What should America's State Religion Be?

Steeeeve: Sorry, the phrase "There is no use trying to show you otherwise." caught my eye and I thought I might get involved. I think that whenever someone says that phrase, or worRAB to that effect, they're losing an opportunity to open a dialogue.

So I think it would be very useful if you could explain to Jo Bennett what your belief in the Bible is about. Having reasonable doubt is not a refusal to believe, or more importantly to have faith that the Bible contains essential truths about ethics, God, and our relationship to him.

I think you may find it useful in showing him this because I suspect that in his terms, you don't have a belief in the inerrancy of the Bible, so much as have faith that it is completely inerrant, unlike Jo who - I'm assuming - who has faith that the Bible is mostly right.

Naturally, where the Bible may err, for whatever reason textual interpretations err, then it seems quite reasonable for a good Christian to look to their heart and to the example of Jesus, and build for themselves a christian narrative that is more true to Christianity than the Bible. Christians have been doing this for centuries, and that is why it has so many denominations and sects.

Saying that Jo Bennett is not a christian because he does not follow your interpretation of the Bible is a bit like a Protestant saying that a Catholic isn't a real Christian - patently false and defamatory.
 
That could come back and bite them and the donors. A large West Coast diocese is facing BK from civil suit awarRAB to victims of pedophile priests. Rome has removed itself from liability by basically what's franchise law and now lawyers are looking church property being actually owned by parishioners who contributed the money to acquire property and improvements. If it is ruled the parishioners are owners, liability could extend to their personal assets. In this circumstance, you get what you pay for could be very applicable.
 
Have you ever convinced anyone of anything on this forum?

Well, Jo Bennett can request that of me then.

You don't speak for Jo but if this is the case then I would say who is Jo to decide which parts are right and not?

looking into ones heart is often clouded by ones desires.

not exactly my interpretation of the Bible...the Bible is fairly clear in all that it says...either you follow it or you don't. With God there are no two right answers.
 
I'm sorry when did I say I supported abortion? I said I didn't support legal prohibitions on it, but am personally against it. I don't support adultery or sex before marriage, but I don't think my personal moral views should be used as the basis for law. Incidentally the biblical position on abortion is not as clear cut as you make out. "When you were in your mother's womb I knew you" certainly implies that the feotus is human, but it's by no means clear cut.

I would be interested to hear you explain how Paul's letters to Timothy (Timothy was the recipient) can refer to the bible that was not compiled for another 3 centuries.

Your first point is completely illogical. The poor expression of the bible does not affect what God wants, only whether we correctly discern it or not. The Bible is imperfect, in order to trust it we must trust all those who wrote bits of it, and all those who were involved in compiling it, and all those involved in translating it. The Bible is not the the most important thing in Christianity.

EDIT: as I recall the copts are the remnants of the Jews who converted to Christianity, they didn't get on too well with the Catholic church due to some allegations relating to doctrinal differences, as I recall.
 
personal against it...hehe. That is even worse. Are you personally against slavery? Why would impose your personal moral views on me like that!!!

some will try to argue "well do you smoke or drink" ...so to answer that real quick..I am not against smoking or drinking...I am against abortion.

I was referring more to Exodus by for abortion by the way. Although your quote is clear too. God talks about making you in the womb and things like that which make it very clear.

Oh, and the Bible was just compiled together, none, of God's writtings were altered. Moreover, I assume you know about how God predicted many things in the Bible.
 
Idiocy. So you're saying that through several revisions, none of the original texts were altered?

You're also saying that the translation did not make a single mistake?

Not to mention many of the dead sea scrolls never made it into the bible. Guess some editing was done there as well!

I'd love to see you prove that the bible is God's word. But then again...I'd also love to see proof of the invisible pink unicorn.

Once again you have shown your inherent failure to think logically.
 
May I ask what makes you believe this?

Bush was not against abortion until the far left picked up his ticket. I am not arguing the Legality of Abortion.

Is lying a precept of Jesus Christ? I mean common if we are going to give this dude Saint status then lets have some kind of Proclamation Service.

"Let no man decieve you"
 
There are degrees of being Christian..........President Bush is a man of very strong faith and follows the precepts of Jesus Christ.........

In my own case I am a Roman Catholic and my church is very clear on the issue of abortion and gay marriage in that it is wrong and how so called Catholics can support those 2 issues and say they follow the Cathjolic faith is beyond me.......

I suspect that it will all come out in the wash on judgment day for Christians and Catholics and becasue of my faith I feel sure that I am on the right side of the issues...........................
 
I know a lot of self-identifying pagans. None of them are atheists. The link you posted said that atheist as a definiton of pagan is not in current use. There are multiple defintions of paganism, just as there are multiple defintions of Christianity, but that does not mean the definition is infinitely flexible, and you can use it to mean whatever you want it to mean. That link suggests you should define what you mean when you refer to pagans. I mean wiccans and others who are either magic users or worship deities from older cultures. What do you mean?
 
Having read that, I agree.

But that's not what I mean. I mean:

Secular - In current political and philosophical discourse, it refers to a government obeying civil laws (as opposed to religious instructions like the Islamic shariah, the Catholic canon law or rabbinacal law), independently from any religion, and not favoring any particular religion; in addition, secularism also includes the priority of the civil laws over any religious legislation.

Humanism - A line of thought which makes the public, the populace, the first priority. Places emphasis on the enforcing of human rights.

I added the 'humanism' to the Secular, because not all secular states (like pre-war Iraq) are big on human rights.
 
Back
Top