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.
Did the Churches stop doing it or did the government take on that duty to itself first? We have only ever seen the expansion of governmental power as a result of the amount of programs it seeks to implement to fix society. Be it the New Deal or war against poverty. The Churches as far as I know did not just unilaterally stop providing care. Rather they were outcompeted by a far more powerful institution.What I am saying is that if the churches hadn't started to stop doing it, the government wouldn't have stepped in.
When did I say I would force anyone to follow my religion? I might make laws which which were inspired by Christianity, such as forbidding no fault divorce and in that way non-Christians in said state would be subject to a Christian standard. That doesn't mean they would have to follow Christianity. In as much as I don't have to be a liberal democrat in the West.But your ideal is forcing people to practice your religion. Not letting them make that choice for themselves. That ... says everything.
I think I'm done with this conversation.
The alleged views of Jesus carry zero weight in US law.Again you're basing your definition of murder on US law and not on what Jesus views as taking a life.
When did the Churches unliterally decide to stop helping people?The way I saw it is churches had stopped doing it.
When did I say I would force anyone to follow my religion? I might make laws which which were inspired by Christianity, such as forbidding no fault divorce and in that way non-Christians in said state would be subject to a Christian standard. That doesn't mean they would have to follow Christianity. In as much as I don't have to be a liberal democrat in the West.
Maybe the above is a typo, but if you would make laws that were inspired by Christianity and non-Christians would be subject to those laws, that is basically forcing a non-Christian to follow Christian laws. In essence, following Christianity. You would force Christian morals on a population that is not part of your religion.
When did the Churches unliterally decide to stop helping people?
Well yeah.
Let's say you have a small local Church which does have a program to help some of it's less fortunate members. Then we put that local Church against the power of the state which adopts the same program, gets rid of any requirements the Church has to receive it's aid and has a thousand times the resources. Who will win in the long term?I didn't say all churches. However, there are many that do not help. I will admit that some of this could be the result of the explosion of denominations or non-denominational churches that are pop-up churches.
I cannot give you an exact time.
As a 21st century Christian you are against it but Christians before you were not. In fact did you know most Christians throughout history were not liberal secular progressives?So, she is indeed right. You would be forcing Christian law on non-Christians and in essence forcing them to practice your religion.
As a Christian myself I am 100% against this! People have the right to choose and even God gives people a choice.
Let's say you have a small local Church which does have a program to help some of it's less fortunate members. Then we put that local Church against the power of the state which adopts the same program, gets rid of any requirements the Church has to receive it's aid and has a thousand times the resources. Who will win in the long term?
As a 21st century Christian you are against it but Christians before you were not. In fact did you know most Christians throughout history were not liberal secular progressives?
Churches have continued doing it and yet it doesn't help solve the decline of Christianity. This is because as I said the state has assumed the function a Church once had in the past and need for a Church has been eroded by the modern democratic state. I don't consider this a good thing.The government, but that doesn't mean that the church cannot continue doing it.
Churches have continued doing it and yet it doesn't help solve the decline of Christianity. This is because as I said the state has assumed the function a Church once had in the past and need for a Church has been eroded by the modern democratic state. I don't consider this a good thing.
I don't think we have. Is it a coincidence that the Churches which follow your line of reasoning most explicitly are the ones which die the fastest? like the Episcopalian Church USA? By neglecting the wisdom of the past and how Christians navigated power we have done ourselves a disservice which doesn't end to our benefit.There are many things that as a 21st century Christian we are for, but others were not as we have gained a better understanding of what God wants. This is a good thing.
I don't think we have. Is it a coincidence that the Churches which follow your line of reasoning most explicitly are the ones which die the fastest? like the Episcopalian Church USA? By neglecting the wisdom of the past and how Christians navigated power we have done ourselves a disservice which doesn't end to our benefit.
OK .... so don't have an abortion yourself. No one is making you have an abortion.
I won’t, but don’t expect me to sit by idol without doing whatever I can do to put a stop to it. When I vote I’ll vote pro life.
If it's the label you don't like, what would you call someone who takes the life of a child?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?