How the Democratic Party opposes Christian Principles

[dlamberth]

I believe God is not the CAUSE of illness and sickness, it is a product of dealing with this world. If it is not good, it is not of God.

I think illness and sickness is just part of life. The little critters that make us sick are a part of the diversity and wonderment of that life we share with them. We don't like to be sick, but the bugs that make us sick are happy doing so. From the bug's perspective, it is good. Personally, I don't know how to separate God from His own Creation. To me, ALL is of God, even that which make us sick. In the same breath, I don't see God "causing" illness and sickness either. It's just all part of life.

.

 

[LilGeorgiaPeach81]

That this thread is still open is amazing.

Based on an earlier post, Clirus, if at least half of Americans suddenly became Biblically pure, how would you go about (presuming you were the President of this country) of eliminating those who did not agree with Biblical Law?

Biblical Law is harsh, and requires execution and punishment of those who not only disobey, but who also disagree with the religion in charge.

How would you execute up to at least 100 million people for disobeying Biblical Law?

Biblical Law also teaches us to forgive. Only those who commit the unforgivable (by humans) like murder, and child molesting. Other transgressors should go to prison and have the opportunity to be instructed in faith.

 

[IzzyPop]

The solution to the problem of the needy is prevention and personal responsibility to those around us.

Republicans favor prevention and personal responsibility and democrats keep promising to make people feel good.

IzzyPop quote

While all of this sounds good (it actually does not, but I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt), can you demonstrate specific examples of Republican policies and or bills passed or proposed in the last 8 years that promote prevention is the areas of the five examples given? Otherwise it is nothing other than fluff.

Response

I keep trying to convince people that government social programs do not work, whether they are Republican programs or democratic programs. In general, Republicans do not propose social programs.

Of course, the democrats have all kinds of social programs. But let me ask a question. Can you demonstrate specific examples of democratic policies and or bills passed or proposed that have solved any of the social issues that were mentioned?

A government cannot create an ethical society by imposing ethics, however an ethical society can be created when God imposes ethics on people and the people vote for ethical government leaders. A government can create an unethical/Atheistic society by opposing Christian ethics.

My concern about government began when the courts (government) began to impose Atheism by legalizing pornography, abortion and homosexuality, all of which the Bible condemns. The trend of the government promoting/supporting Atheism will lead to disease, death and destruction for America.

Separation of Church and State means the Church should not execute, control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. and the State should not legalize sin by legalizing those things that the Bible clearly calls evil. The State should not participate in social programs that facilitate sin or reward sinful behavior.

You have completely avoided the question. You stated that Republicans favor prevention over cure. Fine, I disagree, and I wanted to see specific examples of where this can be demonstrated. I do not care about the philosophy behind your reasoning, I do not even care about your reasoning or lack there of. I care about specific examples to demonstrate your point. No talking points, no vague platform statements, only solid proof of bills proposed or passed in the last 8 years that demonstrate a prevention over cure mentality. Put up or shut up.

 

[Flynmonkie]

I think illness and sickness is just part of life. The little critters that make us sick are a part of the diversity and wonderment of that life we share with them. We don't like to be sick, but the bugs that make us sick are happy doing so. From the bug's perspective, it is good. Personally, I don't know how to separate God from His own Creation. To me, ALL is of God, even that which make us sick. In the same breath, I don't see God "causing" illness and sickness either. It's just all part of life.

.

True. God allows or does not allow, the thing we hold on to is the promises -- "God brings ALL things together for the good of those that love Him," "God is not the author of sin, "and "He has plans for us that are good, not for disaster" etc...

I think there has always been a poor representation about Gods sovereigness in this realm. I guess it is true with many areas of Christianity; that line where our will and Gods meets and shakes hands, or those that do not have a clear perspective on what we “can” control, or not. I had a pastor visit my aunt literally on her death bed waiting for her first pancreatic transplant. he said " I am not sure what you, or your parents did to bring this on yourself, but I know God has it in His hands." I liked to about jump her bed. Of course, again, another instance where that “pastor” by the time I gave him a good "what for,"thought, "It is she that brings the devil here" I get accused of that a lot

I felt pretty darn righteous doing it too. I mean really, I have zero patience for, at the very least poor manners, but that was a over the top. Apparently, God has not gifted me with eloquence. I am pretty much a bull in a china cabnet when I have something to say to just plain obvious mean things like that.

 

[Sphere]

Clirus is making this nonsense up as he goes along. He's been corrected numerous times about these gross generalizations, attributing things like homosexuality to atheism(give me a break, Ted Haggart and Mark Foley)--yet he continues to regurgitate them. He's either a pathological liar, or suffering from delusions.

 

[elanor]

True. God allows or does not allow, the thing we hold on to is the promises -- "God brings ALL things together for the good of those that love Him," "God is not the author of sin, "and "He has plans for us that are good, not for disaster" etc...

I think there has always been a poor representation about Gods sovereigness in this realm. I guess it is true with many areas of Christianity; that line where our will and Gods meets and shakes hands, or those that do not have a clear perspective on what we “can” control, or not. I had a pastor visit my aunt literally on her death bed waiting for her first pancreatic transplant. he said " I am not sure what you, or your parents did to bring this on yourself, but I know God has it in His hands." I liked to about jump her bed. Of course, again, another instance where that “pastor” by the time I gave him a good "what for,"thought, "It is she that brings the devil here" I get accused of that a lot

I felt pretty darn righteous doing it too. I mean really, I have zero patience for, at the very least poor manners, but that was a over the top. Apparently, God has not gifted me with eloquence. I am pretty much a bull in a china cabnet when I have something to say to just plain obvious mean things like that.

Oh my goodness!! Flynmonkie, that is awful!! Well, you are to be commended for your restraint. I'd have been sorely tempted to belt the guy. It is unbelievable and inexcusable the way some people behave under the auspices of faith. It's amazing how often I feel like I have to apologize for believers...

 

[Flynmonkie]

Oh my goodness!! Flynmonkie, that is awful!! Well, you are to be commended for your restraint. I'd have been sorely tempted to belt the guy. It is unbelievable and inexcusable the way some people behave under the auspices of faith. It's amazing how often I feel like I have to apologize for believers...

I see this so often. I think it is the area I live in or something. God Hates this or that yada yada.. UGH!
Solomon wrote of the seven sins God truly hates, I figure if people don’t get that first and foremost, they have no business directing others.

I think apologizing is part of it. I think my reaction is apology enough for those who have experienced this sort of hurt by other Christians. I usually just tell people that these actions are the antithesis of what we are taught.

This is not the first time I have experienced this, I think God gave me these experiences at a young age so that I could be sensitive to those who suffer from misconstrued scripture. It really kept me away from God for awhile. But He never left me. I had to go a few places first before I “got it”, but I did.

Trust me,that small vein of Texas blood feels like tagging some in the eye; it is certainly not me that keeps me restrained! Let’s just say I spend a lot of time in prayers! Nothing riles me worse than seeing the good news turn to bad out of some privileged selfishness. I usually try to understand that some may have some growing to do, been there, done that and will continue to do so. This anger usually comes where there is someone that can quote you a verse in a second to tell you what ails ‘ya, or what will help you, yet at the same time experience some dissonance about connecting them? Like, your going to hell, or You "might" not be one of the elect, But God loves you and wants you to seek Him anyway, just in case. Blah!. I think that churches should be preaching more about humility before correction. I don't see much of that, even in my own denomination. Also, work out your OWN salvation, before meddling in someone else’s etc. Worse yet, teaching we should be revoking choices from people that God himself has given -- one way or another. Lets not forget about the obvious, the difference between Just War, and justifying it!

I ask God to take this sensitivity to this away or at least help me to be nicer about it all, nothing is happening. I guess that He will keep my mouth shut when needed, or shut it for me in other ways if He wants it shut. Meanwhile, if I see it, I speak it.

 

[clirus]

IzzyPop quote

You have completely avoided the question. You stated that Republicans favor prevention over cure. Fine, I disagree, and I wanted to see specific examples of where this can be demonstrated. I do not care about the philosophy behind your reasoning, I do not even care about your reasoning or lack there of. I care about specific examples to demonstrate your point. No talking points, no vague platform statements, only solid proof of bills proposed or passed in the last 8 years that demonstrate a prevention over cure mentality. Put up or shut up.

Response

President Bush has always maintained an abstinence policy relative to AIDS funding.

 

[clirus]

dlamberth quote

Am I miss-reading something here?!? All of this time what I've been hearing you saying is that social programs are evil and are that they are un-Christian. I believe that this is the first time I've heard you say that social programs do not work. To that point what I have to say is that I have to thank Medicare for my son's new kidney. Medicare worked very well for him. Like my son, Medicare has worked for millions of other American as well. So I just think your fill of a lot of bunk when you say that social programs do not work.

Response

I have a question.

If it were God's will that a person should die from a condition/situation, and the person prevented the death by medical care, would that person have sinned?

Three ways to pray.
1) If the condition is one where God has inflected the condition, then pray for acceptance.
2) If the condition is one where it is a disease, then pray for healing and sanitation.
3) If the condition is one where the person has violated God's Law, then pray for salvation.

I am glad you brought up Medicare, because it is a great example of a failed social program. At first all social programs do things, but a people find out there is a freebe, they flock to the freebe with every sort of need. It gets to where people want sex change operations, face transplants, etc.

The cost of Medicare has gotten so high that states are cutting back on services. Universal Health Care is a way of shifting the cost of Medicare from the government back to the people.

Social programs just do not work. Welfare had to limit the time that a person could receive welfare, in order to keep families from having several generations on welfare.

 

[IzzyPop]

IzzyPop quote

You have completely avoided the question. You stated that Republicans favor prevention over cure. Fine, I disagree, and I wanted to see specific examples of where this can be demonstrated. I do not care about the philosophy behind your reasoning, I do not even care about your reasoning or lack there of. I care about specific examples to demonstrate your point. No talking points, no vague platform statements, only solid proof of bills proposed or passed in the last 8 years that demonstrate a prevention over cure mentality. Put up or shut up.

Response

President Bush has always maintained an abstinence policy relative to AIDS funding.

And when it has been shown that abstinence only policies do not work, how is that prevention? It is sticking your head in the sand.

 

[clirus]

christalee4 quote

That this thread is still open is amazing.

Based on an earlier post, Clirus, if at least half of Americans suddenly became Biblically pure, how would you go about (presuming you were the President of this country) of eliminating those who did not agree with Biblical Law?

Biblical Law is harsh, and requires execution and punishment of those who not only disobey, but who also disagree with the religion in charge.

How would you execute up to at least 100 million people for disobeying Biblical Law?

Response

I believe the Bible teaches all things should be dealt with by the following three levels of action;
1) If it is good - accept it and nourish it.
2) If it is evil - reject it but tolerate it.
3) If it threatens your existence - destroy it before it destroys you. This is self defense, which both the individual and society have a right and responsibility to do.

The first two are from the New Testament of the Bible and represent the Law of Love. The third is from the Old Testament of the Bible and represents the Law of Purity/Self Defense. The New Testament deals more with personal responsibility and the Old Testament deals more with the preservation of society. The Old Testament and the New Testament together present God's Law, a means of survival for a person, a nation and a world.

The process used in America to insure that the correct people are executed (the decision to go from tolerance to destruction) is the jury process and the authorization of war by congress. No process is ever perfect, but the choice is society/civilization or an imperfect jury/congressional process.

Christians should warn people (be salt and light), Civil Law should control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. people. Christians should advocate that which is good and healthy for society as described in the Bible. Civil Law should control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. that which is harmful (disease, death and destruction) to society. Congress (as the representatives of the people) defines Civil Law. If the laws that Congress defines are consistent with the Christian Lifestyle (God's Law), the people who practice evil will suffer. If the laws that Congress defines are consistent with the Atheistic Lifestyle, everyone will suffer. Civil Law consistent with the Atheistic Lifestyle cause suffering for everyone because the Christens suffer under the law, and the Atheists suffer because of the sin they practice. Romans 6:23 states, "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."


Separation of Church and State means the Church should not execute, control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. and the State should not legalize sin by legalizing those things that the Bible clearly calls evil. The State should not participate in social programs that facilitate sin or reward sinful behavior.

Even though evil can be tolerated, advocating evil should be rejected. Advocating evil can be anything from portraying an evil activity as fun with no consequences to the attitude that "I would not do it, but I would not be bothered if others did it". Pornography should be rejected because it advocates evil.

America was founded on these concepts where Civil Law was equivalent to the Law of Purity. A major problem in America is that Civil Law has now been so perverted that sin is now legalized and civil rights are more important than civil responsibility. Civil Law is no longer protecting/preserving society thus it is useless unless it is returned to its original intent. .

If all would live in accordance with the Law of love, there would never be a need to invoke the Law of Purity, but many do not live in accordance with any law. America is best served when religion prevents evil by defining evil and showing the disease, death and destruction of evil, and when Civil Law executes those who will not follow any law.

I believe that about 50% of the things of the world are good and about 49.9% of the things are evil and about 0.1% represent things that represent a threat. Some may think the evil should be eradicated, but I think evil eradicates itself because evil has disease, death and destruction associated with it. Evil requires outside assistance to survive. Good is self sufficient.

Anything should be considered evil if both the Bible says it is evil and physical reality shows that it leads to disease, death and destruction. Homosexuality is an example. The Bible says homosexuality is evil, and the AIDS is the physical reality of disease, death and destruction.

The government/state should discourage evil (non religious) by pointing out the disease, death and destruction of evil, and the church should encourage good.

 

[dlamberth]

If it were God's will that a person should die from a condition/situation, and the person prevented the death by medical care, would that person have sinned?

In the instructions Jesus gave us in helping the poor and those in need, where does Jesus tell us to make the determination you give? Simply put, you are presenting a theology that Jesus did not teach and asking a question based upon that flawed theology.

.

 

[Sphere]

I believe that about 50% of the things of the world are good and about 49.9% of the things are evil and about 0.1% represent things that represent a threat. Some may think the evil should be eradicated, but I think evil eradicates itself because evil has disease, death and destruction associated with it. Evil requires outside assistance to survive. Good is self sufficient.

You are delusional.

Anything should be considered evil if both the Bible says it is evil and physical reality shows that it leads to disease, death and destruction. Homosexuality is an example. The Bible says homosexuality is evil, and the AIDS is the physical reality of disease, death and destruction.

The overwhelming majority of AIDS/HIV cases are in heterosexual people(specifically females) and the #1 mode of transmission is through heterosexual sex--you bigot.

The government/state should discourage evil (non religious) by pointing out the disease, death and destruction of evil, and the church should encourage good.

Your perverted perception of reality is evil, and quite frankly revolting.

Thank God in this great nation, The United States, we are a free people capable of making our own choices. We will never stand to be subjected to the systematic oppression and totalitaristic fascist state, that you seek to impose on us all.

 

[Flynmonkie]

dlamberth quote

Am I miss-reading something here?!? All of this time what I've been hearing you saying is that social programs are evil and are that they are un-Christian. I believe that this is the first time I've heard you say that social programs do not work. To that point what I have to say is that I have to thank Medicare for my son's new kidney. Medicare worked very well for him. Like my son, Medicare has worked for millions of other American as well. So I just think your fill of a lot of bunk when you say that social programs do not work.

Response

I have a question.

If it were God's will that a person should die from a condition/situation, and the person prevented the death by medical care, would that person have sinned?

Three ways to pray.
1) If the condition is one where God has inflected the condition, then pray for acceptance.
2) If the condition is one where it is a disease, then pray for healing and sanitation.
3) If the condition is one where the person has violated God's Law, then pray for salvation.

I am glad you brought up Medicare, because it is a great example of a failed social program. At first all social programs do things, but a people find out there is a freebe, they flock to the freebe with every sort of need. It gets to where people want sex change operations, face transplants, etc.

The cost of Medicare has gotten so high that states are cutting back on services. Universal Health Care is a way of shifting the cost of Medicare from the government back to the people.

Social programs just do not work. Welfare had to limit the time that a person could receive welfare, in order to keep families from having several generations on welfare.

There is nothing wrong with preventive measures to see that social programs should not be abused. There is something wrong with oppression, with no hope.

Historically, it is primitive; each will strive to maintain their own survival. At this time, I do not believe we are naturally “geared” to be compassionate, considerate, or generally conscientious by nature. It is something learned. That sits on both sides of this debate. From rich to poor. There will always be this disparity, as someone mentioned earlier in this thread. The key to our democracy, or I believe the framers idea was to keep that playing field level. I don’t believe sex transplants (within reason) should be covered. I don’t believe “plastic surgery” short of real need should be covered. I do believe the basics should be covered if needed. You mention that people are lazy, or several generations “might” end up on welfare. As I have stated before, I think there is much more than meets the eye there. If someone is asked to live within the constraints of the rules of society, someone better make sure those people are educated. Otherwise, you will exactly that, people become educated that living off welfare is appropriate (which again I find this difficult to call “living”) and it is entirely society fault for not becoming proactive in this.

So I guess what I am telling you is that yes there may be some laziness going on, but it is not “just” with “welfare” recipients. So far, by what I have seen in your posts is a person reverting to that natural primitive state making excuses not to do your part.

 

[IzzyPop]

Anything should be considered evil if both the Bible says it is evil and physical reality shows that it leads to disease, death and destruction. Homosexuality is an example. The Bible says homosexuality is evil, and the AIDS is the physical reality of disease, death and destruction.

So I will ask the question again. Due to lesbians having the lowest transmission rates of HIV, does this mean that God approves of lesbianism?

 

[clirus]

Flynmonkie quote

If someone is asked to live within the constraints of the rules of society, someone better make sure those people are educated. Otherwise, you will exactly that, people become educated that living off welfare is appropriate (which again I find this difficult to call "living") and it is entirely society fault for not becoming proactive in this.

Response

If someone is asked to live within the constraints of the rules of society, someone better make sure the rules are ones that work. The rules of society defined in the Bible as the Christian Lifestyle lead to a good life for people. The rules of society defined by Atheists as the Atheistic Lifestyle leads to disease, death and destruction.

There is an old saying, "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." You can educate people all you want, but if they want sex, drugs and being lazy, that is what they will do.

I can tolerate people that want sex, drugs and being lazy, I just don't feel the government has any responsibility for them when their Atheistic Lifestyle leads to disease, death and destruction.

 

[Flynmonkie]

If someone is asked to live within the constraints of the rules of society, someone better make sure the rules are ones that work. The rules of society defined in the Bible as the Christian Lifestyle lead to a good life for people.

Some "one" does, God.

 

[Flynmonkie]

I can tolerate people that want sex, drugs and being lazy, I just don't feel the government has any responsibility for them when their Atheistic Lifestyle leads to disease, death and destruction.

Mind you, I see you are still under the misconception that we will be able to "rid" the world, of ALL “sin”...

As I said, if you keep this thought, you will be chasing your tail for a very long time. It simply is not logical.

 

[christalee4]

christalee4 quote

Civil Law should control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. people. Christians should advocate that which is good and healthy for society as described in the Bible. Civil Law should control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. that which is harmful (disease, death and destruction) to society.

So Clirus, what would you do with the hundreds of thousands, PLUS people who need to be destroyed. Presumably. Would you give them a break first to repent, and if they did not , how you would your society deal with them?

 

[Sphere]

Send them to Christification camps.

Es arbeite fur deutschland, recht? Ich bedeutet, sie waren die guten jahre! Zwischen 1939 und 1945.