$1M Alligator Shoes Please

Status
Not open for further replies.

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Jefferson

No.

Why not?

And I don't see--contrary to Yorzhik's assertion--that my question has been answered at all. Jefferson came back with something like this: "We'd have a constitution to prevent abuses." Well, we have a constitution now, and there's plenty of line-crossing going on these days.

A "constitution" crafted by theonomists--or whatever Jefferson prefers to call himself; don't want to assume anything--would pay the same lip service to liberty that theonomists do in print right now. Any theonomist, whether he happens to be a Muslim or a Christian, pays the same lip service to the public. Once in power, they turn into tyrants. There is no exception to this rule.
 

Gerald

Resident Fiend
Originally posted by Jefferson
Haven't seen it yet on this forum Gerald.
I'm talking face-to-face, friend. The Real World™.

You know, talk smack to somebody, he gets mad and takes a poke at you, then you beat him to a pulp with perfect justification.

After all, he tried to assault you, and you were just defending yourself...
:chuckle:
 

Turbo

Friendly Neighborhood Admin
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
The Real World™ indeed. :rolleyes: Do you think anyone here buys your tired Toughguy™ routine? You're like a seventh grader who prank calls strangers from phonebooths telling them how you're going to beat them up. But the people on the other end can always tell your voice isn't really that deep.
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Originally posted by Jefferson

It's just a logical deduction from other verses. God does not lay out every single possible case law. If He did, the Bible would be the size of a library. Instead, He gives a few examples and then expects us to use our brains to apply those examples to other situations. If you want to suggest to the monarch to allow wife beating, go ahead. I, however, don't see it in scripture.
So you're using fallible human intellect and the incorrigibly evil human heart to divine the your deity's laws?

After watching Christians fighting over such "logical" deductions my entire life and reading about how they've done so for recorded Church history, I'm not sanguine that you'll get it correct. You rail against such "reasonings" when judges engage in them, yet you tell me you've got nothing better to offer?

Pardon me, while I laugh hysterically... :darwinsm:

Remember, in the U.S., anything not prohibited by law (either specifically or in principle), is generally considered legal.

There is neither principle or direct command in the Bible to prohibit wife-beating. Perhaps that explains why Israel, the one nation in the world whose legal system is more closely tied closest to your desired "biblical" basis than ours, has a wife-beating rate about 6 times higher than the U.S. with its "godless" system. :chuckle:
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
"After watching Christians fighting over such 'logical' deductions my entire life and reading about how they've done so for recorded Church history, I'm not sanguine that you'll get it correct. You rail against such 'reasonings' when judges engage in them, yet you tell me you've got nothing better to offer?"

Too true.

I have to wonder why every instance of the church functioning hand in glove with the state has ended in disaster.

The idea that the church as an institution has no place in the civil arena seems abhorrent to some Christians. Note that I'm not saying Christians as individuals should stay out of politics or what have you--I'm not. But as an organization, the last place the church should try to camp out is Capitol Hill.
 

Turbo

Friendly Neighborhood Admin
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Ever heard the phrases "stripe for stripe" or "blow for blow?" I don't remember the phrase "unless she's you're wife" coming next.
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Originally posted by Turbo

Ever heard the phrases "stripe for stripe" or "blow for blow?" I don't remember the phrase "unless she's you're wife" coming next.
What is the context for this comment, Turbo? :think:
 

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Originally posted by Flipper
I generally don't get answers concerning difficult questions like what would happen to welfare and how single parents are supposed to raise their children, and that kind of thing.
They would be raised the same way they were raised before FDR imposed the welfare state on this country. Does that make all presidents before FDR "tryants" in your eyes?

Also, what about the point I've raised again and again regarding the deadly combination of completely legalizing of all firearms united with the patriotic instincts of (presumably) a large number of citizenry?
Where did I say "all" firearms would be legal? I certainly would not legalize shoulder-held surface to air missles.

Those of us who believe that their first duty is to the Constitution of the United States, which expects us to defend the country against tyrants. I have seen the argument made that the theonomy would be a more stable and safe environment. I fail to see how that would be possible in a lengthy civil war.
I don't think too many so-called "patriots" would be in a very rebellious mood after having all of their mortgages and credit card debts cancelled in accordance with the "year of Jubilee" and their taxes reduced to a flat income tax of a mere 5 percent. Instead of open rebelllion I think we would be looking at a nation described as one giant block party.
 

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Originally posted by granite1010
Jefferson came back with something like this: "We'd have a constitution to prevent abuses." Well, we have a constitution now, and there's plenty of line-crossing going on these days.
But why begin with laws that are astray from God's commands? It's one thing to start with God's law and then gradually stray from it, but why deliberately speed up the process by starting out with ungodly laws from the get go?
 

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Originally posted by granite1010
I'm not saying Christians as individuals should stay out of politics or what have you--I'm not. But as an organization, the last place the church should try to camp out is Capitol Hill.
"The church" is a corporate body composed of individuals. Therefore any Christian individual who is a congressman, senator or president is part of the church "camped out on Capitol Hill."

Besides, when I vote I am attempting to impose Biblical Law upon the lifestyles of nonchristians. Should I be allowed to do that? If so, why? If not, why not?
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Jefferson

"The church" is a corporate body composed of individuals. Therefore any Christian individual who is a congressman, senator or president is part of the church "camped out on Capitol Hill."

Besides, when I vote I am attempting to impose Biblical Law upon the lifestyles of nonchristians. Should I be allowed to do that? If so, why? If not, why not?

In one sense yes, you're right, "the church" universal is of course composed of individuals. But I said very clearly that the INSTITUTIONAL church, whether it's a particular sect or denomination that happens to dominate the civil arena, is a dangerous element to add to the functions of the state.
 

CryTears

BANNED
Banned
Originally posted by granite1010

"After watching Christians fighting over such 'logical' deductions my entire life and reading about how they've done so for recorded Church history, I'm not sanguine that you'll get it correct. You rail against such 'reasonings' when judges engage in them, yet you tell me you've got nothing better to offer?"

Too true.

I have to wonder why every instance of the church functioning hand in glove with the state has ended in disaster.

The idea that the church as an institution has no place in the civil arena seems abhorrent to some Christians. Note that I'm not saying Christians as individuals should stay out of politics or what have you--I'm not. But as an organization, the last place the church should try to camp out is Capitol Hill.

oh well gee whiz, what do we have here? yet another pro christian post by granite?
what would you think if Christians pretended to be secular just for political reasons and then voted entirely for Christian interest?
would you think that was okay?-
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Cry...don't you have something better to do?

Whether it's the Puritans or the Inquisition, there are plenty of reasons to question the wisdom of blending the institutional church and the institutional state.
 

CryTears

BANNED
Banned
Originally posted by granite1010

Cry...don't you have something better to do?

Whether it's the Puritans or the Inquisition, there are plenty of reasons to question the wisdom of blending the institutional church and the institutional state.

no not really, you sure don't mind following me around but how typical.
I have not found one pro christian post of yours granite. are you questioning all the church and states? or just Christianity?
Israel is sure a winner LOL! No water, no oil, only money is what is provided by USA, don't forget we use to like Bin Laden and Saddam
Israel is next on our list;)
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by crytahvn

no not really, you sure don't mind following me around but how typical.
I have not found one pro christian post of yours granite. are you questioning all the church and states? or just Christianity?
Israel is sure a winner LOL! No water, no oil, only money is what is provided by USA, don't forget we use to like Bin Laden and Saddam
Israel is next on our list;)

Cry, given your racism and bigotry, I shudder to think what version of Christianity you find acceptable. How exactly would you define "pro Christian"? You have over 2000 posts to dig through. Knock yourself out. Use the search tool like a good girl (or a half-way educated one, anyway) and go rooting.

And yes: I am questioning every single instance where the INSTITUTIONAL church and the INSTITUTIONAL state joined forces and worked hand in hand. Constantine introduced paganism to Christianity, and the Puritans crushed people to death. Heck, I'm a Calvinist, and I don't much care for the fate of Michael Servetus, all right? (I don't expect you to get that one.)

I may be missing an exception or two, but that's the problem: they're exceptions. Mingling the church's religious authority with secular power is a massive mistake.
 

CryTears

BANNED
Banned
Originally posted by granite1010

Cry, given your racism and bigotry, I shudder to think what version of Christianity you find acceptable. How exactly would you define "pro Christian"? You have over 2000 posts to dig through. Knock yourself out. Use the search tool like a good girl (or a half-way educated one, anyway) and go rooting.

And yes: I am questioning every single instance where the INSTITUTIONAL church and the INSTITUTIONAL state joined forces and worked hand in hand. Constantine introduced paganism to Christianity, and the Puritans crushed people to death. Heck, I'm a Calvinist, and I don't much care for the fate of Michael Servetus, all right? (I don't expect you to get that one.)

I may be missing an exception or two, but that's the problem: they're exceptions. Mingling the church's religious authority with secular power is a massive mistake.

according to the handbook granite keeps trying to slander racist and bigot with every post even though it does not relate to do the jewish ordered sound bytes to keep people from believing the truth.
Even though granite is the biggest bigot that ever walked just sneaky, applauds the death of palestinian children to further jewish interest Slights the death of piles of Christian bodies tortured and killed by bolshevik jews.
just as sneak attacks christianity in a fair cool voice to plant seeds of doubt in peoples minds yet yells passionately at the roof tops if judaism is attacked.
Why do you bring up Constantine all the time, I thought you claim to be half chrisitan? All the other Roman rulers stopped Christianity. What pagan did he bring? And so what, paganism was in Judassm at the time. It would only allow the people of the land to embrace it. or is that what the real beef is with constantine.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
"Even though granite is the biggest bigot that ever walked..."

Having been on the receiving end of bigotry, I can assure you I'm not.

"Slights the death of piles of Christian bodies tortured and killed by bolshevik jews."

Do you remember who Anne Applebaum is, cry? I told you to read her book on the gulag because it's the most definitive work on the subject. I've also in the past told you to read RJ Rummel's book Death by Government. Both demonstrate without a shadow of a doubt that the Soviets murdered 40-60 million of their countrymen. I've never once doubted or slighted what the Bolsheviks did.

"just as sneak attacks christianity in a fair cool voice to plant seeds of doubt in peoples minds"

Because I happen to speak reasonably, this may grate against your fanaticism, but that's not my problem. I also noticed you have not addressed the historic error of the church joining hands with the state. Like it or not, this is what the Christian church did. Your problem is with our faith's history, not with me. Then again, ignorance is bliss.

"Why do you bring up Constantine all the time, I thought you claim to be half chrisitan?"

Uhhh...no. I'm half-Jewish. I'm a practicing Christian (Anglican) by faith.

"All the other Roman rulers stopped Christianity. What pagan did he bring?"

He mingled the two most popular cults of the time with the Christian church: the Mithra cult and the Sol Invictus cult (his personal favorite). The parallels especially between Mithraism and modern Christianity are striking. The modern church as we know it today would not exist without Constantine. I only wonder why we needed the state's stamp of approval--and Constantine's influence at the early church councils--to somehow "get Christianity right." I think doctrinally the church was doing fine without some tinkering from the state.
 

Gerald

Resident Fiend
Originally posted by crytahvn
Slights the death of piles of Christian bodies tortured and killed by bolshevik jews.
:yawn:

Wake me when American Christians start getting murdered in large numbers.
 

CryTears

BANNED
Banned
Originally posted by granite1010

"Even though granite is the biggest bigot that ever walked..."

Having been on the receiving end of bigotry, I can assure you I'm not.

"Slights the death of piles of Christian bodies tortured and killed by bolshevik jews."

Do you remember who Anne Applebaum is, cry? I told you to read her book on the gulag because it's the most definitive work on the subject. I've also in the past told you to read RJ Rummel's book Death by Government. Both demonstrate without a shadow of a doubt that the Soviets murdered 40-60 million of their countrymen. I've never once doubted or slighted what the Bolsheviks did.

"just as sneak attacks christianity in a fair cool voice to plant seeds of doubt in peoples minds"

Because I happen to speak reasonably, this may grate against your fanaticism, but that's not my problem. I also noticed you have not addressed the historic error of the church joining hands with the state. Like it or not, this is what the Christian church did. Your problem is with our faith's history, not with me. Then again, ignorance is bliss.

"Why do you bring up Constantine all the time, I thought you claim to be half chrisitan?"

Uhhh...no. I'm half-Jewish. I'm a practicing Christian (Anglican) by faith.

"All the other Roman rulers stopped Christianity. What pagan did he bring?"

He mingled the two most popular cults of the time with the Christian church: the Mithra cult and the Sol Invictus cult (his personal favorite). The parallels especially between Mithraism and modern Christianity are striking. The modern church as we know it today would not exist without Constantine. I only wonder why we needed the state's stamp of approval--and Constantine's influence at the early church councils--to somehow "get Christianity right." I think doctrinally the church was doing fine without some tinkering from the state.

bolshevik jews. jews killed christians.
why don't you complain about Nero?
why dont you complain about Israel?
funny one common thread I see is this
greenies....... no complaints on israel
democrats......no complaints on israel
republicans.......no open complaints on israel
communist jews ........no complaints on israel
atheists.........no complaints on israel
humanists.....no complaints on israel
seculars.......no complaints on israel

I hope Pres Bush learned a lesson as trying to be Pontiff and listening to the complaints of the Jewish high priests and see how thin their loyalty is. They have turned on him as quickly as they did Stalin when they finished with him. They have to win back the democratic party before they all puke up their smoked fish.
They cannot stand it! How they going to go to war and push the democrat party?
I will guess they will continue this blame bush game and say the real weapons were in Syria or fake a bomb in Israel and say they had to defend themselves.
If you notice the NO WAR only started after Iraq and no one says anything about the evil creepy frankenstate of Israel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top