Muslim goal for the planet
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#50. To: Murron (#5)
#51. To: Stoner (#43)
" Hmmmm, I wonder how many Muslims Obolo has brought into this country since he took office? Couple 100,000 or a couple million? "
#52. To: Gatlin, Liberator, GarySpFc, Murron (#23)
“We have already seen a number of Christian atrocities, not only in considering the Crusades and other wars including wars fought on God's behalf, but in considering forced conversions, Christian vandalism, persecution and slavery . Christians also have a poor record in facilitating the worst forms of colonialism. Here we look at just one example, probably the most extreme: The Congo Free State.”
#53. To: Murron, liberator, GarySpFc (#44)
#6 “Islam has always been part of America”
#54. To: Vicomte13 (#50)
(Edited)
"there were 4,743 recorded lynchings in the US..."
#55. To: Gatlin (#32)
There was Christian brutality in whatever name it was conducted.
#56. To: Murron, CZ82 (#40)
Hmmmm, I wonder how many Muslims Obolo has brought into this country since he took office? Couple 100,000 or a couple million?
#57. To: Murron, Vicomte13 (#54)
(Edited)
"there were 4,743 recorded lynchings in the US..." It's not a lie. There are whole volumes of lynching photographs and postcards.
#58. To: Pericles, CZ82 (#56)
Hmmmm, I wonder how many Muslims Obolo has brought into this country since he took office? Couple 100,000 or a couple million?
#59. To: redleghunter, Liberator, GarySpFc, Murron (#52)
“We have already seen a number of Christian atrocities, not only in considering the Crusades and other wars including wars fought on God's behalf, but in considering forced conversions, Christian vandalism, persecution and slavery . Christians also have a poor record in facilitating the worst forms of colonialism. Here we look at just one example, probably the most extreme: The Congo Free State.”
Listed below are only some of the 20th century church atrocities that solely occurred on command of church authorities or were committed in the name of Christianity.
Surpisingly few know that Nazi extermination camps in World War II were by no means the only ones in Europe at the time. In the years 1942-1943 also in Croatia existed numerous extermination camps, run by Catholic Ustasha under their dictator Ante Paveli, a practising Catholic and regular visitor to the then pope. There were even concentration camps exclusively for children!
In these camps - the most notorious was Jasenovac, headed by a Franciscan friar - orthodox-Christian serbians (and a substantial number of Jews) were murdered. Like the Nazis the Catholic Ustasha burned their victims in kilns, alive (the Nazis were decent enough to have their victims gassed first). But most of the victims were simply stabbed, slain or shot to death, the number of them being estimated between 300,000 and 600,000, in a rather tiny country. Many of the killers were Franciscan friars. The atrocities were appalling enough to induce bystanders of the Nazi "Sicherheitsdient der SS", watching, to complain about them to Hitler (who did not listen). The pope knew about these events and did nothing to prevent them. [MV]
In 1954 Vietnamese freedom fighters - the Viet Minh - had finally defeated the French colonial government in North Vietnam, which by then had been supported by U.S. funds amounting to more than $2 billion. Although the victorious assured religious freedom to all (most non-buddhist Vietnamese were Catholics), due to huge anticommunist propaganda campaigns many Catholics fled to the South. With the help of Catholic lobbies in Washington and Cardinal Spellman, the Vatican's spokesman in U.S. politics, who later on would call the U.S. forces in Vietnam "Soldiers of Christ", a scheme was concocted to prevent democratic elections which could have brought the communist Viet Minh to power in the South as well, and the fanatic Catholic Ngo Dinh Diem was made president of South Vietnam. [MW16ff]
Diem saw to it that U.S. aid, food, technical and general assistance was given to Catholics alone, Buddhist individuals and villages were ignored or had to pay for the food aids which were given to Catholics for free. The only religious denomination to be supported was Roman Catholicism.
The Vietnamese McCarthyism turned even more vicious than its American counterpart. By 1956 Diem promulgated a presidential order which read:
To support this kind of government in the next decade thousands of American GI's lost their life....
In 1994 in the small african country of Rwanda in just a few months several hundred thousand civilians were butchered, apparently a conflict of the Hutu and Tutsi ethnic groups.
According to eyewitnesses clergymen gave away hiding Tutsis and turned them over to the machetes of the Hutu militia.
#60. To: Murron (#58)
Hmmmm, I wonder how many Muslims Obolo has brought into this country since he took office? Couple 100,000 or a couple million? You mistake Obama for Bush.
#61. To: rlk (#47)
After you finish rolling on the floor, please get up and tell him, and everyone, what Obama has done to make the USA more Islamic.
#62. To: redleghunter, ALL (#53)
#63. To: Murron, Gatlin, cranky (#44)
(Edited)
Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli
#64. To: Murron (#44)
But you only told me OBAMA what said.
Now tell me what Obama has done to make the USA more Islamic.
#65. To: Gatlin, Murron (#64)
#66. To: Murron (#54)
Please post documented facts for each one of these (4,743) 'alleged' lynchings.
#67. To: SOSO, Pridie.Nones, Liberator, pericles, Murron, cranky, GarySpFc, Stoner, All (#48)
Can anyone claim that it is not the intent of Islam to impose Sharia Law as the only law around the globe? But even Mulsims know that this can't happene but in small steps.
Not I. But even Mulsims know that this can't happene but in small steps.
However, the original question was: "What Obama has done to make the USA more Islamic?"
Our POS current POTUS has contributed more than his fair of these small steps to obtaining the true Muslim goal for the planet.
#68. To: SOSO, Gatlin, Pridie.Nones, Liberator, Murron, cranky, GarySpFc, Stoner (#48)
But even Mulsims know that this can't happene but in small steps. Our POS current POTUS has contributed more than his fair of these small steps to obtaining the true Muslim goal for the planet.
#69. To: redleghunter (#53)
Well the above is true. However the interactions of Islam with the USA has always been negative.
#70. To: Pericles (#56)
You mistake Obama for Bush.
#71. To: SOSO, Pridie.Nones, Liberator, pericles, Murron, cranky, GarySpFc, Stoner, All (#67)
(Edited)
#72. To: Pericles (#57)
NAACP: Thirty Years of Lynching in the U.S. 1889-1918 )
#73. To: Pericles, Murron (#56)
#74. To: Pericles, ALL (#63)
(Edited)
By Gary DeMar
Allen’s article is filled with so many half truths that it would take a book to deal with them adequately. For those of you who are new to the work of American Vision, there are numerous books on the subject that easily refute Allen’s assertions.
* America’s Christian History: The Untold Story by Gary DeMar (1995).
* America’s Christian Heritage by Gary DeMar (2003).
* The United States: A Christian Nation by Supreme Court Justice David J. Brewer (1905).
* The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States Developed in the Official and Historical Annals of the Republic by B. F. Morris (1864).
* Christianity and the American Commonwealth by Charles B. Galloway (1898).2
It seems rather odd that the constitutional framers would thank God for allowing them to draft a Constitution that excluded Him from the Constitution and the civil affairs of government.
Allen is correct that there were a number of Enlightenment principles floating around the colonies in the late eighteenth century as well as anti-clericalism. And there is no doubt that some of these principles made their way into the Constitution, although it’s hard to tell where when compared to the obvious Enlightenment principles inherent in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789). But we should be reminded of Allen’s absolutist claim of a complete dissolution of religion from political considerations in the Constitution. She has set the evaluative standard. If she is correct, then why didn’t the framers presage the French revolutionaries by starting the national calendar with a new Year One? Why did the Constitutional framers set aside Sunday—the Fourth Commandment of the Decalogue—as a day of rest for the President (Art. 1, sec. 7) if it was their desire to secularize the nation as Allen suggests? The French revolutionaries reconstructed the seven-day biblical week and turned it into a ten-day metric week in hopes of ridding the nation of every vestige of Christianity. Nothing like this was done in America.
Then there’s the issue of the state constitutions. One of the reasons some give for the absence of a more explicit declaration of God in the Constitution was the fact that the state constitutions made numerous references to God. The issue of religion was the domain of the states. Since the Federal Constitution was a document of enumerated powers, to mention religion in a more specific way would have given the national government jurisdiction over religious issues. The framers believed that such issues were best left to the states.
Constitutional scholar and First Amendment specialist, Daniel Dreisbach, writes: The U. S. Constitution’s lack of a Christian designation had little to do with a radical secular agenda. Indeed, it had little to do with religion at all. The Constitution was silent on the subject of God and religion because there was a consensus that, despite the framer’s personal beliefs, religion was a matter best left to the individual citizens and their respective state governments (and most states in the founding era retained some form of religious establishment). The Constitution, in short, can be fairly characterized as “godless” or secular only insofar as it deferred to the states on all matters regarding religion and devotion to God.3
Keep in mind that the national Constitution did not nullify the religious pronouncements of the state constitutions, and neither did it separate religion from civil government. The First Amendment is a direct prohibition on Congress, not the states, to stay out of religious issues: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This is a good indication that the states were to be unmolested on their religious requirements. As I’ve noted elsewhere,4 even today every state constitution makes reference to God. Here’s a sample of some of the state constitutions and their religious language during the time the Constitution was drafted:
The Constitutions says nothing about morality or values. There are no prohibitions against murder, theft, or rape. The word “law” is used numerous times, but it is never defined. The author of an 1838 tract entitled, An Inquiry into the Moral and religious Character of the American Government, makes an important observation: “The object of the Constitution [is to] distribute power, not favour; to frame a government, and not to forestall and clog the administration of it by words of preconceived partiality for this or that possible subject of its future action.”7 This is especially true when religion was an issue reserved to the states. States wrote educational provisions into their constitutions, while the Federal Constitution remained silent on the subject. The 1876 constitution of North Carolina includes 15 sections on education.
In attempt to drive a stake in the belief that America had “been founded on Christian principles,” she resurrects the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli and its statement that “the Government of the United States . . . is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”8 I’ve dealt with this treaty elsewhere,9 but let me summarize the argument here.
In drafting the treaty, the United States had to assure the ruler of Tripoli that in its struggle with the pirates “it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,” that “the said states never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan [Muslim] nation” due to religious considerations.
A survey of the state constitutions, charters, national pronouncements, and official declarations of the thirteen state governments would convince any representative from Tripoli that America was a Christian nation by law. The Constitution itself states that it was drafted, as noted above, “In the year of our Lord.” The American consul in Algiers had to construct a treaty that would assure the ruler of Tripoli that troops would not be used to impose Christianity on a Muslim people. A study of later treaties with Muslim nations seems to support this conclusion. The 1816 “Treaty of Peace and Amity with Algiers” is a case in point: “It is declared by the contracting parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony between the two nations; and the Consuls and the Agents of both nations shall have liberty to celebrate the rights of their prospective religions in their own houses.”13
Piracy, kidnapping, and enslaving Christian seamen remained a problem despite the 1797 Treaty. In addition, Tripoli demanded increased tribute payments in 1801. When President Jefferson refused to increase the tribute, Tripoli declared war on the United States. A United States navy squadron, under Commander Edward Preble, blockaded Tripoli from 1803 to 1805. After rebel soldiers from Tripoli, led by United States Marines, captured the city of Derna, the Pasha of Tripoli signed a treaty promising to exact no more tribute.
It is important to note that the 1805 treaty with Tripoli differs from the 1797 Treaty in that the phrase “as the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion” is conspicuously absent. Article 14 of the new treaty corresponds to Article 11 of the first treaty. It reads in part: “[T]he government of the United States of America has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility of Musselmen.” Assurances are still offered that the United States will not interfere with Tripoli’s religion or laws.
It’s obvious that by 1805 the United States had greater bargaining power and did not have to bow to the demands of this Muslim stronghold. A strong navy and a contingent of Marines also helped. But it wasn’t until Madison’s presidency that hostilities finally stopped when he declared war against Algiers.14
Those who use the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli as a defense against the Christian America thesis are silent on the 1805 treaty. For example, Alan Dershowitz cites the 1797 Treaty as “the best contemporaneous evidence” against claims that the United States was founded as a Christian nation,15 but he makes no mention of the 1805 treaty and other treaties that are specifically Trinitarian.
If treaties are going to be used to establish the religious foundation of America, then it’s essential that we look at more than one treaty. In 1783, at the close of the war with Great Britain, a peace treaty was ratified that began with these words: “In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity. It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose the hearts of the most serene and most potent Prince George the Third, by the Grace of God King of Great Britain. . . .”16 The treaty was signed by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and John Jay. Keep in mind that it was Adams who signed the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli.
If one line in the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli turns America into a secular State (which it does not), then how does Allen deal with the treaties of 1783, 1822, 1805, and 1848 and the state constitutions? She doesn’t, because she can’t. Allen needs to go back and do a bit more research and look at resources beyond the typical college professor’s bag of tricks and sleight of hand.
2 To be republished by American Vision in 2005.
3 Daniel L. Dreisbach, “A Godless Constitution?: A Response to Kramnick and Moore” (1997): www.leaderu.com/common/godlessconstitution.html. Dreisbach is a Professor in the Department of Justice, Law and Society at American University, Washington, D.C.
4 Gary DeMar, The Christian Foundation of America (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2005), 14–19.
5 Francis Newton Thorpe, The Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters and Other Organic Laws of the States, Territories, and Colonies, 7 vols. (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1909), 5:2815.
6 Thorpe, The Federal and State Constitutions, 5:2793. The same 1776 constitution stated that “no clergyman, or preacher of the gospel, of any denomination, shall be capable of being a member of either the Senate, House of Commons, or Council of State, while he continues in the exercise of the pastoral function” (5:2793). This provision demonstrates the true meaning of “separation of church and state.”
7 Quoted in Daniel L. Dreisbach, “God and the Constitution: Reflections on Selected Nineteenth Century Commentaries on References to the Deity and the Christian Religion in the United States Constitution” (1993), 24, note 85.
8 The entire treaty can be found in William M. Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols and Agreements between the United States of America and Other Powers, 1776–1909, 4 vols. (New York: Greenwood Press, [1910] 1968), 2:1786.
9 Gary DeMar, America’s Christian History: The Untold Story (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1995), chap. 8.
10 Stephen Clissold, The Barbary Slaves (New York: Barnes & Noble, [1977] 1992), 4. The 1815 Treaty of Peace and Amity with Algiers includes the following in Article XV: “On a vessel or vessels of war belonging to the United States anchoring before the city of Algiers, the Consul is to inform the Dey of her arrival, when she shall receive the salutes which are, by treat or custom, given to the ships of war of the most favored nations on similar occasions, and which shall be returned gun for gun; and if, after such arrival, so announced, any Christians whatsoever, captives in Algiers, make their escape and take refuge on board any of the ships of war, they shall not be required back again, nor shall the Consul of the United States or commanders of said ships be required to pay anything for the said Christians.” (Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols and Agreements between the United States of America and Other Powers, 1:7).
11 Joseph Wheelan, Jefferson’s War: America’s First War on Terror, 1801-1805 (New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, 2003), xxiii.
12 Wheelan, Jefferson’s War, 7
13 Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols and Agreements Between the United States of America and Other Powers, 1:15.
14 Lewis Lord, “Pirates!,” U.S. News & World Report (February 25/March 4, 2002), 50.
15 Alan Dershowitz, America Declares Independence (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2003), 64.
16 Malloy, Treaties, Conventions, International Acts, Protocols and Agreements between the United States of America and Other Powers, 1776–1909, 1:586.
#75. To: GarySpFC (#74)
#76. To: Pridie.Nones (#75)
(Edited)
#77. To: Pridie.Nones, GarySpFC (#75)
Did you plagerize the contents of your post? If not, how long did it take you to type all of that stuff? If so, where is the source weblink?
#78. To: Gatlin, GarySpFC (#77)
Instead of challenging his source, why can't you tell us what you agree with or disagree with in his post?
Is anything included that is untrue?
#79. To: Pridie.Nones (#78)
#80. To: GarySpFC (#79)
I have ministered in the field of apologetics for over 40 years. I have a doctorate in theology, and those who know me on this and other sites are acquainted with my long posts.
#81. To: Pridie.Nones (#78)
#82. To: Pridie.Nones (#78)
Sure. I don't believe any of the "stuff" presented. It is basically hogwash.
#83. To: Pridie.Nones (#80)
(Edited)
#84. To: GarySpFC (#81)
#85. To: Pridie.Nones (#84)
So, local politics were stimulated by not necessarily deep convictions of or about religious faith but nothing more than a sales card for political office.
#86. To: GarySpFC (#82)
It shouldn't be too hard for you to find the different treaties online, examine them, and see what is true.
#87. To: GarySpFC (#85)
And how are you so certain of the Founding Fathers motives?
#88. To: Pridie.Nones (#87)
(Edited)
Most of the founders were Deists. They could give a "hoot" about Christianity primarily because of the many wars in Europe over the Catholicism/Protestant debate, which still rage, albeit not so violently.
#89. To: Gatlin (#71)
(Edited)
#90. To: GarySpFC (#88)
#91. To: GarySpFC (#74)
http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/presidents/thomas-jefferson/letters-of-thomas-jefferson/jefl227.php
#92. To: GarySpFC, Pridie.Nones (#81)
(Edited)
This phrase was not in the Arabic version of the 1797 treaty,2208 and appears to have been an insertion by Joel Barlow (1754– 1812), the American consul at Algiers who oversaw the translation process from Arabic to English.
#93. To: Gatlin (#59)
#94. To: CZ82 (#73)
You mistake Bush for Carter.
#95. To: Pridie.Nones (#86)
Within any nation, once a document is signed and accepted it is cast as a permanent boat anchor around your neck.
#96. To: Vicomte13 (#95)
Pridie.Nones: Within any nation, once a document is signed and accepted it is cast as a permanent boat anchor around your neck.
#97. To: cranky (#3)
He's [the Muzzie President] a Constitutional scholar, doncha know?
#98. To: Pridie.Nones (#96)
It is rare to have any outrage of or by the American People in the USA. Today, all the People do is watch TV, pay their taxes and thank God that they don't have to pay more.
#99. To: Pridie.Nones (#86)
Your research doesn't seem to have much impact, does it? Similarly like all the research of historical evidence about various Constutional Amendments attempting to redress grievances or nullify the process.
#100. To: Gatlin, Carnival Barker, A K A Stone (#34)
Get lost, Punk.
"thanks for providing me a platform from which to launch articles you have not disputed as inaccurate."
#101. To: Liberator (#97)
Has anybody ever been able to discern an iota of documentation from the Kenyan's writings or evidence that supports "constitutional scholar"?
#102. To: Gatlin (#59)
So those who called themselves “Christians” and committed atrocities that solely occurred on “command of church authorities” or were committed in the name of “Christianity” were deemed NOT to be “Christians....by whom?
#103. To: Gatlin, Deckard, Pridie.Nones, The Big Top (#34)
You are doing nothing here except trying to cause disruption.
#104. To: GarySpFC (#99)
There is more at stake in this than what appears on the surface, because once a man chooses to believe a lie he has departed from reality. He thinks he can contain the lie in a dark corner of his mind, but in reality it infects the totality of his being.
#105. To: Pridie.Nones (#101)
Yes. He has written at least one document that you should be able to identify:
#106. To: GarySpFC (#62)
#107. To: Vicomte13 (#98)
#108. To: redleghunter, Gatlin (#102)
#109. To: Liberator (#105)
#110. To: Pridie.Nones, Gatlin, Carnival Barker (#35)
To Gatlin:
"You should take a few moments of your precious time and reflect upon yourself before pointing fingers."
#111. To: Pericles (#91)
#112. To: Pridie.Nones (#109)
I understand she [Bigfoot] actually wrote his community organizer leaflets that he handed out at Church on Sunday.
#113. To: Pridie.Nones (#104)
I am curious about your intent of the above post that I quote. Are you saying that "belief" is tied to "reality?" If so, how do you explain "animism" and the perpetual belief systems thereof?
#114. To: Gatlin, Pridie.Nones (#36)
Thanks, I just devoterd two seconds to that.
#115. To: Liberator, Gatlin (#110)
#116. To: Vicomte13 (#113)
I'd have fun answering those questions, but I'd be butting on a conversation between you and GarySpFc.
#117. To: Vicomte13, GarySpFc (#113)
I'd have fun answering those questions, but I'd be butting on a conversation between you and GarySpFc.
#118. To: Pridie.Nones, Gatlin, The Smallest Show On Earth (#37)
Can you find anything incorrect in the articles?
#119. To: Pridie.Nones, Gatlin (#115)
I have been reading some of the many threads Gatlin has posted upon. Wasn't his original monicker "tater?"
#120. To: Pridie.Nones (#107)
So you deny your own post that I quipped earlier. In the real world, you are a scoundrel, a "flip-flopper" a fish out of water.
#121. To: Pridie.Nones (#117)
Feel free pal; I have a few hours this evening to watch and learn from you. I caution you to be careful, though. You could become bruised by my retorts.
#122. To: Pridie.Nones (#117)
I caution you to be careful, though. You could become bruised by my retorts.
#123. To: GarySpFC (#116)
I tire when arguing with brick walls.
#124. To: Deckard (#38)
#125. To: Pridie.Nones (#123)
(Edited)
You muist realize, when you profess credentials (earlier up the thread) and can not support your own work by thoughts, words, deeds and actions you look like a fool to the viewing audience besides myself.
#126. To: CZ82, cranky (#39)
Wasn't that interview [where 0buma admitted, "My Muslim Faith..."] done by Brian Williams?
#127. To: Vicomte13 (#120)
#128. To: Pericles, Gatlin, Pridie.Nones, Liberator, Murron, cranky, GarySpFc, Stoner (#68)
It is just stupid logic from the American right wing...........
#129. To: CZ82 (#40)
I wonder how many Muslims Obolo has brought into this country since he took office? Couple 100,000 or a couple million?
#130. To: SOSO, Pericles, Gatlin, Pridie.Nones, Liberator, Murron, cranky, GarySpFc, Stoner (#128)
And exactly what logic would that be?
#131. To: GarySpFC (#125)
Jesse, this may be hard for you to understand, but I have Parkinson's disease, and typing is very difficult for me.
#132. To: Gatlin, Pridie.Nones, Liberator, pericles, Murron, cranky, GarySpFc, Stoner, All (#67)
However, the original question was: "What Obama has done to make the USA more Islamic?"
#133. To: Pericles, cranky, Murron, Stoner, Liberator, Pridie.Nones, Deckard, CZ82, GarySpFC, SOSO, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#89)
Well, Obama was stupid in mentioning the past. he should have mentioned the Christian Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), in Africa that is as brutal as Boko Haram and are fighting for religious reasons. But Obama has to dumb stuff down for Americans to get a point across and that is Obama's weakness because while Clinton was good at dumbing down his points so the yokels could get his message, Obama never understood Joe Blow Americans and how to talk to them.
Who, Where, When, Why How and What.
Obama was not the person to say this.
Where he said it was not the right place.
When he said it was not appropriate.
Why he said it is because he believes it.
How he said it and what he said has not been challenged.
The Radical Right Can’t Handle The Truth From President Obama.
#134. To: GarySpFC, Gatlin, redleghunter (#41)
"And the argument that the Crusades — which resulted in the deaths of untold thousands — were only in response to Muslim provocation is highly contested among historians."
#135. To: Gatlin (#133)
#136. To: SOSO (#132)
#137. To: Murron, Gatlin, Pericles, cranky, All (#44)
Gatlin/Pericles: "What Obama has done to make the USA more Islamic."?
#138. To: Gatlin (#133)
#139. To: redleghunter (#102)
So those who called themselves “Christians” and committed atrocities that solely occurred on “command of church authorities” or were committed in the name of “Christianity” were deemed NOT to be “Christians....by whom?
#140. To: Gatlin, Gatlin, Pridie.Nones, Liberator, pericles, Murron, cranky, GarySpFc, Stoner, All (#71)
Those complaining about a “false equivalency” are just using a meaningless buzzword. Here’s a better one: what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
#141. To: SOSO, LF (#46)
Gatlin: "Can you find anything incorrect in the
articles my propaganda?
#142. To: Gatlin, Snarky Pumpkin, A K A Stone (#100)
...your propaganda, red herrings and strawmen.
Who, Where, When, Why, How and What:
Obama was not the person to say this.
Where he said it was not the right place.
When he said it was not appropriate.
Why he said it is because he believes it.
How he said it and what he said has not been challenged.
All you have done so far is spew forth snarky comments.
You have yet to show where Obama lied.
Why can’t you do that?
#143. To: Pridie.Nones (#101)
Yes. He has written at least one document...
#144. To: Liberator (#103)
You are doing nothing here except trying to cause disruption.
#145. To: Gatlin, household Muslim negroes for sale, no field nigaz so not a cracka, *Arab Spring Jihad* (#133)
(Edited)
#71>> Southern American plantation slavery was called the ‘peculiar institution’ for a reason– much slavery elsewhere was household slavery, as in most of the Muslim world
To: hondo68 The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#146. To: Gatlin (#142)
#147. To: Liberator (#108)
One may of course ask why Gatlin feels compelled to indirectly slander the Christianity of Jesus Christ.
#148. To: Liberator (#110)
To EVERY poster and lurker here who knows the truth of the matter...
#149. To: Pericles, cranky, gatlin, All (#11)
Obama has not done one thing to make the USA more Islamic - if anything his policies like supporting abortion and gay rights is anti-Muslim.
#150. To: Liberator, (#114)
What a stud!!
#151. To: Gatlin, redleghunter (#139)
Christianity's tenets command its adherents to love "In the name of Jesus Christ."
#152. To: Gatlin (#150)
#153. To: Gatlin (#139)
(Edited)
#154. To: Gatlin (#148)
What is the TRUTH of the matter?
#155. To: Pridie.Nones (#115)
tater has a dominant personality but is easy to handle.
http://dictionary.reference. co m/browse/tater.
#156. To: Liberator (#118)
Yup. The Gatlin is the very best!!
#157. To: Gatlin (#155)
#158. To: Gatlin (#147)
Slander...where?
#159. To: Pridie.Nones (#157)
#160. To: Liberator (#159)
#161. To: Gatlin, his source, Rachel Maddow (#142)
#162. To: Liberator, gatlin (#161)
#163. To: Liberator (#135)
Oh...pardon while I get up and take a "tater." At ease, Spammeister.
Right Wing Melts Down Over Obama's Comments At National Prayer Breakfast
#164. To: Pridie.Nones (#160)
#165. To: Pridie.Nones (#162)
#166. To: Liberator (#137)
But oh wait...
#167. To: Gatlin (#163)
#168. To: Gatlin (#166)
#169. To: Pridie.Nones (#117)
#170. To: Pridie.Nones (#138)
Don't you understand what politicians do to take your focus off current events?
#171. To: Pridie.Nones (#146)
If POTUS is the Great Orator of the US Constitution...
#172. To: Gatlin (#171)
#173. To: Liberator (#151)
Here's are the bigger questions:
#174. To: Liberator (#152)
Tsk. Haven't you learned your lesson yet, Wolfgang?
#175. To: Liberator (#154)
Where did Obama lie?
#176. To: Pridie.Nones (#157)
You are a liar, a thief and a charlatan.
#177. To: Liberator (#158)
Slander...where?
#178. To: Gatlin (#170)
Of course, and to Obama's credit (as much as I hate to give him credit for anything>...look at what he has everyone talking about right now.
Playing the Right Wing and the Media like a multimillion-dollar Stradivarius!
#179. To: Liberator (#167)
Do you really think ANY one is reading your neatly boxed cut & paste propaganda??
#180. To: Gatlin (#176)
#181. To: Liberator (#168)
*Yeah, but I'm still laughing*
#182. To: Liberator, Gatlin the new Arab, Juan Cole and the house negroes (#161)
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#183. To: Pridie.Nones (#180)
Show one place anywhere around the world today...
Had you been keeping up…you would have already known this:
#184. To: All (#183)
(Edited)
#185. To: Gatlin (#183)
#186. To: Pridie.Nones (#185)
(Edited)
#187. To: Gatlin (#186)
#188. To: Pericles, GarySpFc, liberator, Destro (#89)
Well, Obama was stupid in mentioning the past. he should have mentioned the Christian Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), in Africa that is as brutal as Boko Haram and are fighting for religious reasons.
#189. To: Gatlin, liberator, GarySpFc (#139)
If it is to accepted that those who committed heinous barbaric acts deemed themselves to be “Christians” but were not really “Christians”….can it not also be said that those who deem themselves to be “Muslims” and commit violent acts are not “Muslims?”
#190. To: GarySpFC (#111)
. The work became the basis of university legal education in England and North America. He was knighted in 1770.
#191. To: Gatlin, cranky, Murron, Stoner, Liberator, Pridie.Nones, Deckard, CZ82, GarySpFC, SOSO, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#133)
(Edited)
Well, Obama was stupid in mentioning the past. he should have mentioned the Christian Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), in Africa that is as brutal as Boko Haram and are fighting for religious reasons. But Obama has to dumb stuff down for Americans to get a point across and that is Obama's weakness because while Clinton was good at dumbing down his points so the yokels could get his message, Obama never understood Joe Blow Americans and how to talk to them.
#192. To: SOSO, cranky, gatlin, (#149)
(Edited)
Agian, total BS. Obama is total BS, a total fraud. Wake up. Obama played the useful idiots by telling them what they wanted to hear. He knew that he could not get elected on a pro-life and anti-gay marriage message. In the meantime time he has done evertything he can to misdirect attention from the true agenda of Islam and ignoring modern day Islamic terrorism and brutality. He goes out of his way to avoid using the term Islamic terrorism, he can't even same Islamic extreism. I can understand why he goes so far up his ass to portect his agenda. I can't understand why you do.
#193. To: GarySpFC (#153)
Lee was against slavery and a number of years before the war he freed his own slaves.
#194. To: redleghunter, GarySpFc, liberator (#188)
Well, Obama was stupid in mentioning the past. he should have mentioned the Christian Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), in Africa that is as brutal as Boko Haram and are fighting for religious reasons.
#195. To: Pericles, GarySpFc, liberator, Destro, BobCeleste (#190)
You argue the point for someone who Jefferson was against because of modern American Fundie attempts to hold onto their modern myths of Protestant Fundie America's origins.
#196. To: redleghunter (#195)
The only myth is the leftist, atheist secular myth that the founders were deists.
#197. To: Pericles, GarySpFc, liberator (#194)
And if you argue they are not 'real Christians' that is what Muslims say about ISIL, al-Qaeda, etc.
#198. To: Pericles (#192)
I just want people like you in the right wing............
#199. To: Pericles, cranky, gatlin, , All (#192)
Obama has killed more terrorist with drones than even Bush while depriving the terrorists of easy to target Americans on the ground.
#200. To: Pericles (#190)
#201. To: Pericles (#196)
I did not mention that at all. I showed where Thomas Jefferson stated flat out that English Common Law was not based on Christianity and predated it - he mentions the fact that the British establishment always claims their laws are Christian based and he disagrees. And Jefferson did not hide his views - they were very open. Imagine the modern uproar if an American president said this? Also, the Treaty Of Tripoli which the Senate ratified for Jefferson flat out stated that the USA was not founded as a Christian nation and not one noted comment of shock, dissent, etc to the wording of that treaty which was published in the newspapers back then for all to read. That tells me this was an unremarkable view by Americans at the time of the Founding Fathers regardless of their individual faiths.
#202. To: Pericles, GarySpFc, liberator, Destro (#196)
Also, the Treaty Of Tripoli which the Senate ratified for Jefferson flat out stated that the USA was not founded as a Christian nation and not one noted comment of shock, dissent, etc to the wording of that treaty which was published in the newspapers back then for all to read. That tells me this was an unremarkable view by Americans at the time of the Founding Fathers regardless of their individual faiths.
#203. To: Pericles, cranky, gatlin, All (#198)
#204. To: Pericles, GarySpFc, liberator, Destro (#191)
If Obama used the more accurate "Lord's Resistance Army" example to show how Christian terror groups fighting for religious reasons...
#205. To: redleghunter (#195)
The only myth is the leftist, atheist secular myth that the founders were deists.
#206. To: Pericles (#94)
(Edited)
#207. To: Vicomte13 (#169)
An example is a young boy about to cross a stream and is sighted by an approaching bear. The bear exhibits aggressive behavior towards the boy and the boy cowers in fear not knowing how to handle his panic. Simultaneously, but nevertheless apparent, the weather has turned very nasty and ligthening has struck a nearby tree, shearing off a heavy limb scaring the bear away.
#208. To: Spin Meisters And Moderates (#0)
#209. To: Liberator (#126)
#210. To: Liberator (#137)
" Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrates Obama Administration "
#211. To: Pericles (#89)
(Edited)
#212. To: Pericles, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Pridie.Nones, Deckard, CZ82, GarySpFC, SOSO, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete, all (#191)
gatlin: "Well Obama was stupid in mentioning the past. he should have mentioned the Christian Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), in Africa that is as brutal as Boko Haram and are fighting for religious reasons. But Obama has to dumb stuff down for Americans to get a point across and that is Obama's weakness because while Clinton was good at dumbing down his points so the yokels could get his message, Obama never understood Joe Blow Americans and how to talk to them".
#213. To: Murron (#212)
#214. To: Stoner (#213)
#215. To: Stoner (#213)
#216. To: Pridie.Nones (#207)
The idea of "luck" is all there is to say about belief systems.
#217. To: Vicomte13 (#216)
#218. To: Pridie.Nones (#214)
" Why is that? "
#219. To: CZ82 (#215)
" Just to be controversial, he likes the attention. (Along with a few others). "
#220. To: Stoner (#219)
#221. To: Stoner (#218)
Just did not figure him that way. For one thing, he has been so adamant about supporting the Republican nominee. Just seems strange to me. But then he is strange, LOL.
#222. To: Vicomte13, Pridie.Nones (#216)
" God healed me and saved my life.
#223. To: Stoner, Vicomte13 (#222)
I have witnessed many events that some would say was just luck, or coincidence.
#224. To: Pridie.Nones (#221)
" What Republican nominee? I didn't know there was one as of yet. "
#225. To: Stoner, Gatlin (#224)
#226. To: Pridie.Nones (#223)
" event like that happened is pure bull shit. "
#227. To: Pridie.Nones, Vicomte13 (#217)
It was "luck" that you survived and it was also "luck" that your health was restored. There are no controlled variables about your circumstances that show "God" or any "miracle" other than your belief.
#228. To: Murron (#227)
#229. To: Pridie.Nones (#228)
War seems to be a method of describing all these miracles, doesn't it?
#230. To: Murron (#229)
#231. To: GarySpFC (#201)
Sir William Blackstone
#232. To: redleghunter, GarySpFc, liberator (#202)
That would be article 11 of the treaty. Which some scholars note did not appear in the Arabic version of the treaty. Which is interesting.
#233. To: CZ82 (#206)
(Edited)
So you're trying to say Carter never crawled in bed with the Muslims in Afghanistan? Maybe this was his way of making up for abandoning the Shah.
#234. To: CZ82 (#211)
#235. To: Pericles, GarySpFC (#231)
GarySpFC: Sir William Blackstone
#236. To: Vicomte13, Pridie.Nones (#216)
When I was a boy I dove headlong into a shallow lake and broke my neck and was paralyzed.
#237. To: Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Pridie.Nones, Deckard, CZ82, GarySpFC, SOSO, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#212)
(Edited)
#238. To: Pericles (#237)
I am still waiting for evidence Obama made America more Islamic. All I get is Obama hired Arabs in govt.
#239. To: Pridie.Nones (#217)
It was "luck" that you survived and it was also "luck" that your health was restored. There are no controlled variables about your circumstances that show "God" or any "miracle" other than your belief.
#240. To: Pridie.Nones (#230)
It is impressive to view these fragmented systems because at the end of the day, there is no real god; there are only beliefs about a REAL GOD.
#241. To: Murron (#227)
They are witnesses to miracles everyday, yet some still believe there is no God...go figure~ jmho
#242. To: Vicomte13 (#239)
There is one variable: as I was on my back, paralyzed, my nose filling up with water, I asked: "Please".
And then I was healed. I stood up. I told nobody.
Then there were two separate occasions: little animals that were quite dead held in my hands. And I said "Father, you can do anything. Please." And he did. Both times. The animals came back to life. Luck? No miracle.
Then there is the Shroud of Turin. The image on it is on both faces. It is formed by Maillard Reactions. It is not painted on. It is not of human artifice. We cannot control Maillard Reactions with precision today, let alone back then. It is a chaotic process.
The image cannot exist, not with that exquisite level of detail, even of inorganic matters (the lettering of the coins is transmitted also). It can't exist, but it does. A tangible, physical miracle that has been scrutinized by forensic scientists.
Luck cannot paint the Mona Lisa. Random processes cannot sculpt the Statue of Liberty. But human hands cannot today make the image on the Shroud, and never could: it exceeds our capacity to control nature. But there it is. A true miracle. And look at WHO it is. There is the face of the God who controls your "luck". Res ipsa loquitur.
#243. To: Pridie.Nones (#223)
Vicomte13's personal experiences are nothing more than some good "luck." There was no intervention by a "god" to suggest that such a magnificient and spectacular event like that happened is pure bull shit.
#244. To: Pridie.Nones (#225)
He has only one projected image: more bull shit.
.
#245. To: Pridie.Nones (#242)
Are you a vetenarian to determine with absolute accuracy your whimsical observations?
#246. To: Vicomte13 (#243)
#247. To: Gatlin (#244)
#248. To: Pridie.Nones (#242)
There are no miracles unless you believe in them.
#249. To: Vicomte13 (#245)
#250. To: Pridie.Nones (#246)
(Edited)
here was no "hand of God" about your screw up in life. Get over it. You made mistakes and are "lucky" for no other reason but by sheer happen-stance random events.
#251. To: Pridie.Nones (#249)
(Edited)
I find your post completly unacceptable: morbid and unbelievable. You are an outright sociopathic liar or a drug crazed lunatic. You pick your preferences, it means nothing to me.
#252. To: Vicomte13 (#250)
But you will die, and then you will find yourself alive, and in your life review you will encounter this very discussion, and all others.
#253. To: Pridie.Nones (#238)
I am still waiting for evidence Obama made America more Islamic. All I get is Obama hired Arabs in govt.
#254. To: Pericles (#253)
#255. To: Pericles, Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Pridie.Nones, Deckard, CZ82, GarySpFC, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#237)
I am still waiting for evidence Obama made America more Islamic.
#256. To: Pridie.Nones (#254)
STATS, please. Support your opinion with meaningful stats.
#257. To: Pericles (#233)
#258. To: Pericles (#234)
#259. To: SOSO, Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Pridie.Nones, Deckard, CZ82, GarySpFC, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#255)
""I ask again, what Muslim agenda has Obama enacted in the USA?"
#260. To: CZ82 (#258)
#261. To: Gatlin (#244)
#262. To: Pericles (#190)
Thomas Jefferson thinks otherwise and his thinking and that of his contemporaries was what held sway. You argue the point for someone who Jefferson was against because of modern American Fundie attempts to hold onto their modern myths of Protestant Fundie America's origins.
#263. To: Pericles (#192)
Obama has killed more terrorist with drones than even Bush while depriving the terrorists of easy to target Americans on the ground.
#264. To: CZ82 (#261)
Or are you going to stick with the story it's Izzy?
#265. To: Pridie.Nones (#207)
There is no "god" as "god" is everything around us; however, there are great gods and those great gods are meaningful as they helped in some way promote the survival of someone.
#266. To: Pridie.Nones (#252)
But you won't revive me. You shall relish in your own mind the day you elicted some sort of personal power about mircles for some little creature.
#267. To: GarySpFC (#265)
That's Pantheism, which is just another form of atheism. In reality your god manifests himself in a mirror.
#268. To: Pridie.Nones (#230)
there is no real god; there are only beliefs about a REAL GOD.
#269. To: Pericles (#231)
Sir William Blackstone
#270. To: Vicomte13, GarySpFC (#267)
Pantheism is a form of paganism.
#271. To: Pericles (#260)
"What Limbaugh did not say was that the list of LRA objectives appeared to have come straight off Wikipedia, according to a contemporaneous New York Times account. Nor did Limbaugh mention that for years the group had been widely accused of torture, murder, looting, and wanton destruction.
#272. To: Gatlin (#264)
#273. To: GarySpFC (#268)
Pridie.Nones: "... there is no real god; there are only beliefs about a REAL GOD."
#274. To: Pridie.Nones (#205)
#275. To: Vicomte13 (#267)
It isn't atheism, at least my form of it wasn't. Atheism is the belief that there is no god at all.
#276. To: Murron (#212)
OOPS! My bad. You already are, and doing a bang up job of it too, shoveling and spreading Obama's piles of sugar coated shite. But in the end, all you're going to be holding onto is a 'pile of Obama's/satan's Shite!~ jmho
#277. To: redleghunter (#274)
What piece of garbage?
#278. To: Pridie.Nones (#273)
Gary, I hate to break my perspective to you but you can not second guess GOD. God is a mystery. The creation of all about us is a mystery. There is not much more than that perspective at this time in mankind's quest for knowledge to understand himself and the world around himself.
#279. To: CZ82 (#272)
#280. To: GarySpFC (#278)
The Christian faith is a walk with a God Who has revealed Himself in Scripture, and every day is a great adventure for Christians.
#281. To: Pridie.Nones (#277)
#282. To: Pericles, GarySpFc, liberator, Murron (#232)
The only people who claim this are Fundie revisionists trying to grasp at straws. Even if true (I Don't read Arabic) it matters not at all because the Senate ratified the English language treaty.
#283. To: Pridie.Nones (#280)
Faith? Isn't that term nothing more than a literal or juxtaposed transition of "belief?" If so, you agree with me. If not, you and I are at great odds.
#284. To: GarySpFC (#281)
we were founded as a nation anchored in Christian principles and teaching. We were founded as a Christian nation and we were blessed by God.
#285. To: Pridie.Nones, Pericles (#280)
#286. To: Pridie.Nones (#280)
#287. To: Pridie.Nones (#280)
#288. To: Pericles (#259)
#289. To: All (#281)
#290. To: GarySpFC (#283)
The Christian faith is an action or a readiness to act based on the confidence one has is the object of their belief. Basically, faith is a verb.
#291. To: Pericles (#260)
Why did Rush Limbaugh defend Joseph Kony and Lord's Resistance Army (+video)?
#292. To: All (#281)
#293. To: Pridie.Nones (#280)
#294. To: Pridie.Nones (#277)
#295. To: All (#281)
#296. To: Pridie.Nones (#280)
#297. To: Pridie.Nones (#290)
A "verb" based on a belief. Thank you for clarifying the detail that I have been suggesting all along this thread.
#298. To: Pridie.Nones (#290)
A "verb" based on a belief. Thank you for clarifying the detail that I have been suggesting all along this thread.
#299. To: Pericles, D 'n R globalist swine, SOSO, Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Pridie.Nones, Deckard, CZ82, GarySpFC, rlk, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#259)
KKK like demagoguery
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#300. To: Pridie.Nones, GarySpFC (#280)
Faith? Isn't that term nothing more than a literal or juxtaposed transition of "belief?" If so, you agree with me. If not, you and I are at great odds.
#301. To: redleghunter, Pridie.Nones (#294)
The majority of the founders were not deists. That's a leftist lie.
#302. To: Pridie.Nones (#273)
God is a mystery. The creation of all about us is a mystery. There is not much more than that perspective at this time in mankind's quest for knowledge to understand himself and the world around himself.
#303. To: Pericles (#232)
"...Fundie revisionists trying to grasp at straws."
#304. To: redleghunter, GarySpFc, Murron (#282)
(Edited)
[John] Adams would be one of the last people to declare the USA did not hail from Christian roots. He was clear on this matter:
#305. To: redleghunter (#282)
#306. To: Pericles, Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Pridie.Nones, Deckard, CZ82, GarySpFC, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#259)
""I ask again, what Muslim agenda has Obama enacted in the USA?" The same agenda he has to destroy the white U.S. middle class.
#307. To: GarySpFC, Pridie.Nones (#285)
The Hand of providence
#308. To: sneakypete (#288)
No,it is an actual fact. Basically,thanks to blacks being placed in the Dim Plantation after 1964 there are virtually no middle-class blacks left in this country that don't have AA jobs in government or corporations with government ties,so that leaves the whites. Which includes Jews as well as some His and Her Panics.
#309. To: Liberator (#303)
Aren't you one of two posters on this thread requiring "proof" that Barry 0dinga has Muslified the USA??
#310. To: Pericles (#309)
Where is it?
#311. To: Vicomte13 (#305)
Forgive me for not caring what the Founders thought. Nobody cares what the politicians of a hundred years later when THEY bound the nation too. Americans only obey old laws and edicts that they find are beneficial. They ignore everything else.
#312. To: Vicomte13, redleghunter, GarySpFC, Pridie.Nones (#305)
My problem with all of the agina about a treaty concluded in the 1790s and the early 1800's is this: does it matter?
#313. To: GarySpFC (#275)
Pantheism identifies the universe with God, but their God is "not a personal being", who involves Himself in the affairs of men. Deism admits there is a personal being, however he no longer has a relationship with man. Both are forms of atheism, and especially the former.
#314. To: Liberator (#310)
Where is it?
#315. To: Pericles (#312)
If this is a Christian country where is the cross on the flag like in the UK? The UK's flag has 3 Crosses on it (The Cross of St. Andrew, The Cross of St George, and The Cross of St. Patrick) and the USA's has 50 pentagrams.
#316. To: Pericles (#307)
The Hand of providence
#317. To: Vicomte13, GarySpFC (#313)
He will be. Then the Big Crunch will happen, and the universe will be born anew, imprinted with the commandments of the Once and Future God.
#318. To: Pericles (#309)
(Edited)
What has become more Islamic about the USA since 0bama became president?
#319. To: GarySpFC (#316)
#320. To: Liberator (#318)
DUH. That you even question the obvious Islamic influence of the US gubmint and projection of a pro-Muslim agenda and policy is the very definition of cognitive dissonance. The term "Islamic Terrorism" is not to be uttered. 0dinga's admin, 0dinga's State Dept, his and cabinet are crawling with Muzz-Symps. From Jarret to Brennan. There are countless others. Your hatred of America has lobotomized your brain.
#321. To: Pericles (#314)
I see America becoming more secular not more religious.
#322. To: Pericles (#320)
(Edited)
In other words you slandered people because they have Muslim names and maybe they don't like Israel.
#323. To: GarySpFC (#311)
So the Constitution as written by the Founding Fathers means something different to you than what they had in mind?
#324. To: Pericles (#317)
Physicists now think the big crunch won't happen - we are in an ever expanding universe that will eventually fly apart in all directions and experience a heat death. The universe will not snap back and rexplode and renew itself.
#325. To: Vicomte13, GarySpFC (#323)
(Edited)
The Constitution as written was so dramatically altered by the post-Civil War amendments that it is, in effect, a new Constitution that just carries the window-dressing of the old.
#326. To: Pericles (#237)
I am still waiting for evidence Obama made America more Islamic. All I get is Obama hired Arabs in govt.
#327. To: rlk (#326)
(Edited)
That might make a sane mind suspicious. Incidently I noticed you switched terms and substituted Arab for islamic to obscure your opponent's arguments while making your's seem more acceptable.
#328. To: Pericles (#325)
Spoken like a Frenchman! I doubt any Anglo will admit the reality, the USA has had several constitutions - while pretending they still live under their original one. Americans don't even acknowledge the presidents under the Articles Of Confederation except in special circumstances. It's as if the education myth industry does not want to obscure the myth that George Washington was the first president.
#329. To: Vicomte13 (#239)
There is one variable: as I was on my back, paralyzed, my nose filling up with water, I asked: "Please".
#330. To: rlk (#329)
I don't believe your neck was really broken. It's a frightened little kid's reaction to getting knocked in the head. Now you're trying to make a heroic and authoritative lifetime career out of a passing hallucination produced by a bumped head. Grow up!
#331. To: Liberator (#301)
Was there actually someone on this thread who claimed the majority of Founders were Deists?
#332. To: Vicomte13 (#330)
(Edited)
I don't believe your neck was really broken. It's a frightened little kid's reaction to getting knocked in the head. Now you're trying to make a heroic and authoritative lifetime career out of a passing hallucination produced by a bumped head. Grow up!
#333. To: Pericles (#308)
Are you a grand kegel?
#334. To: SOSO (#306)
I gave you nine points and all you can muster is a BS feeble response to just one? Way to go, Sparky, you sure are a persuasive devil.
#335. To: Pericles, GarySpFc, liberator, Destro, SOSO, Bucky, A K A Stone (#312)
It shows that whatever the faith the Founders had at home in private - they were animated by other ideologies for the public. I actually point out the Treaty Of Tripoli to show America is and has always been an anti-Christ country founded on anti-Christ principals of Luciferian rebellion and Free Masononry inspired ecumenism.
#336. To: redleghunter, ..., Bucky, A K A Stone, Pridie.Nones (#335)
I am leaning towards "Bucky" fight now...
http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? ArtNum=37682&Disp=272#C264.
#337. To: Gatlin (#336)
#338. To: redleghunter (#337)
(Edited)
BTW: Yukon unmasked him first.
#339. To: redleghunter (#331)
My original comment was it is a leftist, secular atheist myth the founders were deists.
#340. To: Gatlin (#338)
(Edited)
BTW: Yukon unmasked him first.
#341. To: Liberator (#340)
BTW2 -- could you please toss my LF newspaper on the front porch? Thanks -- here's a nickel.
#342. To: Vicomte13 (#313)
My pantheism was not an error. It was mostly True. But it was incomplete. The error in it was the one that Pridie.Nones makes: seeing luck, the randomness of entropy, where there is in fact conscious will. THAT is the grand difference.
#343. To: Pericles (#319)
One of the legends or myths of Valley Forge is that Washington prayed for his country here. We do not say that he did not pray at Valley Forge, there simply is an open question as to how he did so and if he actually was witnessed in prayer.
#344. To: Pericles (#234)
" Kony is not a Muslim. "
#345. To: Vicomte13 (#323)
Truth is, the Constitution has written by the Founding Fathers stopped meaning anything in 1861. Now it's just like an old family crest. One wears it with pride and it shows the history, but the actual Constitution is what is really DONE, and the Founders' Constitution was set aside when it failed to address the evil of slavery.
#346. To: Pridie.Nones, Vicomte13, All (#242)
(Edited)
#230-Pridie.Nones "It is impressive to view these fragmented systems because at the end of the day, there is no real god; there are only beliefs about a REAL GOD". -Pridie.Nones
#347. To: GarySpFC (#345)
The truth is you believe in a living Constitution, whereas I believe in a written one. Yes, errors were made in the past and in the present, but the Constitution is still a written document, with the shortcomings of a corrupt court translating it. I do not believe in relativism.
#348. To: rlk (#332)
I believe you were embraced by hysteria and insanity.
#349. To: Murron (#346)
Yes, VIRGINIA/Pridie.Nones, there is a God. He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! How dreary would be the world if there were no God. It would be as dreary as if there were no VIRGINIAS/Pridie.Nones . There would be no childlike faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished.
#350. To: redleghunter (#349)
#351. To: Murron (#346)
Yes, VIRGINIA/Pridie.Nones, there is a God.
#352. To: GarySpFC (#265)
That's Pantheism, which is just another form of atheism.
In reality your god manifests himself in a mirror.
#353. To: Vicomte13 (#266)
I'm a Catholic because it's TRUE.
#354. To: GarySpFC (#268)
Pridie.Nones: there is no real god; there are only beliefs about a REAL GOD.
GarySpFC: Prove it!
Quite frankly if there is no God it follows good and evil are only relative terms.
If there is no God, then a man shouldn't care if his mother is chased down the street like a bitch in heat by a pack of men or dogs. You really have no basis whatsoever for your morality.
#355. To: GarySpFC, Pericles (#285)
"The Hand of providence has been so conspicuous in all this, that he must be worse than an infidel that lacks faith, and more than wicked, that has not gratitude enough to acknowledge his obligations." George Washington's letter of August 20, 1778 to Brig. General Thomas Nelson
#356. To: Liberator (#302)
But...Hasn't man's quest for knowledge and understanding included satisfying his innate spiritual and emotional hunger for understanding and communicating with God?
To accept God as nothing more than a mere "mystery," one would have to ignore how God assured man of the genesis of the universe, the geneology of man and God in the flesh, life's instructions to man on wisdom, love, and purpose. One would also have to dismiss the 300 or more fulfilled prophecies of Jesus Christ, as well as the Gospel and...The End Game. It's all there in the Good Book. We can't play dumb with God, son.
Sure, many things about God will remain a "mystery," but what matters isn't.
#357. To: Pridie.Nones (#351)
Curious comment that you posted. Your comment seems to suggest I stated something to the effect: there is no god. Nope, there is a god based on my opinion;
#358. To: Murron (#357)
#359. To: Pridie.Nones (#358)
I described "belief systems" in a god or a REAL GOD. I suppose you are confused? What is complicated about my choice of terms to elicit a concept.
#360. To: Murron (#359)
My time is limited, sorry.
#361. To: Pridie.Nones (#353)
Were you an altar boy?
#362. To: Pridie.Nones (#360)
OK, to use an age-old Kentuckian euphemism: "let's get to brass tax." God is not about religion. Religion is about God. Does that help clarify my perspective?
#363. To: Pridie.Nones, GarySpFC (#355)
#364. To: Pridie.Nones, Redleghunter, Liberator, ALL (#352)
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology (vol. 1; Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1993), 174–175.
Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology (vol. 1; Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), 319.
Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology (vol. 1; Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), 333–334.
#365. To: Pridie.Nones (#354)
(Edited)
#366. To: Pridie.Nones (#355)
Nowhere within your post is there relevence to Jesus Christ. The founders did not specifically belong to a religion; they belived in a creator, however just not a religion.
#367. To: GarySpFC (#364)
The student of doctrine may well ponder the following utterance which is a normal offspring of pantheistic philosophy: “The belief in a personal living God is the chief foundation and origin of our worm- eaten social state; and further, that so long as mankind shall hang by a single hair to the idea of heaven, there is no happiness to be looked for on earth. Man himself is the religion of futurity. God stands in need of man, but man has no need of God” (cited by Cooke, ibid., p. 186). These revolting assertions are the very creed of atheism and communism, which are clutching the throat of the social interests of the world and which hate the things of God with a perfect hatred.
#368. To: Pericles (#363)
There has been a movement amongst the fundies to fake histroy and plant quotes:
#369. To: GarySpFC (#368)
There has been a movement amongst the fundies to fake histroy and plant quotes: Your site also attacks David Barton, but it fails to mention Barton recently won a major lawsuit for being slandered
#370. To: SOSO (#306)
I gave you nine points and all you can muster is a BS feeble response to just one? Way to go, Sparky, you sure are a persuasive devil.
#371. To: CZ82, Pericles, Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Pridie.Nones, Deckard, GarySpFC, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#370)
#372. To: CZ82, Pericles, Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Deckard, GarySpFC, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#371)
#373. To: GarySpFC (#366)
(Edited)
Your post is dishonest in taking only one quote I posted and making it the foundation for your argument. I made many posts showing the Founding Fathers in referring to religion had Christianity in mind.
#374. To: Pridie.Nones, GarySpFC, CZ82, Pericles, Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Deckard, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#373)
........no Jesus Christ references much less Christianity references.
#375. To: Pridie.Nones (#355)
"Almighty and eternal Lord God, the great Creator of heaven and earth, and the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; look down from heaven in pity and compassion upon me Thy servant, who humbly prorate myself before Thee." George Washington's prayer at Valley Forge
#376. To: Pridie.Nones (#372)
George Carlin
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#377. To: SOSO (#374)
#378. To: Pridie.Nones (#373)
I posted most, if not all of your quotes: no Jesus Christ references much less Christianity references.
#379. To: hondo68 (#376)
He F'd with God, now he's dead. EOM
#380. To: Pridie.Nones, GarySpFC, CZ82, Pericles, Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Deckard, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#374)
........no Jesus Christ references much less Christianity references.
#381. To: SOSO (#380)
#382. To: Pridie.Nones, GarySpFC, CZ82, Pericles, Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Deckard, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#377)
Do you know what you are suggesting?
#383. To: SOSO (#382)
#384. To: SOSO (#382)
(Edited)
#385. To: Pridie.Nones, GarySpFC, CZ82, Pericles, Murron, Gatlin, cranky, Stoner, Liberator, Deckard, rlk, hondo68, Vicomte13, redleghunter, sneakypete (#381)
Adams' notes were not written into the US Consitution or any other document for or about the US.
#386. To: Pridie.Nones (#383)
You have proved nothing more than you don't know what the HELL you are discussing.
#387. To: Pericles (#384)
#388. To: Pericles (#384)
Where is the cross in the American flag? On its symbols? Seals? I see it in European versions.
#389. To: SOSO (#386)
#390. To: Pridie.Nones, redleghunter, vicomted13, GarySpFc, A Pole (#389)
Lets tally the number of "christian religions" for your take on the effort of "Christianity." How many religions are there? Which one is right? How man Bibles? Which one is right?
#391. To: Pridie.Nones (#389)
Lets tally the number of "christian religions" for your take on the effort of "Christianity."
#392. To: Pridie.Nones, SOSO (#389)
Lets tally the number of "christian religions" for your take on the effort of "Christianity." How many religions are there? Which one is right? How man Bibles? Which one is right?
#393. To: Pericles (#392)
Orthodox.
#394. To: Pridie.Nones (#388)
(Edited)
Where is the cross in the American flag? On its symbols? Seals? I see it in European versions.
#395. To: A K A Stone (#393)
Orthodox.
#396. To: Pridie.Nones (#372)
#397. To: Pridie.Nones, GarySpFc, BobCeleste, SOSO, CZ82, liberator, Destro, Bucky, A K A Stone (#373)
I posted most, if not all of your quotes: no Jesus Christ references much less Christianity references.
#398. To: Pridie.Nones, GarySpFc, BobCeleste, SOSO, CZ82, liberator, Destro, Bucky, A K A Stone (#388)
Psst ... some of these devout "christians" on this thread do not understand the historical times about the founders; it was a time of enlightenment not necessarily anchored in religious beliefs.
#399. To: SOSO (#385)
Only a total dolt can continue to deny that each of these men were profundly influenced by their respective understanding of Jesus and Christianty, even if only on a philosophical level.
#400. To: redleghunter, Pridie.Nones (#396)
Take me off your blasphemy ping list. Thanks.
#401. To: Pridie.Nones (#389)
#402. To: Pridie.Nones (#389)
#403. To: Pridie.Nones (#389)
#404. To: Pridie.Nones (#389)
#405. To: Pridie.Nones (#389)
#406. To: Pridie.Nones (#389)
#407. To: Pridie.Nones (#389)
#408. To: Pridie.Nones (#389)
#409. To: Pridie.Nones (#389)
#410. To: Pridie.Nones (#389)
#411. To: Pericles (#395)
"you are on the outside and will not be saved unless you join our group."
#412. To: A K A Stone (#411)
#413. To: Pericles (#395)
While Orthodoxy does believe that ultimately to be saved means being in the Church and those outside the Church will not be saved, that issue is not fully decided until judgment day.
#414. To: GarySpFC (#413)
Are members of the Orthodox Church saved simply because it's the oldest? I
#415. To: Pericles (#395)
We readily recognize that anyone inside or outside the Church at any particular point in time can be in the currents of salvation or not participating in it. Thus, there is no ability to point to any one person either inside or outside the visible Church and say they are saved or not saved. Whether any one particular person is going to make it to heaven we leave in God's hands. We cannot know the heart of the person, much less the disposition of God towards a particular individual short of God revealing that to us.
#416. To: sneakypete (#402)
Did you know that 52 of the 55 signers of "The Declaration of Independence" were orthodox, deeply committed, Christians?
#417. To: Pericles (#414)
15 I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other!
16 So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth.
17 You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.
18 I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see.
19 Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest, and repent.
20 Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.
21 To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne. 22 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”
#418. To: SOSO (#416)
Did you know that 52 of the 55 signers of "The Declaration of Independence" were orthodox, deeply committed, Christians?
#419. To: sneakypete (#418)
I have no doubt a few were devout believers,but the vast majority were "Sunday Morning social Christians".
#420. To: SOSO (#419)
Any fair minded study of the FF and the drafting of the Consitution leds to ther conclsuion that the document was heavily influenced by Christian mores and philosophy.
#421. To: sneakypete (#420)
Not that there is anything wrong with adopting what works
#422. To: Biff Tannen (#421)
I wonder how much of the founders talk of God was nothing more than politicians pandering to the masses.
#423. To: sneakypete (#422)
#424. To: sneakypete, redleghunter (#399)
#425. To: sneakypete (#422)
#426. To: Vicomte13 (#424)
(Edited)
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napoleon Bonaparte
#427. To: GarySpFC (#425)
(Edited)
I think the system of morals and His religion as He left them to us,
#428. To: Vicomte13 (#424)
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." - Napoleon Bonaparte
#429. To: GarySpFC (#425)
As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals and His religion as He left them to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see.29
#430. To: sneakypete (#429)
#431. To: GarySpFC (#430)
I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?
#432. To: Pericles (#414)
It is hard for Protestants to get this but (and this is using my terminology alone) Orthodoxy considers itself to be a boat sailing on the rivier of Jesus. It feels the boat is the best constructed (because it came from the source itself) to navigate the river. Other boats are floating on it too but have a rough time - hit shoals, etc. That does not mean these poorly crafted boats won't make it to the end of the journey upriver.
#433. To: GarySpFC (#432)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]