The Bible

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟70,740.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
And you have regurgitated that statement pretty often also.

I keep waiting for you to say something other than, "you can't prove that".

Certainly, one of us is wrong.

What more do you want me to say other than the truth? You haven't supported your assertions. Whenever you've been challenged you've failed to counter with evidence, but have instead run away, only to return with the same baseless assertions. The day I say something other than this is the day when you actually start qualifying your outrageous claims with empirically meaningful evidence that we can all discuss. Until then, you'll just have to get used to it, because even if I don't say this, someone else inexorably will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr Dave
Upvote 0

salida

Veteran
Jun 14, 2006
4,305
278
✟6,243.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
We can't fairly have one religion promoted over another. So in fairness, we separate church and state. It has nothing to do with "replacing" or trying to abolish a religion. Religion just has no place in politics.


Athiest and secular humanism which is a religion has no place in politics either then. The point is everybody has a value system and Christ called christians to be a light on a hill-not to put things in a compartment and hide sir.

Thomas Jefferson who gets misquoted all the time wanted the government out of churches-not christianity removed from the public square.

Who was Thomas Jefferson?
and what did he believe about God?
http://www.free2pray.info/TJefferson.html
 
Religion and the Founding of the american republic
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06-2.html
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DuneSoldier

Regular Member
Apr 22, 2010
520
25
✟8,302.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Athiest and secular humanism which is a religion has no place in politics either then. The point is everybody has a value system and Christ called christians to be a light on a hill-not to put things in a compartment and hide sir.

Thomas Jefferson who gets misquoted all the time wanted the government out of churches-not christianity removed from the public square.

I don't want Christianity removed from the public square. But I don't want to have the laws of the country based on the Old Testament Eye for an Eye system.

You can't have the church influencing the government without having the government influence the church. Sadly even with our current secular government I'm seeing the politics of the believers corrupting the believes and the image of the local churches around here.
 
Upvote 0
T

The Lady Kate

Guest
Athiest and secular humanism which is a religion has no place in politics either then.

You can keep calling them religions, but it doesn't make it so... it does, however, give you a nice rationalization to become just like your perceived enemy.

The point is everybody has a value system and Christ called christians to be a light on a hill-not to put things in a compartment and hide sir.

And certainly not to keep your prayers out of the public square and street corners, but instead in private where only God sees... wait a minute.

Maybe Matthew 6 was talking about some other religion? :scratch:

Thomas Jefferson who gets misquoted all the time wanted the government out of churches-not christianity removed from the public square.

Alas, separation works both ways... It's hard to put Christianity in the public square without the public footing the bill... and that's the sort of thing a secular government tries to avoid.
 
Upvote 0

clirus

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2004
3,208
106
✟3,900.00
Faith
Baptist
What more do you want me to say other than the truth? You haven't supported your assertions. Whenever you've been challenged you've failed to counter with evidence, but have instead run away, only to return with the same baseless assertions. The day I say something other than this is the day when you actually start qualifying your outrageous claims with empirically meaningful evidence that we can all discuss. Until then, you'll just have to get used to it, because even if I don't say this, someone else inexorably will.

To the Atheist the truth is God does not exist.

To the Christian the truth is God does exist.

Now which truth is truth?

You have opinions/beliefs and I have opinions/beliefs.

One of us is wrong.
 
Upvote 0

clirus

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2004
3,208
106
✟3,900.00
Faith
Baptist
salida quote

Athiest and secular humanism which is a religion has no place in politics either then. The point is everybody has a value system and Christ called christians to be a light on a hill-not to put things in a compartment and hide sir.

Response

Amen, Amen, and AAAmen

Evolution should not be taught in school unless "intelligent design"/creationism is taught also. Neither evolution nor intelligent design/creationism can be proved so both are faith based concepts.

The government needs to get out of promoting Atheism and Humanism.
 
Upvote 0

Mr Dave

God Save The Queen!
Apr 2, 2010
7,220
762
Sheffield
✟25,710.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Single
Evolution should not be taught in school unless "intelligent design"/creationism is taught also. Neither evolution nor intelligent design/creationism can be proved so both are faith based concepts.

The government needs to get out of promoting Atheism and Humanism.

I don't know about where you are, but both of these are taught in schools, at least in Britain,

Evolution in biology classes, ID in R.E.

ID is not science so is not taught in science.
Evolution is not religion, so is not taught in RE.
ID is religious view held by some so is taught in RE.
Evolution is scientific so is taught is science.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟70,740.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
To the Atheist the truth is God does not exist.

To the Christian the truth is God does exist.

Now which truth is truth?

You have opinions/beliefs and I have opinions/beliefs.

One of us is wrong.

That's a red herring. We're NOT talking about opinion on whether God exists or not. We're talking about your opinion on poverty, its causes, and the Good Samaritan, among other issues. We're talking about the fact that whenever your opinion on these issues is challenged, and you are asked to support your assertions with empirically meaningful evidence that might compel us to agree, you run away. We're talking about the fact that you make extraordinary claims, but don't show us the extraordinary evidence required to back them up. We're talking about you making baseless assertions, and then running away from the challenge when someone inevitably comes along to scrutinize them.

If this is how you intend to play the game, then you've already lost.
 
Upvote 0

clirus

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2004
3,208
106
✟3,900.00
Faith
Baptist
That's a red herring. We're NOT talking about opinion on whether God exists or not. We're talking about your opinion on poverty, its causes, and the Good Samaritan, among other issues. We're talking about the fact that whenever your opinion on these issues is challenged, and you are asked to support your assertions with empirically meaningful evidence that might compel us to agree, you run away. We're talking about the fact that you make extraordinary claims, but don't show us the extraordinary evidence required to back them up. We're talking about you making baseless assertions, and then running away from the challenge when someone inevitably comes along to scrutinize them.

If this is how you intend to play the game, then you've already lost.

Well, certainly one of us is lost.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟70,740.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Well, certainly one of us is lost.

Why can't you address the actual point? Is it really so hard? I've asked you quite a few times now whether you intend on supporting your assertions with empirically meaningful evidence. And on each reply you've dodged that question. A simple yes or no would suffice to let us know whether we are wasting our time in assuming that you are here for a genuine debate as opposed to an Op-Ed piece.
 
Upvote 0

Tielec

Organisational Psychologist
Feb 26, 2010
214
17
Perth
✟7,942.00
Faith
Atheist
The collision between sociopathy and christianity.

One of the things I do is psychometric testing, including personality. When I test myself I consistently find that in terms of caring I am on the SUPER low end. This is not neccessarily a bad thing (it is for clinical psychologists obviously). Luckily I truly believe that better outcomes can be achieved by all stakeholders if we look out for each other, regardless of how distasteful/boring/pathetic I personally find the process.

I wonder if clirus hasn't attempted to use christianity in a similar way, to self-regulate behaviour, but without any emotional response to determine what parts of the bible to listen to and which to ignore. Without emotions it's hard to determine right and wrong, we can't all be rational ethicists like Singer. Instead we would focus on the parts of the bible that are intellectually salient, and follow that rabbit hole down.

To those of you who will rightly criticise me for psycho-analysing innapropriately I can only claim that my defense is an extreme curiosity as to how someone can end up in this state...
 
Upvote 0

clirus

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2004
3,208
106
✟3,900.00
Faith
Baptist
Why can't you address the actual point? Is it really so hard? I've asked you quite a few times now whether you intend on supporting your assertions with empirically meaningful evidence. And on each reply you've dodged that question. A simple yes or no would suffice to let us know whether we are wasting our time in assuming that you are here for a genuine debate as opposed to an Op-Ed piece.

The only debate I see from you is you saying, "You can't prove that."

I will let the logic and Bible references be the evidence.

I do believe you are wasting your time.
 
Upvote 0

Archaeopteryx

Wanderer
Jul 1, 2007
22,229
2,608
✟70,740.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
The only debate I see from you is you saying, "You can't prove that."

I will let the logic and Bible references be the evidence.

I do believe you are wasting your time.

But there's the problem. The logic and Bible references are evidence against your assertions, not for them. You mount a most unpersuassive argument, it is inevittably scrutinised using logic, Bible references and empirical evidence, and then you make a flippant remark and run off without adequately addressing the challenges pressed against you. That isn't a genuine debate Clirus. That is argumentum ad nauseum to the extreme, and the skeleton of a failed strategy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mr Dave
Upvote 0

clirus

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2004
3,208
106
✟3,900.00
Faith
Baptist
The collision between sociopathy and christianity.

One of the things I do is psychometric testing, including personality. When I test myself I consistently find that in terms of caring I am on the SUPER low end. This is not neccessarily a bad thing (it is for clinical psychologists obviously). Luckily I truly believe that better outcomes can be achieved by all stakeholders if we look out for each other, regardless of how distasteful/boring/pathetic I personally find the process.

I wonder if clirus hasn't attempted to use christianity in a similar way, to self-regulate behaviour, but without any emotional response to determine what parts of the bible to listen to and which to ignore. Without emotions it's hard to determine right and wrong, we can't all be rational ethicists like Singer. Instead we would focus on the parts of the bible that are intellectually salient, and follow that rabbit hole down.

To those of you who will rightly criticise me for psycho-analysing innapropriately I can only claim that my defense is an extreme curiosity as to how someone can end up in this state...

There is a natural desire in humans to look out for each other, but there is also an base sinful nature in humans. Thus it is easy for humans to take advantage of other humans.

Humans have advanced because they look out for each other in a society, but a very key point of a society is to reward good and rebuke/execute evil.

The Bible represents the absolute authority on humans, good and evil, because God created humans.

I do not believe humans can ever correctly define good and evil since humans have a sin nature. I do not believe emotions should be used to determine right from wrong. Evil can look very needy/pitiful, except when you find the needy/pitiful situation exists because of sinful activity that could have been prevented by accepting Jesus Christ as Lord/Savior and committing to following the commandments/doctrines of the Bible.

No matter how appealing it may seem, I do not believe Christians should reward evil by Christian charity, nor government reward evil by Socialism.

Since I cannot correctly determine right from wrong, I yield that authority to God and recommend that others do likewise. If God/Bible says it is evil then Christians should rebuke evil in obedience to God and government should rebuke/execute evil for health, safety and economic reasons.

The church and state should never reward evil.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums