Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Here’s the No. 1 fallacy on eternal security
- By Hentenza
- General Theology
- 340 Replies
Yes he does.
The saints ARE the body of Christ, all believers. Go back and look at every salutation to every church in his epistles. Paul is writting directly to the churches. The matter of saving faith regards the level of faith some are in. We talked about the parable of the soils before which explains the different levels of faith. These different levels are in every church including yours.
“Greet every saint in Christ Jesus. The brothers who are with me greet you. All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar’s household.”
Philippians 4:21-22 NASB2020
Philippians 4:21-22 Greet every saint in Christ Jesus. The brothers who are with me greet you. All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar’s household. | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now
Greet every saint in Christ Jesus. The brothers who are with me greet you. All the saints greet you, especially those of Caesar’s household.
bible.com
This is what Paul tells the church of Philipi as he closes his epistle.
The problem you have is your church‘s error in teaching about saints (hagios). In RCC theology, the saints are in heaven. In the Bible, the saints are on earth. In RCC teaching, a person does not become a saint unless he/she is “beatified” or “canonized” by the Pope or prominent bishop. In the Bible, everyone who has received Jesus Christ by faith is a saint. In RCC practice, the saints are revered, prayed to, and in some instances, worshiped. In the Bible, saints are called to revere, worship, and pray to God alone.
You are a Christian because you answered God‘s call and received the free gift of faith by the grace of God. Examine your faith and determine if you are just a babe in Christ or are you maturing. I know that nothing can ever separate me from the Lord but you, because of your church’s incorrect teachings on salvation by faith plus works, will always wonder if you are good enough. I grew up full blow RCC but ended up in the spot of asking if I would ever be good enough. It let me to atheism (yes your church led me to atheism). But God called me back and here I am. You are a saint by virtue of being a sheep in Jesus flock. Jesus says that He will never loose one of His sheep and no one can take them away from His hand. Is up to you to enter Jesus rest or not. You need to mature to the next level.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Newsome pushed back against Democracy to achieve his political goals
- By eclipsenow
- American Politics
- 336 Replies
Because none of that actually addresses the points I made.
Where precisely did they create a mechanism for referendum?
The existence of the Senate may have been a compromise between large and small states, but if they wanted so badly for the people to have direct control over everything they would've just made it be directly elected by the whole state from the start. They didn't do that.
As for your claim of it becoming corrupt, accusations of corruption in the choosing of Senators appear to have been rather exaggerated, though they sure made good polemics by those who wanted reform. This is not to say the Senate did not run into some serious issues that required an adjustment to how it worked, however. Sometimes state legislatures would deadlock and be unable to choose a Senator. But it seems to me the biggest problem with the Senate is that it eventually turned state legislature races into proxy elections. Just as no one cares who the electors they vote for in a presidential election are so long as whoever they vote for will then vote for the person they want, people started not caring much about who they were voting for in a state congress race and caring far more about the identity of the Senator that person would vote for.
The 17th Amendment did fix those, but unfortunately created some new issues that weren't there before. You mention issues of corruption, but requiring people to campaign statewide probably made them far more beholden to special interests because you need serious cash to be able to reach everyone in a state (the smallest state is nearly 600K, and the largest nearly 40 million people!). There's also how it appears to have played a big role in changing the filibuster from something to make sure everyone got a chance to talk into a blunt cudgel used to prevent bills that had majority support in the Senate from advancing. There's a pretty good writeup here of the ideas behind the Senate, what worked with it, what ended up going wrong with it, and how while the 17th Amendment fixed some of those issues, it did create some new ones:
A Senate, If You Can Keep It
Some Constitutional Amendments #6, Part I: The Senate is dead. We, the People, were found over the body with the murder weapon: democracy.decivitate.jamesjheaney.com
I think its points are pretty valid. (that said, I can't say I find the follow-up post detailing the author's suggestion on how to fix it particularly feasible)
Regardless, the indirect election of the Senate was a reflection of how the founders were against giving the people too much direct power in government. There's no shortage of quotes from them talking about the dangers of excess democracy, such as this one by John Adams (noted in the above link):
"Remember Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes exhausts and murders itself. There never was a Democracy Yet, that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to Say that Democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious or less avaricious than Aristocracy or Monarchy. It is not true in Fact and no where appears in history. Those Passions are the same in all Men under all forms of Simple Government, and when unchecked, produce the same Effects of Fraud Violence and Cruelty."
This is why they set up things like checks and balances and the indirectly elected Senate and how the President was (supposed to) not be directly elected. He then uses the government France set up after the French Revolution as an example of excell of democracy gone bad:
"What can I Say of The Democracy of France? I dare not write what I think and what I know. Were Brissot, Condorcet, Danton Robespiere and Monsiegnieur Equality less ambitious than Cæsar, Alexander or Napoleon? Were Dumourier, Pichegru, Moreau, less Generals, less Conquerors, or in the End less fortunate than <him> he was.?"
Now, some people obnoxiously pull out quotes like this to try to win push pedantic claims like "the United States isn't a democracy", which is dumb because the word has expanded in meaning since then and is used to refer to countries like the United States. Regardless, it's still pretty clear that the founding fathers were not particularly big fans of the idea of giving the general public direct and complete power over the government and certainly not that referendums were good ideas (as easily shown by the fact the constitution doesn't give it as an option). Maybe you think they were wrong. Maybe they were. But it's pretty clear their ideas of self-governance did not include or even come close to granting the people the ability to pass laws directly by popular vote.
Interesting. I think most Australian political thinkers say Australia is a "Representative Democracy". There are a few different perspectives within that that might conflict. I forget the exact terms - but there are debates about how much freedom a Representative politician is meant to have in Representing his electorate. EG: Do they mainly Represent the 'standard' policy of their party? Or do they have the freedom - if convinced by good argument against that party line - to pursue other policies?
EG: Imagine a REPUBLICAN discovering about standard OECD healthcare offering universal cover at half the price. Imagine they start to promote the idea of NATIONALISING half America's hospitals to be government owned and operated? (Yeah - just imagine that? One may as well imagine pink unicorns vomiting rainbow oil into all your cars so the country smells like cinnamon doughnuts!)
Are they performing "Representative Democracy"?
Back in the day - I remember Jed Bartlett on The West Wing saying "America isn't a Democracy, it's a Republic."
At the time I was taken aback - but I can see the place for saying that in broadening our understanding of the phrase "Representative Democracy".
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
There’s a Giant Flaw in Human History
- By sjastro
- Physical & Life Sciences
- 564 Replies
Chris Nuanton the Egyptologist/Archaeologist whom I have communicated with on a number of occasions was kind enough to give his comments.
Here is Chris Naunton's link.
chrisnaunton.com
Here is Chris Naunton's link.
Pyramid Mythbusting: further thoughts…
*I first drafted this piece in February 2023 but I’ve only just got round to finishing it, as a complement to my recent talk on ‘Pyramid Mythbusting’. Three phenomena I’ve been able to observe over…
chrisnaunton.com
Upvote
0
