Born again morality as opposed to the worlds morality.

[Hans Blaster]

Not sure how that can be the case considering its the 7th commandment handed down by Moses some 2,500 years ago and written in Exodus 20. Christ also refers to this some 2000 years ago.

Matthew 5:27-28“You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery. ' But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

The Protestants do not have a different set of commandments as they are in the bible. The 6ths is don't Kill and the 7th is don't commit adultery.

It's the same text, but they divide it into commandments in different ways. Of the 11 commandments the Catholics merge the first two into one and the protestants (roughly) the last 2 into one.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Then they are breaching Christian ethics as the bible clearly says that abortion is wrong. THis is how we sort out the false teachings from the truth of Gods word.

If it did you (and all of the other anti-abortion posters here) could quote a single verse that read something like "abortion is a sin against God". They can't. You can't. The anti-abortion position many Christians use can be *constructed* from various biblical principles and verses, but not a single, clear statement.

 

[BCP1928]

Whenever someone uses the phrase "...as the Bible clearly says..." be sure to keep your hand on your wallet and your eyes on the nearest exit.

 

[Hans Blaster]

First its a civil right to express your religious belief in public.

Are you sure? Do people have civil rights to hold a religious ceremony on a busy highway?

So two civil rights are clashing. Second its the hypocracy that they allowed anti Christian groups to demonstrate outside churches and Christian organisations for simply being a Christian organisation.

Protests near abortion clinics aren't banned. Impeding access and harassing patients is.

Its the lawfare used indescriminately against one group while allowing the other to get away with the very thing they are coming down on Christians for. That was a big factor in why the Dems were voted out.

What "indiescriminately" are we talking about. This is a law about interfering with access to abortion clinics. It only applies to those situations. The only people who care about these "injustices" are the anti-abortion extremists who were never going to vote for a Democrat for anything. It had nothing to do with why the Democrats were "voted out".

Third the anti prayer law applies to a certaiun perimeter.

It's not an anti-prayer law. It is an anti-harassment law. If you put your harassment in the form of a prayer that does not matter.

So even those living in that area are scrutinised. Even if they sat on their own front porch and prayed. Fourth its a thought crime. The State is controlling the minds and thoughts of others. There is no way to tell. It is assumed that Christians just stopping to think in the area are praying and assumed to be doing wrong.

It is not a thought crime law (look at your own religion for those). The US government doesn't know what people are thinking.

Its draconian and totalitarian which is exactly what people were comp-laining about the Biden administrations lawfare and power control by elites behind the party.

Oh good grief, now its the "elites behind the party".

 

[stevevw]

The US was not a theocracy or operated under biblical law AT ANY TIME. Your historical understanding is worse than you political understanding.

Yes you say today the US is like a theocracy. If thats the case in comparison the early colonies had laws against adultery, SSM and homosexuality. Sunday was a day of worship and it was compulsory in many colonies. Which is closer to a theocracy back then or now.

So what? That doesn't make a theocracy. It is government control by the church that makes a theocracy.

Your making out theres a theocracy today. I think back then was closer to a theocracy than now. On morality the US was virtually a theocracy as it reflected the biblie. Even as recent as the post war was 90% belief and social norms were biblical in comparison to today.

Where was chruch attendance compulsory in the US? (And we don't even have a parliament.)

I thought this was common knowledge. I even remember the Blue laws in my lifetime when it was against the law to open business on Sundays as it was a day of worship. But before that many colonies actually had compulsory Sunday worship and if you weren't in church you were arrested.

As Protestant moral reformers organized the Sabbath reform in 19th-century America, calls for the enactment and enforcement of stricter Sunday laws developed. Numerous Americans were arrested for working, keeping an open shop, drinking alcohol, traveling, and engaging in recreational activities on Sundays.

Blue law - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

After the 1680s, with many more churches and clerical bodies emerging, religion in New England became more organized and attendance more uniformly enforced. By the eighteenth century, the vast majority of all colonists were churchgoers. Asserting that leaders and officials derived that authority from divine guidance and that civil authority ought to be used to enforce religious conformity.
Religion in Colonial America: Trends, Regulations, and Beliefs

Way to get this EXACTLY BACKWARDS. Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli assures the other side that the US is a secular state:

Treaty of Tripoli - Wikipedia

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen (Muslims);

Yes but in practice they told the Muslims that unlike them in treating fellow humans badly they were a Christian nation.

The treaty was assuring the Tripolitan Muslim warlord that the government of the United States would never show hostility toward his country based on America’s intimate affiliation with Christianity.

The January 1787 treaty with Morocco (“Treaty of Peace…,” 1846c, 8:100-108) contains the following references: “In the Name of Almighty God” and “trusting in God” (p. 100). It also refers to “the Christian powers” (in Article X, p. 102), “any Christian power” (in Article XI, p. 102), “the other Christian nations” (in Article XVII, p. 103), and “any of the Christian powers” (in Article XXIV, p. 104)—the last two references clearly implying that America is among them. Article XXV states: “This treaty shall continue in full force, with the help of God, for fifty years
Article XI places “Moors” in juxtaposition to “Christians” (Article XI, p. 104), and the “Additional Article” contrasts “Moorish” with “Christian Powers” (p. 104).
The Treaty of Tripoli and America's Founders - Apologetics Press

John Quincy Adams, son of John Adams and 6th President, declared:
From the day of the Declaration, the people of the North American Union and of its constituent States, were associated bodies of civilized men and Christians, in a state of nature; but not of Anarchy. They were bound by the laws of God, which they all, and by the laws of the Gospel, which they nearly all, acknowledged as the rules of their conduct (1821, p. 26, emp. added).

So though it may be true that the United States government did not enforce a specific sect of Christianity, it certainly wasn’t neutral when it came to religious matters. In fact, religion was viewed as necessary to a civil society and the government of the United States, through its executive, was willing to incorporate Christian beliefs and Christian symbolism into its affairs.
Secularists, please stop quoting the Treaty of Tripoli

Majority of a religion does not make a state a theocracy.

I thought you said it does. You claim even minority Christian Evangelists within Trumps team is enough to make a soft theocracy.

Nevertheless The majority will dictate social norms and influence policy as a result. Just like social norms today will influence government policy and law. So we can go back in recent times and see the Christian influence on norms and laws. Society was dictated by Christian balues and beliefs. The dissenters were the minority. What we consider moral today was taboo, ostracised and outlawed only 50 plus years ago.

It is only the government that matters. (Again)

Your not seeing the bigger picture. Yes the State has assumed power. But the State itself is not a neutral machine and can be influenced by ideology and religion. You just said the State in the hands of Christians like Vance and others is becoming a soft theocracy.

In the past the State was pro religion and allowed Christian mvalues as the basis for law and order. There is no neutral State. If its not based on God then its another god or its an ideology such as Woke.

Humans cannot exist together without some metaphysical basis for morality and meaning. There have been various foundations for morals and meaning by it humanism, wellbeing, science, Woke, DEI, social justice, human rights ect.

These all have some philosophical, metaphysical and ideological basis. They are not science and cannot be measured like objective reality. So they are a belief. One belief about morality against another.

 

[stevevw]

Are you sure? Do people have civil rights to hold a religious ceremony on a busy highway?

No one has that right. Once again your being perdantic. Oh wait groups like BLM and Extinction Rebellion take that right and no one does anything. They often stop traffic and cause mayham for society.

I am talking about Christians expressing their beliefs in public without being attacked or sacked or ostracised. Riley Gaines was near killed for just refusing to acknowledge trans ideology (which is a belief) and not reality. Good Christians being attacked for just expressing their beliefs.

Protests near abortion clinics aren't banned. Impeding access and harassing patients is.

No Christians are arrested for simply standing within the limits which extends to no where near the entrance. Just standing or walking by the opposite side of the street and praying is deemed illegal.

British Man Convicted of Criminal Charges for Praying Silently Near Abortion Clinic
In Britain, it can be a crime to think the wrong thoughts in the wrong place. It sounds absurd—not to mention Orwellian—but a handful of people have been arrested or charged in the country simply for praying silently near abortion clinics.

British man convicted of criminal charges for praying silently near abortion clinic

In Britain, it can be a crime to think the wrong thoughts in the wrong place. It sounds absurd—not to mention Orwellian—but a handful of people have been

reason.com

Abortion clinic payout woman shocked at prayer arrest

Silent prayer woman given payout over Birmingham abortion clinic arrest

West Midlands Police paid Isabel Vaughan-Spruce £13,000 but did not admit liability.

www.bbc.com

Laws in Austrial make praying for someone who is trans to overcome thir problem is deemed conversion therapy.

New Australian Law Makes Certain Prayers ‘Unlawful’

New Australian Law Makes Certain Prayers ‘Unlawful’

As Vice President J.D. Vance warns about the suppression of Christians' free speech rights, a new law in a Western nation makes "praying with or over a person"

washingtonstand.com

Abortion clinic 'buffer zones' violate first amendment – supreme court
Justices side with seven Massachusetts anti-abortion protesters who said 35-foot buffer zone infringed on free speech

In fact we have a right not just for prayer but to actually peacefully protest against abortion clinics like we have a right to protest against religions like Islam or Jews like Uni students or politicians or environmentalist outside polluting corporations. This is an Orwellian law and an example of how the State enforces its religion of Woke on Christians and others.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the government from “abridging the freedom of speech.” U.S. Const. amend. I. Supreme Court case law “establishes that private religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression.”

Know Your Rights: The Right To Pray in Public | American Center for Law and Justice

From the nation’s founding to the present day, Presidents and governors have called for voluntary prayer or reflection in response to natural disasters, tragedies, and other significant events. Those who signed the Declaration of Independence believed that God hears and answers prayer, as they . . .

aclj.org

What "indiescriminately" are we talking about. This is a law about interfering with access to abortion clinics. It only applies to those situations. The only people who care about these "injustices" are the anti-abortion extremists who were never going to vote for a Democrat for anything. It had nothing to do with why the Democrats were "voted out".

Its not just the prayer situation. I gave you some examples of the lawfare used against Trump supporters and Christians and Trump himself relentlessly. People are not stupid. They see this and that was part of why even dems turned against their own party as they had lost the plot and were becoming radical due to their ideological over reach.

It's not an anti-prayer law. It is an anti-harassment law. If you put your harassment in the form of a prayer that does not matter.

It is according to many Christians. They are not even allowed to pray and protest across the road. At the end of the day most are not harrassing but just want the right to pray outside what they consider is wrong and murder.

The State has allowed much more leeway for those protesting their own ideologies such as BLM and environmental groups proesting outside organisations and even churches. Its the bias attitude.

Anti-Israel activists protest outside Manhattan cathedral on Christmas

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/anti-israel-activists-protest-outside-manhattan-cathedral-on-christmas/

LGBTQI+ group protest outside controversial Australian Christian Lobby event
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-24/acl-protest/100401686

It is not a thought crime law (look at your own religion for those). The US government doesn't know what people are thinking.

But they tell you what you should be thinking. Prayer is a silent act. How do you tell that a person standing across the road from a clinic is praying or not. Does that mean someone sitting on a bench across the raod with their eyes closed could be assumed to be praying. Of course its a thought crime.

Its telling people what they can and cannot think or believe with their own mind and conscience. In fact in some ways it will make Christians very uncomfortable about even being in the area. What happens if you live a couple of doors down from a clinic and you have audiable prayers or hold a prayer group in the privacy of your own home. Someone heres you and reports you to the authorities. Its big brother stuff.

Oh good grief, now its the "elites behind the party".

Of course didn't you know that. Do you honestly believe Bid was running the show lol. That was all part of it. The gaslighting of Biden, the orchestration of Harris bypassing vetting, the involvement of Obama and others behind the scenes. Even Michelle O'bama calling all the black men naughty boys for not endorcing Kamala. It was Obamas mark 2 lol with some strings pulled by big money sponsors like Suros.

You need to get up with the reality of what has been happening. I understand some dems have not acknowledged they lost it and became captured by ideology more than their fundemental principles. They became more like anti liberal in the end. Thats what ideology does as its a belief like a religious belief.

 

[stevevw]

The Catholics use a different Bible: 6th is adultery, 7th is stealing.

Yeah thanks. That shows you how long its been since I was Catholic lol. In fact I really left when I was a young teen and never really got into all the ins and outs of the tradition and law.

But its really a minor difference because whether its 6 or 7 its the laws themselves. My point was that there is not alternative views or versions of these laws. Adultery is a sin full stop and Christ said its not even the act itself thats the sin. Rather its the end result of a heart that is already lusting. But even without acting its a sin.

This was the fullfillment of the law. This was the spirit of the law I was talking about. Its the change of heart and not the efforts to conform through dicipline or regime.

Being born again is the transformation of the heart and mind into the spiritual rather than the natural instincts or desires which form the basis for morality in the world.

 

[stevevw]

It's the same text, but they divide it into commandments in different ways. Of the 11 commandments the Catholics merge the first two into one and the protestants (roughly) the last 2 into one.

Yes and thats the important thing that they are the same. There is no second or third version. So this is one way we can determine if Christian denominations are adhering to the core beliefs which are essential and non negociable.

The same applies to Christs teachings and the diciples teachings to the church which was based on the authority of Christ through the Holy Spirit. Paul mentions this

Romans 1:1
Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God,

1 Corinthians 11:1-34
Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

 

[stevevw]

If it did you (and all of the other anti-abortion posters here) could quote a single verse that read something like "abortion is a sin against God". They can't. You can't. The anti-abortion position many Christians use can be *constructed* from various biblical principles and verses, but not a single, clear statement.

No it can't. Its not a matter of having a specific verse that says "abortion is a sin against God". Not every moral situation is covered say under 'thou shall not kill'. But we can determine what is life and what is murdering life.

Psalm 139:13-16
“For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.

Job 10:11-12
“You clothed me with skin and flesh, and knit me together with bones and sinews. You have granted me life and steadfast love.”

Luke 1:41, 44
“When Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb.

Ephesians 1:3-4
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him.”

We can safely say that we are life in the womb and known by God as we are developing. It is God who puts us together. In fact God knew us before we were born.

So if we are life from conception and kist as worthy to God then aborting a fetus is like killing an innocent new born or a child. There is no difference between inside and outside the womb. The same life is life and precious to God. So its breach the commandment to not kill.

There is no alternative rational as a Christian because they would have to argue and prove that life does not begin at conception according to the bible. Which they cannot possibly do because its clear that life for God begins even before conception.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Yes you say today the US is like a theocracy.

I am not. It is a path we are dangerously close to going down, but it has not happened.

If thats the case in comparison the early colonies had laws against adultery, SSM and homosexuality. Sunday was a day of worship and it was compulsory in many colonies. Which is closer to a theocracy back then or now.

Your making out theres a theocracy today. I think back then was closer to a theocracy than now. On morality the US was virtually a theocracy as it reflected the biblie. Even as recent as the post war was 90% belief and social norms were biblical in comparison to today.

The US is 250 years old. What came before IS NOT THE US.

I thought this was common knowledge. I even remember the Blue laws in my lifetime when it was against the law to open business on Sundays as it was a day of worship. But before that many colonies actually had compulsory Sunday worship and if you weren't in church you were arrested.

As Protestant moral reformers organized the Sabbath reform in 19th-century America, calls for the enactment and enforcement of stricter Sunday laws developed. Numerous Americans were arrested for working, keeping an open shop, drinking alcohol, traveling, and engaging in recreational activities on Sundays.

Blue law - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I am aware of blue laws. They do not constitute a theocracy. Plenty of things were open on sundays. (My personal favorite was the very Dutch Calvinist town near by that prohibited alcohol sales on Sunday, but the local bar (or at least one of them) would leave their back doors open on Sundays during the [regional NFL team] games and were open anyway.

After the 1680s, with many more churches and clerical bodies emerging, religion in New England became more organized and attendance more uniformly enforced. By the eighteenth century, the vast majority of all colonists were churchgoers. Asserting that leaders and officials derived that authority from divine guidance and that civil authority ought to be used to enforce religious conformity.
Religion in Colonial America: Trends, Regulations, and Beliefs

Not the US.

Yes but in practice they told the Muslims that unlike them in treating fellow humans badly they were a Christian nation.

The treaty was assuring the Tripolitan Muslim warlord that the government of the United States would never show hostility toward his country based on America’s intimate affiliation with Christianity.

The January 1787 treaty with Morocco (“Treaty of Peace…,” 1846c, 8:100-108) contains the following references: “In the Name of Almighty God” and “trusting in God” (p. 100). It also refers to “the Christian powers” (in Article X, p. 102), “any Christian power” (in Article XI, p. 102), “the other Christian nations” (in Article XVII, p. 103), and “any of the Christian powers” (in Article XXIV, p. 104)—the last two references clearly implying that America is among them. Article XXV states: “This treaty shall continue in full force, with the help of God, for fifty years
Article XI places “Moors” in juxtaposition to “Christians” (Article XI, p. 104), and the “Additional Article” contrasts “Moorish” with “Christian Powers” (p. 104).
The Treaty of Tripoli and America's Founders - Apologetics Press

John Quincy Adams, son of John Adams and 6th President, declared:
From the day of the Declaration, the people of the North American Union and of its constituent States, were associated bodies of civilized men and Christians, in a state of nature; but not of Anarchy. They were bound by the laws of God, which they all, and by the laws of the Gospel, which they nearly all, acknowledged as the rules of their conduct (1821, p. 26, emp. added).

So though it may be true that the United States government did not enforce a specific sect of Christianity, it certainly wasn’t neutral when it came to religious matters. In fact, religion was viewed as necessary to a civil society and the government of the United States, through its executive, was willing to incorporate Christian beliefs and Christian symbolism into its affairs.
Secularists, please stop quoting the Treaty of Tripoli

You should stop now and stick to the text. The treaty does not (as you originally brought up, not me) call the US a "Christian nation". I don't need some text from some mid-wit appologist.

I thought you said it does.

I most certainly did not. In fact I said "Majority of a religion does not make a state a theocracy."

You claim even minority Christian Evangelists within Trumps team is enough to make a soft theocracy.

It is what they are trying to do. It is our (americans) responsibility to stop them.

Nevertheless The majority will dictate social norms and influence policy as a result. Just like social norms today will influence government policy and law. So we can go back in recent times and see the Christian influence on norms and laws. Society was dictated by Christian balues and beliefs. The dissenters were the minority. What we consider moral today was taboo, ostracised and outlawed only 50 plus years ago.

This isn't about "societal norms". This is about government imposition of religious rules. (Their religion is dying here anyway.)

Your not seeing the bigger picture. Yes the State has assumed power. But the State itself is not a neutral machine and can be influenced by ideology and religion. You just said the State in the hands of Christians like Vance and others is becoming a soft theocracy.

In the past the State was pro religion and allowed Christian mvalues as the basis for law and order. There is no neutral State. If its not based on God then its another god or its an ideology such as Woke.

US criminal law has nothing to do with your religion.

Humans cannot exist together without some metaphysical basis for morality and meaning. There have been various foundations for morals and meaning by it humanism, wellbeing, science, Woke, DEI, social justice, human rights ect.

These all have some philosophical, metaphysical and ideological basis. They are not science and cannot be measured like objective reality. So they are a belief. One belief about morality against another.

What on earth is this supposed to mean?

 

[Hans Blaster]

No one has that right. Once again your being perdantic. Oh wait groups like BLM and Extinction Rebellion take that right and no one does anything. They often stop traffic and cause mayham for society.

Protests that block traffic often result in arrests (some have permits).

I am talking about Christians expressing their beliefs in public without being attacked or sacked or ostracised. Riley Gaines was near killed for just refusing to acknowledge trans ideology (which is a belief) and not reality. Good Christians being attacked for just expressing their beliefs.

You mean the swimmer who finished tied for 5th and was given the prepared 6th place trophy instead of the 5th? That loser? (Not the topic.)

No Christians are arrested for simply standing within the limits which extends to no where near the entrance. Just standing or walking by the opposite side of the street and praying is deemed illegal.

Evidence would help here, but you posted this...

British Man Convicted of Criminal Charges for Praying Silently Near Abortion Clinic
In Britain, it can be a crime to think the wrong thoughts in the wrong place. It sounds absurd—not to mention Orwellian—but a handful of people have been arrested or charged in the country simply for praying silently near abortion clinics.

British man convicted of criminal charges for praying silently near abortion clinic

In Britain, it can be a crime to think the wrong thoughts in the wrong place. It sounds absurd—not to mention Orwellian—but a handful of people have been

reason.com

Abortion clinic payout woman shocked at prayer arrest

Silent prayer woman given payout over Birmingham abortion clinic arrest

West Midlands Police paid Isabel Vaughan-Spruce £13,000 but did not admit liability.

www.bbc.com

Laws in Austrial make praying for someone who is trans to overcome thir problem is deemed conversion therapy.

New Australian Law Makes Certain Prayers ‘Unlawful’

New Australian Law Makes Certain Prayers ‘Unlawful’

As Vice President J.D. Vance warns about the suppression of Christians' free speech rights, a new law in a Western nation makes "praying with or over a person"

washingtonstand.com

Not the US. Not relevant.

Abortion clinic 'buffer zones' violate first amendment – supreme court
Justices side with seven Massachusetts anti-abortion protesters who said 35-foot buffer zone infringed on free speech

The same supreme court that permitted abortion bans and is mostly catholic? OK, sure.

In fact we have a right not just for prayer but to actually peacefully protest against abortion clinics like we have a right to protest against religions like Islam or Jews like Uni students or politicians or environmentalist outside polluting corporations. This is an Orwellian law and an example of how the State enforces its religion of Woke on Christians and others.


The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the government from “abridging the freedom of speech.” U.S. Const. amend. I. Supreme Court case law “establishes that private religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression.”

Know Your Rights: The Right To Pray in Public | American Center for Law and Justice

From the nation’s founding to the present day, Presidents and governors have called for voluntary prayer or reflection in response to natural disasters, tragedies, and other significant events. Those who signed the Declaration of Independence believed that God hears and answers prayer, as they . . .

aclj.org

Its not just the prayer situation. I gave you some examples of the lawfare used against Trump supporters and Christians and Trump himself relentlessly.

"Peacefully protest abortion clinics" is not the same as blocking patients from entering and harassing them.

People are not stupid.

A lot of them are.

They see this and that was part of why even dems turned against their own party as they had lost the plot and were becoming radical due to their ideological over reach.

It is according to many Christians. They are not even allowed to pray and protest across the road. At the end of the day most are not harrassing but just want the right to pray outside what they consider is wrong and murder.

The State has allowed much more leeway for those protesting their own ideologies such as BLM and environmental groups proesting outside organisations and even churches. Its the bias attitude.

Anti-Israel activists protest outside Manhattan cathedral on Christmas

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/anti-israel-activists-protest-outside-manhattan-cathedral-on-christmas/

LGBTQI+ group protest outside controversial Australian Christian Lobby event
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-24/acl-protest/100401686

But they tell you what you should be thinking. Prayer is a silent act. How do you tell that a person standing across the road from a clinic is praying or not. Does that mean someone sitting on a bench across the raod with their eyes closed could be assumed to be praying. Of course its a thought crime.

Its telling people what they can and cannot think or believe with their own mind and conscience. In fact in some ways it will make Christians very uncomfortable about even being in the area. What happens if you live a couple of doors down from a clinic and you have audiable prayers or hold a prayer group in the privacy of your own home. Someone heres you and reports you to the authorities. Its big brother stuff.

Of course didn't you know that. Do you honestly believe Bid was running the show lol. That was all part of it. The gaslighting of Biden, the orchestration of Harris bypassing vetting, the involvement of Obama and others behind the scenes. Even Michelle O'bama calling all the black men naughty boys for not endorcing Kamala. It was Obamas mark 2 lol with some strings pulled by big money sponsors like Suros.

You need to get up with the reality of what has been happening. I understand some dems have not acknowledged they lost it and became captured by ideology more than their fundemental principles. They became more like anti liberal in the end. Thats what ideology does as its a belief like a religious belief.

Contain your posts.

 

[Hans Blaster]

No it can't. Its not a matter of having a specific verse that says "abortion is a sin against God". Not every moral situation is covered say under 'thou shall not kill'. But we can determine what is life and what is murdering life.

Then it is not clear.

Psalm 139:13-16
“For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.

Job 10:11-12
“You clothed me with skin and flesh, and knit me together with bones and sinews. You have granted me life and steadfast love.”

Luke 1:41, 44
“When Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb.

Ephesians 1:3-4
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him.”

We can safely say that we are life in the womb and known by God as we are developing. It is God who puts us together. In fact God knew us before we were born.

And yet it does not match the Jewish understanding of their part of the text.

So if we are life from conception and kist as worthy to God then aborting a fetus is like killing an innocent new born or a child. There is no difference between inside and outside the womb. The same life is life and precious to God. So its breach the commandment to not kill.

There is no alternative rational as a Christian because they would have to argue and prove that life does not begin at conception according to the bible. Which they cannot possibly do because its clear that life for God begins even before conception.

An embryo has life, but then so do the WBCs in a blood sample.

 

[partinobodycular]

(Their religion is dying here anyway.)

This might make for an interesting thread, because religion may in fact be on the cusp of a golden age. Diminishing belief in the supernatural has generally been equated with a rise in the educational level of society. The more educated the populous is, the less religious they are. Thus it would make sense to believe that the inverse is also true, that if you lower society's educational level you'll increase its religiosity.

Derek Muller's recent Youtube! video concerns the fact that a person's ability to reason is directly related to their subconscious knowledge base, which is itself related to the amount of effort that's required to learn new things. But with the advent of Google and AI, learning new things has become as simple as asking Google. No actual effort is required, thus no deep understanding of the subject is attained. We don't actually need to know very much at all, because we can always just ask AI.

Therefore modern technology may have the effect of making society dumber, and thus prone to a reversion to spirituality and religiosity. What happens when technology does our 'thinking' for us, and we're never forced to think things through for ourselves? Suddenly what's 'true' becomes manipulable by whatever's most prevalent on the internet, and Lord only knows how vocal religious zealots can be.

So the question is, will the constant availability of information make us dumber? And will that then make society more religious?

Veritasium: What Everyone Gets Wrong About AI and Learning – Derek Muller Explains

 

[Mountainmike]

This is not a morality. It is just proclaiming that your are divinely special and can no longer be immoral. I first encountered this theology as an adult and it was the first time I was forced to think about what might be theologically correct and I could not condone this theological position. It was the first time I even considered questioning a theology. It was not the last.

I’m surprised at that from an ex catholic .

Catholics don’t believe that born again cant sin.
Thats a Protestant evangelical / fundamentalist thing. Born again man made 500 year old doctrine courtesy some of the reformationists ( none of whom agreed with each other)

 

[Mountainmike]

Are you sure? Do people have civil rights to hold a religious ceremony on a busy highway?

Protests near abortion clinics aren't banned. Impeding access and harassing patients is.

What "indiescriminately" are we talking about. This is a law about interfering with access to abortion clinics. It only applies to those situations. The only people who care about these "injustices" are the anti-abortion extremists who were never going to vote for a Democrat for anything. It had nothing to do with why the Democrats were "voted out".

It's not an anti-prayer law. It is an anti-harassment law. If you put your harassment in the form of a prayer that does not matter.

It is not a thought crime law (look at your own religion for those). The US government doesn't know what people are thinking.

Oh good grief, now its the "elites behind the party".

Alas in the U.K. just protesting using a placard “ here to talk” is now illegal.
woman now has a criminal record and £20000 fine for just that
You get arrested for silent prayer in those areas. Thought is a crime.
its a slippery slope, for those determined to prevent protest.
Your lefties are no doubt in dialogue with ours.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Alas in the U.K. just protesting using a placard “ here to talk” is now illegal.
woman now has a criminal record and £20000 fine for just that
You get arrested for silent prayer in those areas. Thought is a crime.
its a slippery slope, for those determined to prevent protest.
Your lefties are no doubt in dialogue with ours.

Do the english even have rights?

 

[Mountainmike]

Do the english even have rights?

We have a bill of rights. 17th century , ECHR rules on free speech, and right to protest.

It’s No use against lefties and a judiciary intent on supporting them.

judiciaries are getting politicised. Here, and there.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I’m surprised at that from an ex catholic .

Why? (see below)

Catholics don’t believe that born again cant sin.
Thats a Protestant evangelical / fundamentalist thing. Born again man made 500 year old doctrine courtesy some of the reformationists ( none of whom agreed with each other)

That I heard some evangelical street preacher claiming some protestant thing and found it to be bad theology after consideration? Why would it be odd for a Catholic to conclude that the Catholic church was correct? (My only intellectual concern was that I had just chosen the think I already accepted.)

I still stand by that conclusion: A reward based on doing good things (or not doing bad things) is better than one based on believing something. (I just don't think the reward is real anymore.)

 

[Mountainmike]

Why? (see below)

That I heard some evangelical street preacher claiming some protestant thing and found it to be bad theology after consideration? Why would it be odd for a Catholic to conclude that the Catholic church was correct? (My only intellectual concern was that I had just chosen the think I already accepted.)

I still stand by that conclusion: A reward based on doing good things (or not doing bad things) is better than one based on believing something. (I just don't think the reward is real anymore.)

Sorry . I missed the context.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The Catholics use a different Bible: 6th is adultery, 7th is stealing.

That isn't about what Bible one uses. The text in Exodus is the same in Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox Bibles; the only differences are in how to regard the so-called Deuterocanonical Books (often called "The Apocrypha" in Protestant sources), and "Deuterocanonical" versions or parts of some of the Protocanonical books (most notably Esther and Daniel).

The text in Exodus merely speaks of the "Ten Words" which were written on the two stone tablets, but doesn't provide specifics on how to specifically enumerate these "Ten Words". As such there are several ways of numbering the Decalogue, keeping it always the Decalogue because the text calls it "Ten Words" (Decalogue means, literally, "Ten Words"). There is a traditional Jewish numbering, St. Augustine gave a numbering of them, which is what Roman Catholics, Lutherans, and [some](?) Anglicans continue to use, John Calvin provided a new numbering scheme which is what most Protestants today still use, and then the Eastern Christian Churches have their own numbering system.

So, for example, since Lutherans use the Augustinian numbering system, the Lutheran Confessions summarize the 1st Commandment as "Thou shalt have no other gods" and the 2nd Commandment as "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain". Thus the full text of the 1st Commandment, for Lutherans is:

"I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, ... but showing steadfast love to thousands who love Me and keep My commandments." - Exodus 20:2-6

This is also the case for Roman Catholics, as can be seen in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

On the other hand, the traditional Jewish numbering has the 1st Commandment as "I am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt" and the 2nd Commandment is "You shall have no other gods before Me", and the 3rd is "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord your God in vain".

While John Calvin, and most Protestants, have the 1st Commandment as "You shall have no other gods before Me" and the 2nd as "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything...", and the 3rd as "You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain".

It always adds up to being a Decalogue. So it's all the same commandments, it's just a matter of where Jews and Christians count 1, 2, 3, etc.

A common error I often see from some Protestants is the accusation that Catholcis have "removed the 2nd Commandment" because they simply don't know that they are using John Calvin's particular numbering system, while Catholics (and Lutherans, and Anglicans) are using the older Western Christian numbering system. And they often don't know this because no one ever told them, or they simply have never realized, that the Bible itself doesn't number the commandments, it simply tells us that there are "Ten Words". And readers have, in the millennia following, numbered them in different ways.

If one simply counts the "You shall" and "You shall nots", there are more than 10, so that alone wouldn't be an accurate way to number them. In order to get to a nice round 10 requires some level of arbitration. And, ultimately, such arbitration is hardly the point that matters in the Decalogue anyway.

-CryptoLutheran