United States Christianity, History, and US Politics
- Thread starter Megadeath
- Start date
You're mismashing the beliefs and claims of a bunch of different groups together there (IE, most Christians are not YECs), coupled with a lot of outright mistakes. Most Christians are aware that Jesus wasn't actually born on December 25th, and know that there's been some pagan influence on Christian traditions. I would, again, suggest that you take some time to actually learn about the groups you're criticizing before doing so, because right now you're really not making a good case for yourself.
Everyone makes their personal philosophy the end all, be all of ethics and morality and thinks it's tenants should be applied elsewhere. If you don't think your philosophy is the most morally and ethically sound position you could hold, why do you hold it instead of whatever belief system you think is superior? And if your obviously correct and just moral system says something is morally wrong, why should people be allowed to do it?
Aside from the points that DocSolaris made, I'd note that it's far from unheard of to celebrate a holiday or observance on a different date than the actual event (for example, Thanksgiving).
Agreed, I'll split it off in a bit.
Isn't there this whole portion of the Bible where God literally nukes two cities for practicing homosexuality, bestiality, and incest?Disagree with me how?
TO THE QUESTION PROPOSED:
Does the Church have the power to give the blessing to unions of persons of the same sex?
RESPONSE:
Negative.
Answer of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to the question about the blessing of the unions of persons of the same sex | ROME REPORTS
TO THE QUESTION PROPOSED: Does the Church have the power to give the blessing to unions of persons of the same sex? RESPONSE: Negative. Explanatory Note...www.romereports.com
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
It was quite a bit more than that, but Sodom and Gomorrah were most known for such things. Sodom being the root for 'sodomize,' of course.
Further on this should wait for forthcoming new thread.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
Reasonable Christians make their religion the center of absolutely everything in their lives.
The fact that you do not understand this, demonstrates the fact that you do not understand the mindset of someone who actually believes in God, not just treats religion as a mere cultural institution.
If God and reason say one thing, and you say another, why the heck should I support what you say?
DocSolarisReich
Esoteric Spaceman
Yes, yes there is. From the Law and the Prophets we can discern Four Sins that Cry Out to Heaven for Vengeance.
From the Douay Catholic Catechism of 1649
CHAPTER XX – The sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance
Q. 925. HOW many such sins are there?
A. Four.
Q. 926. What is the first of them?
A. Wilful murder, which is a voluntary and unjust taking away another’s life.
Q. 927. How show you the depravity of this sin?
A. Out of Gen. iv. 10. Where it is said to Cain “What hast thou done? the voice of the blood of thy brother crieth to me from the earth: now, therefore shalt thou be cursed upon the earth.” And Matt. xxvi 52, “All that take the sword, shall perish with the sword.”
Q. 928. What is the second?
A. The sin of Sodom, or carnal sin against nature, which is a voluntary shedding of the seed of nature, out of the due use of marriage, or lust with a different sex.
Q. 929. What is the scripture proof of this?
A. Out of Gen. xix. 13. where we read of the Sodomites, and their sin. “We will destroy this place because the cry of them hath increased before our Lord, who hath sent us to destroy them,” (and they were burnt with fire from heaven.)
Q. 930. What is the third?
A. Oppressing of the poor, which is a cruel, tyrannical, and unjust dealing with inferiors.
Q. 931. What other proof have you of that?
A. Out of Exod. xxii. 21. “Ye shall not hurt the widow and the fatherless: If you do hurt them, they will cry unto me, and I will hear them cry, and my fury shall take indignation, and I will strike thee with the sword.” And out of Isa. x. 1, 2. “Wo to them that make unjust laws, that they might oppress the poor in judgment, and do violence to the cause of the humble of my people.”
Q. 932. What is the fourth?
A. To defraud working men of their wages, which is to lessen, or detain it from them.
Q. 933. What proof have you of it?
A. Out of Eccl. xxxiv. 37. “He that sheddeth blood and he that defraudeth the hired man, are brethren,” and out of James v. 4. “Behold the hire of the workmen that have reaped your fields, which is defrauded by you, crieth, and their cry hath entered into the ears of the Lord God of Sabbath.”
As I said, I will spend the time to do a detailed study of the inaccuracies and such in the Bible, when the people who want to use for political purposes are willing to admit it is not a completely accurate retelling of events that is more about the politics of the writers than it is a historical record.
The closest I have to an end all, be all for what I think and look to for guidance is the US Constitution.
Though I also put a lot of stock in Sun Tsu, because his teachings are apolitical and non-religious, yet are very much applicable to many areas outside military conflict.
Edit: Battlegrinder, can you move this to the new thread.
Last edited:
LindyAF
Well-known member
The US Constitution is just a document for a proposed structure of government. There isn't even anything in the original document that pertains to an individual person at all, everything that does is an amendment.
I'm trying to think of a way that you could "look for guidance in the US Constitution" without that being a fancy way of saying a shallow fondness for American kisch.
I'm trying to think of a way that you could "look for guidance in the US Constitution" without that being a fancy way of saying a shallow fondness for American kisch.
LindyAF
Well-known member
Like, do you implement the doctrine of checks and balances in your life? The 3/5 compromise? Legislative supremacy? Do you only listen to people who are over 25, because that is the requirement for a representative, but only ever take orders from someone over 35 who was born in the US, because that is the requirement for President?
DocSolarisReich
Esoteric Spaceman
Yeah, once upon a time, I looked on those pieces of enlightenment drivel with similar cultic affection, I get where it comes from, man seeks the transcendent wherever he can find it. And at least Bacle doesn't claim to reconcile Christ and the Cult of America, which is more than I can say for a lot of so called 'Christians' in these latter days.
.....You do realize that saying "I won't correct my inaccurate understand of your beliefs, until you admit to a bunch of incorrect things that I only believe because I don't understand your beliefs" is not a productive or useful way to approach others, correct? plenty of christians are willing to admit that parts of the bible are allegorical or cannot be proven as historically true (probably in great proportion to the number of atheists that are willing to admit that quite a few parts of it have been historically verified as authentic, actually), and as for it being "about the politics of the writers", I'm not even sure what that means. The bible, particularly the new testament, features a bunch of verses where Jesus clearly says he's not interested in worldly politics, and as for it being used justify the political opinions of people today, A) people do that all across the political spectrum, and B) you are assuming that people are trying to make the bible fit their politics rather than the reverse (which is certainly possible, but you need to actually prove that, you can't just assume it).
Do you not see the issue in saying "I reject the bible and Christianity as a source of moral guidance, instead I lean on this document written by a bunch of Christians that has, at best, extremely limited applicability in terms of moral philosophy and what bits it does have, such a system of checks and balances intended to limit the power of officials, exist because of the author's Christian beliefs in the fallibility and sinfulness of man?"
I don't care about 'productive or useful', I care about pushing back against the people who want to shove me back in the closet and strip away same-sex marriage.
No, because unlike the Bible, the US Constitution is a living document for a living, evolving world.
Yeah, you wanna know something? You are not a conservative. The Constitution is not a "living" document, that's just an excuse to erase the first and second amendment for starters. Fuck right off with that subversive shit.
DocSolarisReich
Esoteric Spaceman
We at least know he wants to conserve gay 'marriage' and his own paycheck and bank accounts; and presumably those of everyone else. I don't mind calling him 'conservative', but rightwing he ain't.
And how's that working? I can only speak for myself, but so far I've moved from "don't care about the issue" to "don't care about the issue, and don't intend to listen to Bacle's opinion on it if I do start caring"......which doesn't really sound like a net gain for you.
That makes it even less useful, because the constitution, or any set of laws, move reactively as the world changes, they change once there's enough public pressure generated to make them move, rather than inspiring that public change in the first place. If you'd acted on that logic ten years ago, you'd be arguing against the same rights you're relying on the constitution to protect now, because ten years ago they didn't support you!
Secondly, a living, evolving document is fine as the basis for a government system, but awful if you're trying to use it a source of moral guidance. You mentioned before that you can construct a system of morality apart from the bible, which is true, but I've never heard of anyone saying they want to construct a flexible, constantly evolving set of moral principles. When people say someone else is "morally flexible", that's not meant as a positive statement.
You are someone who still thinks the election wasn't stolen, so I'm not sure why you think I have any high opinion of your or care to convince you of things, so unless you want to start saying we should repeal same-sex marriage, it's no skin off my back.
I trust a living document, and people who understand that society evolves and changes, more than I trust Bronze/Iron age prophets, for guidance in a changing and evolving world.
Also, 10 years ago I hadn't accepted the fact I was bi, yet still had no issue with homosexuals wanting to marry and have the same rights as hetero folks.
King Arts
Well-known member
This right here is not conservative. This is textbook liberalism. Lol in what way are you a conservative if the governing law of the land and your source of morality is flexible and open for interpretation? At that point it’s not even an opinion it’s just a fad.
I wasn't really sold by fried's arguements on the matter, but if this how you're going to make the counterpoint I'm halfway tempted to disagree with you just out of spite.
That doesn't address the points I made at all, and it's wrong on top of that. Both in the nitpicky way (Christianity post dates the iron age by about, oh....500 years), and in more fundamental aspects. The fact that the world has changed is irrelevant, because humans, and human nature have not. What's so different about mankind today that if you told someone from 3000 years ago about it, that they just wouldn't be able to handle it, because it's so totally alien to their view of morality? Because that sort of thing has happened, there was a group of aborigines that had been living a pre-Neolithic lifestyle without knowing what was going on in the rest of Australia until they encountered modern civilization in 1984, and they managed the transition pretty well.
DocSolarisReich
Esoteric Spaceman
But it is 'conservatism' in the sense that the 'conservative' seeks to defend yesterday's progress! against tomorrow's Progress! This has been the case at least since RL Dabney diagnosed Yankee 'Conservatism' in 1897 and I would argue since Edmund Burke sought to defend the mild Glorious Revolution against the radical French Revolution.
"It may be inferred again that the present movement for women’s rights will certainly prevail from the history of its only opponent: Northern conservatism. This is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution; to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition."
AnimalNoodles
Well-known member
Which calculations? Do you know why Christmas is celebrated in December? Because the Feast of the Annunciation, the day when Christ was said to have been conceived happens on march 25. Pregnancies are 9 months long. Guess what date comes 9 months after 25 march?