Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 12/27/2003 9:20:22 PM EDT
The other day a co worker and I got into a heated debate over whether or not (some of) our laws of this great land were derived from the 10 commandments. He refused to agree that they did. Do any of you know of any websites where this topic can be found? If so please post them on this thread.

Thanks alot,

GLX1747

Fighting one liberal at a time in Colorado.

Link Posted: 12/27/2003 9:36:16 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/27/2003 10:05:09 PM EDT
He says that our laws are not based from religeous laws at all, and this is why we broke away from England. I am looking for someone with a website that has Thomas Jefferson relating some of our laws to that of the 10 commandments. This guy is anti religion all the way. I'm not a bible thumper, but I am a believer.
Link Posted: 12/27/2003 10:13:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/27/2003 10:29:01 PM EDT by Lockedon]
I believe there are only three Laws that remotely resemble the Ten Commandments. [b]But just because they resemble the commandments, does NOT mean they were derived from them.[/b] Thou shalt not steal, murder or bear false witness against your neighbor are pretty common sense rules. And argument SOME Christians will ALWAYS bring up is that this was a Christian nation, founded by Christians. While the latter may be true about some individual members of our forefathers, religious freedom, and separation of church and state was one of the biggest contributors to the revolutionary war. (that and a tax on our morning beverage [;)])
Link Posted: 12/27/2003 10:15:46 PM EDT
Look in your state statutes for felonies. For example, in Fla, moving survey stakes is a felony. Want to guess why? Because the Bible says moving boundary markers is punishable by death. If you look hard enough, you'll be amazed how much of our law is Biblical in origin.
Link Posted: 12/27/2003 11:49:17 PM EDT
U.S. law is based on English common law. Only silly old men like Old Paniless /Old Toothless think it was based on the 10 commandments. If teh FF were fleeing 500+ years of oppression by the church, why would they look to the church for guidance setting the laws?? They were more preactical then emotional.
Link Posted: 12/28/2003 12:02:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Only_Hits_Count: U.S. law is based on English common law. Only silly old men like Old Paniless /Old Toothless think it was based on the 10 commandments. If teh FF were fleeing 500+ years of oppression by the church, why would they look to the church for guidance setting the laws?? They were more preactical then emotional.
View Quote
Much of that law is, in a broader sense, based on tradition and custom, which itself is based on the fundamental commandments found in the Bible.
Link Posted: 12/28/2003 12:31:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/28/2003 12:36:02 AM EDT by Only_Hits_Count]
Originally Posted By mattja:
Originally Posted By Only_Hits_Count: U.S. law is based on English common law. Only silly old men like Old Paniless /Old Toothless think it was based on the 10 commandments. If teh FF were fleeing 500+ years of oppression by the church, why would they look to the church for guidance setting the laws?? They were more preactical then emotional.
View Quote
Much of that law is, in a broader sense, based on tradition and custom, which itself is based on the fundamental commandments found in the Bible.
View Quote
So the christians invented: do not kill, do not steal and hands off thine neighbors ass??? In a 'broader sense' the are common sense rules seemingly inherent to most civilized people of european descent. Ooops- and and of course-- I seem to remember a contribution or two from the romans.
Link Posted: 12/28/2003 1:21:44 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Only_Hits_Count: So the christians invented: do not kill, do not steal and hands off thine neighbors ass???
View Quote
Those laws existed before Christianity.
In a 'broader sense' the are common sense rules seemingly inherent to most civilized people of european descent.
View Quote
Law is not usually inherent, but I think it's safe to agree most civilizations and cultures saw the benefit of punishing those who murder.
Ooops- and and of course-- I seem to remember a contribution or two from the romans.
View Quote
That could be true.
Link Posted: 12/28/2003 7:55:13 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 4:32:48 AM EDT
I would take God's Ten Commandments in lue of the U.S Govt's 20,000 gun laws anyday. I can see why the U.S. Govt would want to take them down. Gods laws are more steamlined and more efficient and have no grey area's. Stupid people don't run Gods arena either. Gods Cool.
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 5:08:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/29/2003 5:10:35 AM EDT by TomJefferson]
Originally Posted By mattja:
Originally Posted By Only_Hits_Count: So the christians invented: do not kill, do not steal and hands off thine neighbors ass???
View Quote
Those laws existed before Christianity.
In a 'broader sense' the are common sense rules seemingly inherent to most civilized people of european descent.
View Quote
Law is not usually inherent, but I think it's safe to agree most civilizations and cultures saw the benefit of punishing those who murder.
Ooops- and and of course-- I seem to remember a contribution or two from the romans.
View Quote
That could be true.
View Quote
Minor correction, The Ten Commandments existed way before Christianity too. The Ten Commandments is not the sole property of Christians. Although what is right and what is wrong pre-dates the Ten Commandments, the Ten Commandments is considered one of the earliest records of written law. It also pre-dates Rome. Though our federal government was founded by Christians, it's founders did not incorporate the Ten Commandments into the constitution. These you will find in your state laws which I believe you will find original laws heavy in Biblical origin. Many have been repealed over the years such as sexual conduct laws. Like Steyr said, the problem is both or you are right to some extent. Tj
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 5:55:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/29/2003 6:14:43 AM EDT by DriftPunch]
It's really a stupid argument. There have always been rules associated with any society. The laws specific to order will inevitably look similar in any culture in any time. That many of our 'order' laws appear Christian shouldn't suprise anyone, as most Americans are Christian and identify these laws as secular offspring of 'Christian behavior'. However, most of these laws would not seem foriegn to an immigrant from SE Asia that has had zero influence from Christanity. Keep in mind that Greeks and Romans influenced us greatly as well. The reason the root of these influences is easily overlooked is that, unlike Christianity, these societies are extinct.
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 6:02:15 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/29/2003 6:03:18 AM EDT by Old_Painless]
Originally Posted By Only_Hits_Count: U.S. law is based on English common law. Only silly old men like Old Paniless /Old Toothless think it was based on the 10 commandments. If teh FF were fleeing 500+ years of oppression by the church, why would they look to the church for guidance setting the laws?? They were more preactical then emotional.
View Quote
"silly old men"? "Old Toothless"? You know, Only_Hits_Count, if I were so overwhelmed by hatred that I stayed up till 3:49am to call people names that I only know from the internet, I'd be worried about my mental health. You and I have only had debates on this forum. I don't even know you and certainly don't bear you any ill will. I believe that it is possible to disagree with folks without getting mad about it. This is called the General Discussion Forum. That's what we do here. We discuss things. I bet if we met at the range, we'd have a great time shooting together. There is no need to get all upset and mad about disagreements.
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 7:17:41 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 7:31:19 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 7:36:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/29/2003 7:42:29 AM EDT by Zaphod]
Originally Posted By Lockedon: Thou shalt not steal, murder or bear false witness against your neighbor are pretty common sense rules.
View Quote
Are they? Hmmmmm.....Seems like "Survival of the Fittest" trumps them, eh? No, they are common-sense only to a reasonably civilized people, and civilized people recognize the frailty of establishing such laws simply because "everyone agrees to them". Using that logic, if rape were made legal, then it would be right. No, some standards are absolute, and they DON'T come from Man, despite his desperate desire to believe so.
And argument SOME Christians will ALWAYS bring up is that this was a Christian nation, founded by Christians. While the latter may be true about some individual members of our forefathers,
View Quote
There is data indicating that over 98% of the people living in the Colonies were Christian of one stripe or another (Protestant, Catholic). The remainder were mostly Jewish. As such, over 99% of those "some" were followers of the God of Abraham and therefore, the original 10 Commandments.
religious freedom, and separation of church and state was one of the biggest contributors to the revolutionary war. (that and a tax on our morning beverage [;)])
View Quote
Religious freedom, yes. Freedom from religion an absolute and unqualified NO. The Pilgrims wanted to practice their Christianity without the C of E throwing them in prison for it. As for separation of Church and State being a primary reason for the Revolution, I invite you to READ the Declaration of Independence (you know, that scrap of paper that lit the whole thing off). See how many times "God", "Divine Providence", etc. are mentioned. No, the colonies revolted because the government (Britain) was trampling upon God-given rights, NOT because they wanted God and State seperate. Edited to fix quotes and to add: The 10 Commandments contain 297 words. The Bill of Rights is stated in 463 words. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address contains 266 words. A recent federal directive to regulate the price of cabbage contains 26,911 words. Think about it...
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 7:52:35 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Only_Hits_Count: U.S. law is based on English common law. Only silly old men like Old Paniless /Old Toothless think it was based on the 10 commandments. If teh FF were fleeing 500+ years of oppression by the church, why would they look to the church for guidance setting the laws?? They were more preactical then emotional.
View Quote
Yes, they were... From George Washington, the "Father", of our Country... [b]"The thing that separates the American Christian from every other person on earth is the fact that he would rather die on his feet, than live on his knees!" George Washington's personal prayer book, consisting of 24 pages in his field notebook, written in his own handwriting, reveal the depth of his character: "SUNDAY MORNING....Almighty God, and most merciful Father, who didst command the children of Israel to offer a daily sacrifice to Thee, that thereby they might glorify and praise Thee for Thy protection both night and day, receive O Lord, my morning sacrifice which I now offer up to thee; "I yield Thee humble and hearty thanks, that Thou hast preserved me from the dangers of the night past and brought me to the Light of this day, and the comfort thereof, a day which is consecrated to Thine own service and for Thine own honour. "Let my heart therefore gracious God be so affected with the glory and majesty of it, that I may not do mine own works but wait on Thee, and discharge those weighty duties Thou required of me: and since Thou art a God of pure eyes, and will be sanctified in all who draw nearer to Thee, who dost not regard the sacrifice of fools, nor hear sinners who tread in Thy courts, pardon I beseech Thee, my sins, remove them from Thy presence, as far as the east is from the west, and accept of me for the merits of Thy son Jesus Christ, that when I come into Thy temple and compass Thine altar, my prayer may come before Thee as incense, and as I desire Thou wouldst hear me calling upon Thee in my prayers, so give me peace to hear the calling on me in Thy word, that it may be wisdom, righteousness, reconciliation and peace to the saving of my soul in the day ofthe Lord Jesus. "Grant that I may hear it with reverence, receive it with meekness, mingle it with faith, and that it may accomplish in me gracious God, the good work for which Thou hast sent it. "Bless my family, kindred, friends and country, be our God and guide this day and forever for His sake, who lay down in the grave and arose again for us, Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen." "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible." [/b] Peddle your mis-conceptions, somewhere else...[rolleyes]
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 8:09:19 AM EDT
Antidisestablishmentarianism.
View Quote
was'nt that a line from 'black adder'- ill be back before you can say Antidisestablishmentarianism. at which the prince regent keeps trying to say it. till finally he says 3 days later "a distinctly minty mounted mannerism"
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 8:55:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/29/2003 8:56:36 AM EDT by DriftPunch]
Originally Posted By Zaphod: No, some standards are absolute, and they DON'T come from Man, despite his desperate desire to believe so.
View Quote
Man actually does create most of the laws he lives under. The only exceptions are the physical rules of the universe which he continues to discover, not create. All societies are hierarchial and are governed by influence in one fashion or another. In monarcharies, dictatorships, or oligarchies those occupying the highest rung(s) make the law, regardless of credibility or the 'consent of the governed'. Influence is equal to societal position in these cases. In other government types, influence is harder to locate, but the hierarchy of influence is still present. An example of this in a modern society is the 'media' and its power. The 'church' is another good example. The aincents also created law under the flag of their gods will. They believed that they were enacting the will of the gods in their legislation too. The only difference between your vision of 'absolute' and theirs, is that they didn't believe in your god, thus in their case, their law sprung from man through an incorrect vision of god. My point is that your position is self affirming. It requires faith, and those who have such faith, cannot question the righteousness of such law. It permanently connects a societies laws to their religion. Thus the supposed divine influence is more of an enforcement tool, than a mandate from a deity. Not only does it strike fear into potential law breakers, but it eliminates sympathy for their punishment. I mean, why not burn a heretic? But I digress...
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 8:57:16 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/29/2003 9:28:00 AM EDT by HardShell]
[b]liberty86:[/b] Thanks for posting that GW prayer above! If I have ever seen it before I have long-since forgotten it - shame on me... edited to add: Great link below, too - already added to my "Favorites." Thanks again!
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 9:06:47 AM EDT
Originally Posted By HardShell: [b]liberty86:[/b] Thanks for posting that GW prayer above! If I have ever seen it before I have long-since forgotten it - shame on me...
View Quote
Thanks HS, if ya like that, you'll love this... [url=http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/founding.html]More!![/url]
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 9:19:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By t-stox:
Antidisestablishmentarianism.
View Quote
was'nt that a line from 'black adder'- ill be back before you can say Antidisestablishmentarianism. at which the prince regent keeps trying to say it. till finally he says 3 days later "a distinctly minty mounted mannerism"
View Quote
"Ah, yes. It was pispeptic, frasmodic, even compunctious to cause you such paricombobulation..." I love that show! [rofl2]
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 9:22:00 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DriftPunch: My point is that your position is self affirming. It requires faith, and those who have such faith, cannot question the righteousness of such law.
View Quote
Not "cannot". "Do not".
It permanently connects a societies laws to their religion. Thus the supposed divine influence is more of an enforcement tool, than a mandate from a deity.
View Quote
And you have PROOF of this?
Not only does it strike fear into potential law breakers, but it eliminates sympathy for their punishment. I mean, why not burn a heretic?
View Quote
Not in Christianity, my friend. (And yes, I know all about the burning of heretics by Christians. They were wrong.)
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 9:24:58 AM EDT
Originally Posted By liberty86: Thanks HS, if ya like that, you'll love this... [url=http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/founding.html]More!![/url]
View Quote
October 3, 1789, National Day of Thanksgiving "Whereas 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 favor.... "Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the twenty-sixth day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these United States... "that we then may all unite unto him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection ofthe people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; "for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted; for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed.... "And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions...to promote the knowledge and practice of the true religion and virtue.... Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3rd of October, A.D. 1789"
View Quote
Obviously there was no ACLU around back in 1789... [rolleyes] My, my, my.....how far we have fallen... [:(]
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 9:42:27 AM EDT
First, the only groups who left England for religeous reasons were very theocratic in themselves... Look up what was considered 'criminal' by the Puritains. Second, most of western law has it's roots in a mixture of the 10 Commandments & Roman law, since at one time Rome ruled basically alll of Europe, and the modern states grew out of the wreckage of the ancient empire... As for the 10, they (and the other laws that surrounded them) are the first known example (in the european-asian area) of a written and equitable legal system (first written law goes to 'Hamaurabbi's Code', but it was far from equitable - a rich man paid a fine for murder, a poor man paid with his life. In Israelite law, they both were to be stoned). Prohibitions on murder, theft, and adultry are all on the books in the USA today... So is capital punishment for murder...
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 11:24:58 AM EDT
I usually just link people up with this article when they try to feed me that line of BS. http://humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=2441 While not specific it's hard to believe that Moses's statue would be all over DC if it weren't the case. bosifus
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 11:30:42 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Old_Painless:
Originally Posted By Only_Hits_Count: U.S. law is based on English common law. Only silly old men like Old Paniless /Old Toothless think it was based on the 10 commandments. If teh FF were fleeing 500+ years of oppression by the church, why would they look to the church for guidance setting the laws?? They were more preactical then emotional.
View Quote
"silly old men"? "Old Toothless"? You know, Only_Hits_Count, if I were so overwhelmed by hatred that I stayed up till 3:49am to call people names that I only know from the internet, I'd be worried about my mental health. You and I have only had debates on this forum. I don't even know you and certainly don't bear you any ill will. I believe that it is possible to disagree with folks without getting mad about it. This is called the General Discussion Forum. That's what we do here. We discuss things. I bet if we met at the range, we'd have a great time shooting together. There is no need to get all upset and mad about disagreements.
View Quote
Hiya Painless- I'll grant you that my initial comments toward you in this thread were possibly less then polite. I apologize. I was going to edit the post, but I try to stand by what I say, and I didn't want 'sneak back' and retract something after i said it. The 'attitude' came from a comment you made previously on this same subject. I had again stated that U.S. law was based on english common law, and you made a remark about me knowing very little about both law and christmas. The pagan celbrations existed for 10000 years before the old testament was written. All the trapping are PAGAN. You don’t have to like it- but you can’t deny it. Any biblical evidence that shows he was born in December?? I admit I have little patience for someone that only quotes scripture in a discussion on religious/political matters. If what you are saying is true- I would assume you could find another source or two to corroborate your view. I find blind devotion to be a less then desirable trait. Especially in an LEO. My pastor calls him "honest thomas"... you may have heard him referred to as doubting thomas. You seem intimidated by any opinion that differs from your view. Yet all you can do is cling to your technique of spouting obtuse verses. I was a christian for a long time. Yet when I really started to examine the faith and the teachings, I was appalled at the hypocrisy and mistruths and outright lies presented by the church(es) and swallowed by the gullible public. I believe that modern christianity is nothing more then another political system, used and twisted to support the will of MEN. Which begs the question: is that the will of god? Or does he just tolerate it?? Most people are 'convenient christians' - they go to church- maybe weekly, maybe twice a year. They obliviously break commandment left and right without a second thought. You only answers are 'god said so' and 'because it's in the bible, and god wrote the bible' or a slight variation thereof. Christian beliefs run counter to the laws of nature in many instances-- that whole brotherhood/unity/love thy enemy/ meek will inherit the earth... etc will bite you in the ass- as it already has. This nation will dissolve in the next 50 years or so. To much ‘diversity’, and ‘understanding’. YMMV
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 11:36:36 AM EDT
Has anyone read any books published by the Sovereign Press?
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 11:40:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/29/2003 11:56:01 AM EDT by StariVojnik]
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: Some of the laws from all countries come from the 10 commandments since they are some of the oldest examples of laws to govern men. It is not surprising how common "Thou shalt not kill" is. But basically only 2 (and posssibly 3) of the commandments are US laws so he kinda has a point.
View Quote
If one were to look further back, one would find that before the 10 Commandments, we could find the [b]Egyptian 42 negative confessions[/b]. I have not committed sins against men. I have not opposed my family and kinsfolk. I have not acted fraudulently in the Seat of Truth. I have not known men who were of no account. I have not wrought evil. I have not made it to be the first [consideration daily that unnecessary] work should be done for me. I have not brought forward my name for dignities. I have not [attempted] to direct servants. [1] [I have not belittled God]. I have not defrauded the humble man of his property. I have not done what the gods abominate. [b]I have not vilified a slave to his master.[/b] (bear false witness) I have not inflicted pain. I have not caused anyone to go hungry. I have not made any man to weep. [b]I have not committed murder.[/b] I have not given the order for murder to be committed. I have not caused calamities to befall men and women. I have not plundered the offerings in the temples. I have not defrauded the gods of their cake-offerings. I have not carried off the fenkhu cakes [offered to] the Spirits. I have not committed fornication. I have not masturbated [in the sanctuaries of the god of my city]. [b]I have not diminished from the bushel.[/b] (stealing) I have not filched [land from my neighbour's estate and] added it to my own acre. I have not encroached upon the fields [of others]. [b]I have not added to the weights of the scales.[/b] (fraud) I have not depressed the pointer of the balance. I have not carried away the milk from the mouths of children. I have not driven the cattle away from their pastures. I have not snared the geese in the goose-pens of the gods. [b]I have not caught fish with bait made of the bodies of the same kind of fish.[/b] (Is this an early form of Mad Cow disease but for fish?) I have not stopped water when it should flow. I have not made a cutting in a canal of running water. I have not extinguished a fire when it should burn. I have not violated the times [of offering] the chosen meat offerings. I have not driven away the cattle on the estates of the gods. I have not turned back the god at his appearances.
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 11:50:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Only_Hits_Count: The pagan celbrations existed for 10000 years before the old testament was written. All the trapping are PAGAN. You don’t have to like it- but you can’t deny it. Any biblical evidence that shows he was born in December??
View Quote
Does it matter what month the Lord was born in? We choose to celebrate in December. Archeological data indicates it was more likely August. So what? Does it make ANY difference in the great scheme of things? Does it in ANY way detract from the teachings of Christ, or the sacrifice He made for all of us? Is THAT the best you can do to debunk Christianity?
I admit I have little patience for someone that only quotes scripture in a discussion on religious/political matters.
View Quote
You obviously don't read very well. O_P is quite eloquent in the vernacular as well as the Scriptures. You would do well to read his posts carefully.
If what you are saying is true- I would assume you could find another source or two to corroborate your view.
View Quote
Perhaps YOU need to come up with a few. Correlation can be very dangerous, you know. Do you know that 100% of mass murderers consumed bread within 1 month of commiting their crimes?
I find blind devotion to be a less then desirable trait. Especially in an LEO.
View Quote
I, on the other hand, find it a very admirable trait. I guess if the RKBA is removed from the Constitution, you will prefer a mindless drone of a cop enforcing it to a person who believes that the right descends from a higher power?
My pastor calls him "honest thomas"... you may have heard him referred to as doubting thomas.
View Quote
Doubt is one thing. You are expressing disdain. BIG difference.
You seem intimidated by any opinion that differs from your view. Yet all you can do is cling to your technique of spouting obtuse verses.
View Quote
Obtuse? Tell me, what makes you the authority to make such a statement? Seems to me that YOU are intimidated by any opinion based in faith. Could it be because you don't have any, and therefore cannot understand?
I was a christian for a long time. Yet when I really started to examine the faith and the teachings, I was appalled at the hypocrisy and mistruths and outright lies presented by the church(es) and swallowed by the gullible public.
View Quote
Well, there's your problem. The hypocrisy and mistruths and outright lies presented by the church(es) have little to do with the FAITH they are supposed to be representing. Tell me, when Klinton signed the AWB, did you lose your belief in the RKBA, or were you enraged at KLINTON?
I believe that modern christianity is nothing more then another political system, used and twisted to support the will of MEN.
View Quote
Please provide data that establishes how my being Christian in any way puts me under the control of MEN.
Most people are 'convenient christians' - they go to church- maybe weekly, maybe twice a year. They obliviously break commandment left and right without a second thought. You only answers are 'god said so' and 'because it's in the bible, and god wrote the bible' or a slight variation thereof. Christian beliefs run counter to the laws of nature in many instances-- that whole brotherhood/unity/love thy enemy/ meek will inherit the earth... etc will bite you in the ass- as it already has. This nation will dissolve in the next 50 years or so. To much ‘diversity’, and ‘understanding’. YMMV
View Quote
You mean like you're practicing? Are you actually suggesting that the moral decay and political putrification we see happening daily is actually caused by people having a religious faith? Are you serious?
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 12:11:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/29/2003 12:14:45 PM EDT by Old_Painless]
Originally Posted By Only_Hits_Count: Hiya Painless-
View Quote
Hiya back, OHC.
I'll grant you that my initial comments toward you in this thread were possibly less then polite. I apologize.
View Quote
I accept your gracious apology and offer mine to you.
I was going to edit the post, but I try to stand by what I say, and I didn't want 'sneak back' and retract something after i said it.
View Quote
I know what you mean. I also think it is "unfair" to edit meaning in a post after the fact. I often edit poor grammar and spelling, however. [:D]
The 'attitude' came from a comment you made previously on this same subject. I had again stated that U.S. law was based on english common law, and you made a remark about me knowing very little about both law and christmas.
View Quote
I remember that. I apologize if I insulted you.
The pagan celbrations existed for 10000 years before the old testament was written. All the trapping are PAGAN. You don’t have to like it- but you can’t deny it.
View Quote
Sure I can. The facts are that neither you nor I were around 10,000 years ago, so all we have is history to guide us. And history is often open to debate. It is possible for honest men to have different opinions about the truth regarding history.
Any biblical evidence that shows he was born in December??
View Quote
Absolutely none. In fact, I strongly doubt that He was born in December. But that is the traditional time to celebrate His birth. Your argument is: This was first a pagan holiday season, so Christmas [u]must[/u] be based on the pagan holiday. That is an error. There are 365 days in the year. Any day chosen to celebrate an event will surely conflict with some holiday from some other event. That doesn't mean that they are related. I will agree with you that pagans celebrated winter solace (or whatever) in the December time frame. The fact that Christians chose this same time frame to celebrate Jesus' birth means nothing. I imagine that if we had chosen October to celebrate it, we would be accused of stealing Halloween.
I admit I have little patience for someone that only quotes scripture in a discussion on religious/political matters.
View Quote
Okay, I understand that. But since we are discussing religion, what else would I use but God's revealed Word? (Because that's what I believe the Bible is.) It would be like two guys discussing the rules of football and one saying, "I get so impatient when someone only quotes the Rules of Football when we discuss football matters."
If what you are saying is true- I would assume you could find another source or two to corroborate your view.
View Quote
Again, please look at it from my perspective. If I believe that the Bible is God's instructions for man in religious matters (and I do), then why would I look anywhere else for answers to religious questions.
I find blind devotion to be a less then desirable trait. Especially in an LEO.
View Quote
Actually, I'm a retired LEO. And "blind devotion" to the law was an asset in that business. If I stopped a person for doing 30 mph and said, "I know you were doing 30 mph and it is a 30 mph zone, but I believe I will go outside the law and write you a ticket anyway.", they wouldn't have been very happy. And rightly so. My job was to know the law and apply it fairly. A good LEO knows the law and doesn't try to mis-apply it. A good Christian knows God's Word and doesn't mis-apply it either.
My pastor calls him "honest thomas"... you may have heard him referred to as doubting thomas.
View Quote
You may be surprised to know that I agree with you on this, to some extent. Thomas was indeed a doubter, but not more so than other disciples. He believed in the end.
You seem intimidated by any opinion that differs from your view.
View Quote
I do not mind opinions different than mine. If I did, I surely would not hang around a site like this one. [:D] I actually enjoy the debates. I think it sharpens the mind to have to defend your beliefs. And, believe it or not, I've had my opinions changed on this forum. (But not on religion.)
Yet all you can do is cling to your technique of spouting obtuse verses.
View Quote
I don't know any "obtuse" verses. the only ones I know are from God. [:D]
I was a christian for a long time. Yet when I really started to examine the faith and the teachings, I was appalled at the hypocrisy and mistruths and outright lies presented by the church(es) and swallowed by the gullible public. I believe that modern christianity is nothing more then another political system, used and twisted to support the will of MEN.
View Quote
Again, you might be surprised that I agree with you on much of this. But bad men and bad churches don't change a perfect God. Those that misrepresent Him will have to answer some day.
Which begs the question: is that the will of god? Or does he just tolerate it?? Most people are 'convenient christians' - they go to church- maybe weekly, maybe twice a year. They obliviously break commandment left and right without a second thought. You only answers are 'god said so' and 'because it's in the bible, and god wrote the bible' or a slight variation thereof. Christian beliefs run counter to the laws of nature in many instances-- that whole brotherhood/unity/love thy enemy/ meek will inherit the earth... etc will bite you in the ass- as it already has. This nation will dissolve in the next 50 years or so. To much ‘diversity’, and ‘understanding’. YMMV
View Quote
Well, rather than addressing each of those issues, I will again agree with you that there are many who say that they are Christians, but their lives do not show it. Your comment about "is that the will of god? Or does he just tolerate it??", is the critical one. I believe that God is patient. He is not intimidated by men's unbelief. He even invites us to (pardon the quote) "Come, let us reason together, saith the Lord." One thing for sure. You and I can have a civil debate about these issues without being enemies. If you're ever in east Texas, let's go shooting.
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 12:21:44 PM EDT
Sorry Zaphod- I'm just not up for refuting your various 'points' ;rollseyes: Suffice it to say that I feel most christians take a lot of their beliefs at face value and without question. Most can't debate or discuss said issues without becoming overly emotional. Take for example the Xmas issue. Celebrate it anyway you choode. I just want people to know the origins of the customs. Christians did not invent everything!!! Truth be told- the Jesus following wobbled along for several hundred years befor gaining widespread acceptance (through charity I think- not preachings). Honestly most christians probably shouldn't be celebrating halloween. It's not an 'evil' issue, just traditions steeped in heathen cultures. If you guys want to play pagan for a day- who am I to stop you? I think it was brohawk that said he had changed to a 'purer' form of chrsitian worship. I applaud that type of attitude. That's what it's about for me. (modern) Christianity has been tainted/ruined by men. Turned into just another way to control people.
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 12:32:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/29/2003 12:35:19 PM EDT by DriftPunch]
Originally Posted By Zaphod: Does it matter what month the Lord was born in?
View Quote
Yes, it does. It's an example of little information intersecting with religous politics to become dogma. Thus if one can be made to acknowledge that what they have learned as absolute fact is actually the result papal declaration, and not fact, what else may be untrue? You are correct that it doesn't effect any teaching of Jesus himself, but it effects the belief in the honesty of the machine that developed centuries after his death. Every crack can be a prybar mounting point for someone like myself. If you are someone that cannot think for yourself, I'll have you questioning your very existance in no time off a simple crack like this one.
Are you actually suggesting that the moral decay and political putrification we see happening daily is actually caused by people having a religious faith? Are you serious?
View Quote
There are men of honor in any faith (including none), just like there are those that are contemptable. You'll probably find little correlation between a persons claimed religion, and his contribution to 'decay'. I always find it interesting how people have a stylized vision of the past designed to prop up a current belief. Corruption and Scandal have been with government (and humanity for that matter) forever. What's new is the fact that the powerful can no longer suppress scandal, and the media channels push every single one nationally.
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 12:45:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
Originally Posted By Zaphod: Does it matter what month the Lord was born in?
View Quote
Yes, it does. It's an example of little information intersecting with religous politics to become dogma. Thus if one can be made to acknowledge that what they have learned as absolute fact is actually the result papal declaration, and not fact, what else may be untrue? You are correct that it doesn't effect any teaching of Jesus himself, but it effects the belief in the honesty of the machine that developed centuries after his death.
View Quote
DriftPunch, I guess I don't quite understand your position on this issue. As I told OHC, I have never though that Jesus was actually born on 12-25. As an evangelical Christian, I've never heard even one person say such a thing. Not one. Why is this such a big issue with you? It is a non-issue. No one is saying that Jesus was really born on 12-25. That is merely the day that was chosen to [u]celebrate[/u] His birth.
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 12:48:58 PM EDT
'FF fleeing 500 years of opression by the church' Actually, most of them were businessmen, and most were afilliated with one branch of the Church or another (Anglican (now Episcopal), Calvinist, Catholic, and Lutheran were the big 4, Baptist would come along soon)... US law -> English common law -> Roman law -> Greek (& later Christian, after Constantine decided he couldn't 'beat em', so it was time to 'join em') roots....
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 12:56:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Old_Painless:
Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
Originally Posted By Zaphod: Does it matter what month the Lord was born in?
View Quote
Yes, it does. It's an example of little information intersecting with religous politics to become dogma. Thus if one can be made to acknowledge that what they have learned as absolute fact is actually the result papal declaration, and not fact, what else may be untrue? You are correct that it doesn't effect any teaching of Jesus himself, but it effects the belief in the honesty of the machine that developed centuries after his death.
View Quote
DriftPunch, I guess I don't quite understand your position on this issue. As I told OHC, I have never though that Jesus was actually born on 12-25. As an evangelical Christian, I've never heard even one person say such a thing. Not one. Why is this such a big issue with you? It is a non-issue. No one is saying that Jesus was really born on 12-25. That is merely the day that was chosen to [u]celebrate[/u] His birth.
View Quote
Exactly... Christmas came about in the middle ages, as a celebration designed to remind people that the Church was about Christ (not about all the other stuff it was engaged in). This is why the Greek & East Orthodox denominations celebrate Christmas differently... It's about remembering the event, not being to-the-date accurate... As for the rest, the presence of snow & other modern holicay symbols are the result of 'transferrance': hundreds of years of people celebrating Christmas who had never left their homeland, and everyone assumed that Israel was just like England/France/Germany... This, of course, was further compounded by the USA (eastern half, anyhow) being very Europe-like in terms of weather...
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 12:57:00 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Old_Painless: DriftPunch, I guess I don't quite understand your position on this issue.
View Quote
The point is that culture connotes this date as his birthday, which makes many believe that this was indeed his birthday. There are many who simply refuse to question the teachings of the church (or even go against the Christmas spirit) so much that even questioning this fact drives them over the edge. I can see them sticking their fingers in their ears, and saying "LA LA LA LA" now. It doesn't matter that the bible doesn't give a date as you state. If you asked 1000 random people when Jesus was born, what would 90% say? The fact that Christ wasn't born on Dec 25 really doesn't offer any good argument for an attack (debate wise) on the Bible, but it is useful for an attack on the church.
Link Posted: 12/29/2003 1:24:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Old_Painless:
Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
Originally Posted By Zaphod: Does it matter what month the Lord was born in?
View Quote
Yes, it does. It's an example of little information intersecting with religous politics to become dogma. Thus if one can be made to acknowledge that what they have learned as absolute fact is actually the result papal declaration, and not fact, what else may be untrue? You are correct that it doesn't effect any teaching of Jesus himself, but it effects the belief in the honesty of the machine that developed centuries after his death.
View Quote
DriftPunch, I guess I don't quite understand your position on this issue. As I told OHC, I have never though that Jesus was actually born on 12-25. As an evangelical Christian, I've never heard even one person say such a thing. Not one. Why is this such a big issue with you? It is a non-issue. No one is saying that Jesus was really born on 12-25. That is merely the day that was chosen to [u]celebrate[/u] His birth.
View Quote
For me to have faith in something – I have to genuinely believe it, and when I look at all the things that seem to be arbitrarily moved around for convenience or propaganda, it corrupts the rest of it. Sort of like “well if they lied about that, what else are they not telling me??? If you’re caught in just a single lie on the witness stand, your credibility is forever questioned afterwards. If they don’t accurately deal with the date of his birth and resurrection (seemingly major points), it just casts too much doubt on the rest of it for me.
Old_Painless: Again, you might be surprised that I agree with you on much of this. But bad men and bad churches don't change a perfect God. Those that misrepresent Him will have to answer some day.
View Quote
That’s the attitude that confuses me; How can god be perfect if he allows men to kill, persecute and oppress people while hiding behind his name???? I seem more upset with ‘false prophets’ and TV evangelists then most believers do. Mega churches… John Hagee.. Is it pax TV that runs all the TV preachers??? Channel 26 for non cable folks.
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 7:52:24 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Only_Hits_Count: Sorry Zaphod- I'm just not up for refuting your various 'points' ;rollseyes:
View Quote
Why not, if they're that easy to dismiss?
Suffice it to say that I feel most christians take a lot of their beliefs at face value and without question.
View Quote
Yeah....it's called FAITH.
Most can't debate or discuss said issues without becoming overly emotional.
View Quote
While there are certainly people who allow themselves to get out of hand, I don't see Christians marching on Washington demanding that Good Friday be made a national holiday. However, I DO see non-Christians marching all over the place demanding that any and all references to Christianity (not any OTHER religion, mind you) be removed from the public discourse. Who's overly emotional, then?
Take for example the Xmas issue. Celebrate it anyway you choode. I just want people to know the origins of the customs. Christians did not invent everything!!!
View Quote
Please find any place where Christians claim to have "discovered" anything. You are once again confusing cultural practices (Christmas trees, wreaths, the date, etc.) with what the religious significance of the date is. Christians could and would celebrate Christmas with equal vigor if it were held in the middle of the summer and with no lights, trees, etc. in the mix. ...or are you suggesting that all those things are Christian, and should, by extension, be removed from all public buildings, too?
Truth be told- the Jesus following wobbled along for several hundred years befor gaining widespread acceptance (through charity I think- not preachings).
View Quote
Well, DAMN! Here I was thinking the early Christians had just jumped on the Internet and spread the Word that way! [rolleyes]
Honestly most christians probably shouldn't be celebrating halloween. It's not an 'evil' issue, just traditions steeped in heathen cultures. If you guys want to play pagan for a day- who am I to stop you?
View Quote
A good deal of Christians [b]don't[/b] celebrate Halloween because of it's ocult overtones. Others, like me, "celebrate" insofar as the kids getting dressed up and going trick-or-treating. Again it's a [b]cultural[/b], not religious issue. Just because my kids dress up doesn't mean I'm bowing to baal or whoever.
I think it was brohawk that said he had changed to a 'purer' form of chrsitian worship. I applaud that type of attitude. That's what it's about for me.
View Quote
Certainly no harm in that, but please don't tell me I'm less Christian than you are because I enjoy Christmas trees, lights, carols, etc.
(modern) Christianity has been tainted/ruined by men. Turned into just another way to control people.
View Quote
Sigh..... I've asked this question a dozen times and am STILL waiting for an answer from you types: HOW DOES MY BEING A CHRISTIAN IN ANY WAY PROVIDE CONTROL OVER ME TO ANYONE BUT GOD?
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 7:57:57 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DriftPunch: Yes, it does. It's an example of little information intersecting with religous politics to become dogma. Thus if one can be made to acknowledge that what they have learned as absolute fact is actually the result papal declaration, and not fact, what else may be untrue? You are correct that it doesn't effect any teaching of Jesus himself, but it effects the belief in the honesty of the machine that developed centuries after his death.
View Quote
That's funny, but I seem to remember the question of the actual date of Christ's birth (not only the month, mind you, but the YEAR) being raised when I was a little kid. I don't recall any of my Catholic schools ever teaching me that December 25th was the FACTUAL date of Christ's birth. Not ONCE.
Every crack can be a prybar mounting point for someone like myself. If you are someone that cannot think for yourself, I'll have you questioning your very existance in no time off a simple crack like this one.
View Quote
You sound like you live an enjoyable life: putting prybars into the "cracks" you think you see in others. Tell me, what makes you so sure you know ALL the answers? Are YOU God?
There are men of honor in any faith (including none), just like there are those that are contemptable. You'll probably find little correlation between a persons claimed religion, and his contribution to 'decay'. I always find it interesting how people have a stylized vision of the past designed to prop up a current belief. Corruption and Scandal have been with government (and humanity for that matter) forever. What's new is the fact that the powerful can no longer suppress scandal, and the media channels push every single one nationally.
View Quote
That's all true. However, just as you accuse me of having "a stylized vision of the past designed to prop up a current belief", I can equally accuse you of having the same thing, the difference is that you tear down a belief system rather than prop one up. Tell me, what is so superior about your belief system that you feel compelled to try and tear down mine?
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 8:05:40 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Old_Painless: Why is this such a big issue with you? It is a non-issue. No one is saying that Jesus was really born on 12-25.
View Quote
Because that's the only way they can attempt to break down the Scriptures. Look, if they show that the Scriptures say, "Christ was born on 25 December", and they prove it wrong, then the whole book can be debunked. However, since the Scripture DOESN'T say it, they are forced to do the "churches make dogma to control people" tapdance, but then repeatedly refuse to show how being a Christian in any way puts one under control of a church. It's the same thing with Creation. "Well," they say, "if we KNOW that the universe is billions of years old, and the Bible says only thousands, then the Bible is factually in error. Therefore," (and this is the part that always burns my ass) "we have proven that there is no God." And then they tell US that WE live deluded by faith? [rofl2]
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 8:14:21 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DriftPunch: The point is that culture connotes this date as his birthday, which makes many believe that this was indeed his birthday. There are many who simply refuse to question the teachings of the church (or even go against the Christmas spirit) so much that even questioning this fact drives them over the edge. I can see them sticking their fingers in their ears, and saying "LA LA LA LA" now. It doesn't matter that the bible doesn't give a date as you state. If you asked 1000 random people when Jesus was born, what would 90% say? The fact that Christ wasn't born on Dec 25 really doesn't offer any good argument for an attack (debate wise) on the Bible, but it is useful for an attack on the church.
View Quote
DP, You'll have to forgive me, but I reply as I read down the thread, so your answer hear sort of modifies my earlier responses. There is no doubt that CHURCHES are guilty of adding things to dogma that are either factually innacurate or which have no place in dogma. Sometimes both. Thos who respond to challenges to those items of dogma with the quoted, "LA LA LA" are they types I call "legalists". I hold them in utter contempt, because they make a huge deal about such pittances and ignore the greater meanings of what the FAITH teaches. It is people like that that have driven me off more than one "Christian" site. Not because I couldn't debunk their stupidity easily, but rather because they had welded their minds shut with their own self-rightousness. I sincerely believe that people who do that will be the second teir to suffer upon the Second Coming (the first will be the churches themselves, for the very reasons you cite). I try to keep scientific and similar studies seperate from Scripture insofar as the latter establishing the former. In my view, the former SUPPORTS the latter, and if there is a discrepancy, then it is most likely because there is a deeper meaning to the Scripture that we may have missed. By the same token, I recoil when so-called "scientists" dismiss out-of-hand data that could be interpretted as supporting the Bible as-written and as-understood. "Show me the data" is my cry, and I will use the brain God gave me to dtermine the facts as clearly as I can understand them.
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 8:20:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Only_Hits_Count: That’s the attitude that confuses me; How can god be perfect if he allows men to kill, persecute and oppress people while hiding behind his name???? I seem more upset with ‘false prophets’ and TV evangelists then most believers do.
View Quote
Don't be too sure. Of all the TV evangelists I have ever seen, I have only liked THREE. All three of them are exactly the same today as they were many, many years ago. I've met one of them (D. James Kennedy). They are each upstanding individuals who have been free from scandal and whose works in support of God's Plan are manifest. The others (that a$$hole Tilson is my favorite to condemn) are charlatains of the utmost measure, and I can assure you they will pay a fearful price if they are anything other than sincere. As for God allowing it to happen: Remember that He gave us free will. He will not force you into doing (or not doing) anything (even following His Commandments), but He WILL hold you accountable afterwards. Remember, just because we had Klinton (and some will argue Bush as well) piss on the Constitution doesn't change what the DOCUMENT says.
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 8:47:11 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 8:57:30 AM EDT
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: Why argue with the unsaved about such a small item, when they cannot begin to grasp the larger and far more important matters? Eric The(Sensible)Hun[>]:)]
View Quote
Because if I can make them see the error of their "logic", I may be able to put them on the road to changing their status to "saved". Isn't that what we're supposed to do for them? Plus, I really can't stand it when lousy logic is used against my Faith! [:D]
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 9:01:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/30/2003 9:02:33 AM EDT by DriftPunch]
Originally Posted By Zaphod: You sound like you live an enjoyable life: putting prybars into the "cracks" you think you see in others.
View Quote
I have a great life! Relax, I do not seek to engage (in debate) those who are not interested in making their point known. But the minute one starts espousing their beliefs publicly the gloves come off. For they have entered into the public debating arena, and are fair game. I do enjoy giving some people something to think about. Hell, it's probably healthy for them to justify their position, as many have never been challenged before.
Tell me, what makes you so sure you know ALL the answers? Are YOU God?
View Quote
I have never claimed to know even a tiny portion of the answers, and I'm quite satisfied with the fact that there will always be more questions than answers. My thesis has always been that all forms of religion have been developed as a societal framework, and the reason you state above. That being: an answer to questions that human cognition mandates asking. Humanity doesn't like .null. values as answers.
That's all true. However, just as you accuse me of having "a stylized vision of the past designed to prop up a current belief", I can equally accuse you of having the same thing, the difference is that you tear down a belief system rather than prop one up.
View Quote
I said 'people', not Zaphod. One of my favorite people in the world suffers from this, my father. His opinions of the past greatly effect his recall and interpretation of the facts.
Tell me, what is so superior about your belief system that you feel compelled to try and tear down mine?
View Quote
These debates are voluntary, and most are started to engage in this type of discussion. Part of my presence in these threads is because if left alone, they'd turn into one giant group hug, ignoring the fact that there are those with alternate beliefs. [size=4]I do not inject myself in to 'prayers needed' threads.[/size=4]
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 9:05:29 AM EDT
Eric, I think this was fairly civil until you started your name calling (again)... My two final points; Zaphod- You repeatedly refer to 'culture'. I agree with you. It's a collection of leftovers from when all our ancestors were pagans. Each and every one of you is descended from heathen stock. Christianity is a fairly recent occurrence. They just pasted their beliefs over their predecessor’s. Purely for marketing purposes. As I said, celebrate anyway you choose, I was honestly surprised when I found out how much of it is steeped in pagan rituals. I have no real problem with you celebrating as you see fit, as long as you extend the same courtesy to me. ( the capitalization is just a product of laziness, no disrespect intended. I thought god was forgiving and understanding??? You'll notice that I wasn't selective in the capitalization-) Secondly- back to the original question- if the laws were based on the 10 commandments, why don't they mention it in the preamble or the bill of rights??? You'd think they'd slip in there somewhere.
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 9:08:16 AM EDT
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: The Church cannot help it if some folks out there are simply too stupid to read and understand its traditions, as opposed to its religious principles and beliefs. It is the Church's well-founded belief that [b]Jesus Christ[/b] was born into this world. It is the man-made tradition of the Church to celebrate that Glorious Event on December 25th. Period. End of story. Why argue with the unsaved about such a small item, when they cannot begin to grasp the larger and far more important matters? Eric The(Sensible)Hun[>]:)]
View Quote
Amen........[^]
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 9:22:24 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/30/2003 9:32:43 AM EDT
I thought Christmas was [i]Santa Claus'[/i] birthday... j/k...[:D]
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top