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.
I did post this:How are they "suppressing" the truth, specifically? To say that they deny Christ isn't a specific description or analysis about what and how they are doing this, so the statement you've made remains vague. Maybe if you were less vague they'd more likely be able to see the light?
No. Not the same.In just the way that Shiva applies to you.
No. One of the Deities is real. Thats a huge difference.Two deities in which I don't believe? One in which you don't? Sounds exactly the same.
It’s a fact that everyone should believe in.It's a belief, not a fact.
It is Christian Forums....eh hem. THis is not a theology forum...
The mods seem to like it when we maintain the integrity of the various subforums, such as "American Politics".It is Christian Forums.
Yes, I'm aware of the ages of our founders at the time. I'm not implying those under 25 are "worthless" in their opinions. But they often live "too much in the moment". That last development of the brain is what helps humans to think about long term consequences of decisions. That is, there are fewer "hold muh beer" moments.Alexander Hamilton was 21 when he signed the declaration of independence.
I did post this:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
— Romans 1:18-19
I’m defending my position which I stated early on. Everyone was free to ignore me and move on.The mods seem to like it when we maintain the integrity of the various subforums, such as "American Politics".
(I'm not always completely innocent in this regard.)
Just because you deconstructed the text doesn’t mean I need to follow suit. I’ll stick with proper hermeneutics.I knew you'd follow true to form and quote that particular set of "go to" verses. However, as I already said from my own academically laced angle, this all too brief statement by the Apostle Paul does not delineate in any stringent discourse the specific epistemology by which this spiritual "recognition" is suppressed. Of course, Paul goes on to lay out the scriptural echoes that make up the outline of how morality gradually falls in stages among human beings. But this doesn't explain the epistemological dynamics by which everyone---and I mean everyone---is going about "suppressing" the truth.
So while you and I can in some vague, general way assert with Paul that the world of non-Christians is suppressing God's truth(s), it is at this point that you Reformers rely too much on your exegesis and spiritual applications of the Reformers to qualify epistemology, especially where today's politics and spiritualized goals come into view and clash. Hence, it's also a reason I am not a Theonomist.
Who are you talking to?Rather than battle Jesus Christ, name another thing the founding fathers got wrong. Your arguments are getting old and stale.
Totally. What a wreck the 2A is, just in terms of comprehensibility.The Second Amendment (and the First, and probably several others) could have benefitted from a little more definition and clarity.
I'm not asserting I know what they meant, but there's enough argument about it that they could have nipped in the bud with a little effort.
How many angles are posters going to try and use against your point? It's funny to me that out of a million possibilities that the Founding Fathers could have gotten wrong, it's become *your* argument for Christianity that's become the entirety of the subject.Who are you talking to?
Thank you for the variety.Totally. What a wreck the 2A is, just in terms of comprehensibility.
That's exactly it. Why were your posts deemed so controversial? Makes no sense.I’m defending my position which I stated early on. Everyone was free to ignore me and move on.
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?