Texas GOP party platform: You can pray the gay away!

[MillCreek]

Whose morals and whose religion is the one that must be followed? Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Taoism, Hindu, Buddhism, Pagan, Satan, etc?

Most of the people citing this sort of thing believe that conservative or Evangelical Christianity is the only road to salvation, and the concept of 'secular morality' is an oxymoron.

[makattak]

Whose morals and whose religion is the one that must be followed? Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Taoism, Hindu, Buddhism, Pagan, Satan, etc?

Christian morality was that restraint for over a century. Absent that restraint, your "fiscal issues" cannot be resolved.

[charby]

Quote from: makattak on Today at 11:01:23 AM

Christian morality was that restraint for over a century. Absent that restraint, your "fiscal issues" cannot be resolved.

Explain the brothels of the 19th century and early 20th, child labor, gambling, why was the Volstead act repealed, how did abortion become legal, why can business be open on Sunday, why were women allowed to vote, etc.

[makattak]

Most of the people citing this sort of thing believe that conservative or Evangelical Christianity is the only road to salvation, and the concept of 'secular morality' is an oxymoron.

"Secular morality" is not an oxymoron. There are some very moral athiests. Every person has the natural law written on their hearts. As such, even while denying its Author, they follow it.

Our founders recognized that even with the influence of Christianity, men with power had to be further constrained. They knew that without the dual constraints, our Republic would dissolve.  They relied on Christian morals to constrain voters in who they elected and to constrain the elected into following the law.

Clearly it was not perfect, even before the widespread rejection of Christian morals, but I observe that it worked better than today when we are still drawing down the social capital of inherited Christian morals.

[zahc]

So are you in somewhat of an agreement with me? I'm a bit confused?

I was never in disagreement. You refuted an argument I never made. My first post addressed a specific idea-that Christians are authorized and capable of judging others because we observe Jesus judging in the bible.  My latest post was further clarification of my original argument so your confusion is understandable.

[Ron]

The star witness on judgement day will be our own conscious.

Corroborating evidence provided by an omniscient God.

Now is the time to look for mercy, not then.

In the end there will be both perfect justice and perfect mercy.

We can choose our own destiny.

I need a lot of mercy so I've thrown my lot in with Christ.

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father, except through me.

 

[charby]

I was never in disagreement. You refuted an argument I never made. My first post addressed a specific idea-that Christians are authorized and capable of judging others because we observe Jesus judging in the bible.  My latest post was further clarification of my original argument so your confusion is understandable.

Gotcha, I wasn't trying to refute you. Hence the confusion on my part.

I was just dumping my feelings towards folks who ravenously judge people which they are in disagreement with. Usually in the name of their own version/interpretation of a popular religion. Sometimes to the point of extreme prejudice that they start to consider the people they judge to be subhuman to themselves and want to deny them the freedoms they hold dear to themselves. Even go so far as use emotional subjective views to point out that these different people are even a poisonous menace to society and need to be controlled so the infestation is stopped.

[Perd Hapley]

Gotcha, I wasn't trying to refute you. Hence the confusion on my part.

I was just dumping my feelings towards folks who ravenously judge people which they are in disagreement with. Usually in the name of their own version/interpretation of a popular religion. Sometimes to the point of extreme prejudice that they start to consider the people they judge to be subhuman to themselves and want to deny them the freedoms they hold dear to themselves. Even go so far as use emotional subjective views to point out that these different people are even a poisonous menace to society and need to be controlled so the infestation is stopped.

On the other hand, judging those scary religious people, and painting them as a poisonous menace is apparently OK.

Your fear-mongering about certain religious folk has really become absurd.

[Perd Hapley]

First of all, Christians are commanded to judge sin.

And sinners. My apologies to zahc for not bringing more convincing evidence before. I will do that now. Most are gleaned from the following web site, which also contains more scripture references to the point, as well as a pretty good discussion of what Christians ought NOT do with regard to judgment.

http://www.christianciv.com/Judge_Others.htm

Firstly, there are Luke 17 and Matt 18, in which Christ tells us to rebuke our fellow Christians when they sin, and then if they will not repent, to excommunicate them. In Matt 7, he referred to this as helping a brother get the speck out his eye (after we get the plank out of ours). In Matt 10 and Luke 10, he sent people out (not just his twelve disciples, by the way) to spread the Gospel, and he told them to publicly rebuke those who would not receive them. So yes, while there are certain things Christ did that we probably shouldn't do, as individuals, judgment is not among them.

FWIW, when I said that Christians are commanded to "denounce wickedness," I wasn't speaking of judging particular people, but of Ephesians 5.11: “Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.” That's really no different than what a lot of secular people and groups are doing when it comes to human trafficking, or food deserts, or whatever the cause du jour.

[Perd Hapley]

If the GOP and Religious Right spent as much energy on fiscal problems are they do on moral problems, a lot of the problems that truly affect us would either be solved or less of a problem.

I agree that "gay marriages" being without legal status is not a problem that "truly affects us." I wish the left would agree with us on that, and stop pushing.

[Perd Hapley]

I welcome bible scholars to correct me...did followers ever raise anyone from the dead? Interestingly, I do not believe Jesus ever spoke in tongues.

In whichever version I happened to find them in, online. Bold mine.


Matthew 10:7-8 (KJV)
And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

John 14:12 (ESV)
12 “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father.

This page has some people that were raised from the dead (both Old and New Testament) at the request of prophets and apostles:
http://stronginfaith.org/article.php?page=114

[Perd Hapley]

Tip of the hat to makattak for making a lot of sense. But that is just his way.

[lee n. field]

http://www.christianciv.com/Judge_Others.htm

Hmmm.  Theonomists and reconstructionists.  And inevitably, postmillenial.  I'm guessing they wouldn't be much approving of where I come down.

[Perd Hapley]

Interesting observation, but I don't think it's germane. I've never heard of the site before, and didn't read the whole page, but it does point out a lot of scriptures on the topic of judginess.

[charby]

On the other hand, judging those scary religious people, and painting them as a poisonous menace is apparently OK.

Your fear-mongering about certain religious folk has really become absurd.

If certain religious folks quite preaching hate and maybe preach about love and forgiveness, then I would sing a different tune.

How much violence/hate is delivered due to religious beliefs?

[Perd Hapley]

If certain religious folks quite preaching hate and maybe preach about love and forgiveness, then I would sing a different tune.

How much violence/hate is delivered due to religious beliefs?

Thanks for proving my point. Surely, in the 21st century, this canard about religion being more hateful or violent than the alternative is so thoroughly debunked that we need not go through the motions again.

[onions!]

Wouldn't it be nice if both the believers and the unbelievers would shut their pie holes and just go about their lives?Quietly.

[charby]

Thanks for proving my point.

How so?

[charby]

Wouldn't it be nice if both the believers and the unbelievers would shut their pie holes and just go about their lives?Quietly.

I'm not a unbeliever, just a critic.

[lee n. field]

Interesting observation, but I don't think it's germane.

I think it might be.

These are, from what reading I have done (Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law is 15' away from me, though I haven't read it since maybe 1979 or so), one of the sets of folks that really do want to have a theocracy.  These are (in the public mind) the scary folks, that want to "stone adulterers, kill all the queers yada yada".  I'm sure it's more nuanced than that, but that's how the MSM sees them.

(The penetcostalist version of this actually worries me more.)

[dogmush]

Thanks for proving my point. Surely, in the 21st century, this canard about religion being more hateful or violent than the alternative is so thoroughly debunked that we need not go through the motions again.

You're kidding right?

Christianity is having a quiet century or two, but religion is as deadly and hateful worldwide as ever.

[MillCreek]

These are, from what reading I have done (Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law is 15' away from me, though I haven't read it since maybe 1979 or so), one of the sets of folks that really do want to have a theocracy.  These are (in the public mind) the scary folks, that want to "stone adulterers, kill all the queers yada yada".

You can see who longs for the Republic of Gilead and will gladly volunteer to staff the re-education camps for the gays.  After all, someone has to be the Commandant.  For the children and to reduce societal costs, you know.

[Perd Hapley]

You're kidding right?

Christianity is having a quiet century or two, but religion is as deadly and hateful worldwide as ever.

That wasn't my point. I was referring to the hatred and violence perpetrated in the name of secular movements, whether it be communism, gun control, or just garden-variety, "I hope your wife gets raped, and can't have an abortion" leftism. There's no longer any excuse for this nonsensical idea that religion is some well-spring of hatred and head-chopping.

In referencing the century, I wasn't peddling the mistaken idea that religion used to be mean, but is now warm and fuzzy. I don't believe in progress, in that sense.

[Perd Hapley]

I think it might be.

These are, from what reading I have done (Rushdoony's Institutes of Biblical Law is 15' away from me, though I haven't read it since maybe 1979 or so), one of the sets of folks that really do want to have a theocracy.  These are (in the public mind) the scary folks, that want to "stone adulterers, kill all the queers yada yada".  I'm sure it's more nuanced than that, but that's how the MSM sees them.

(The penetcostalist version of this actually worries me more.)

Uh, are you disagreeing that the scriptures they reference indicate a commandment to make judgments?

[Perd Hapley]

How so?

Uh, by continuing to "go so far as use emotional subjective views to point out that these different people are even a poisonous menace to society."