- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Conservatism doesn’t always equal Christianity
Posted on 3/3/21 at 11:49 am to AggieHank86
Posted on 3/3/21 at 11:49 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Well, Deists don’t really accept the notion of “prophets” either, but we do need a term to distinguish these folks from traditional deists, or conversation gets ridiculiusly awkward (with a 20-word description rather than a handy label).
Can we use chritian Deist, with no capitalization? Nazarene Deism? Yeshuan Deism?
It really seems pedantic, when you are already distinguishing Traditiobal Christian, but I try not to get wrapoed around the axle over meaningless semantics.
Honestly, I'm not that picky. I understand the gist of the term "Christian Deist" and don't mind anyone using it, and I will acknowledge the meaning behind the phrase. No worries.
Just pointing out that they're not really "Christian" in the strict meaning. That's all.
Having delved into philosophy at a wide and admittedly fairly shallow depth, the first thing that one comes to understand is that words' meanings have quite a bit of significance!
It is pedantic. Indeed. Thus is the nature of philosophy.
0
Posted on 3/3/21 at 11:51 am to Jjdoc
quote:
Paul is not Jesus. That's first.
So, Paul's writings in the New Testament should be disregarded?
Perhaps Paul was wrong?
quote:
Paul addressed what exactly?/
God's giving people the government that He decides (Romans 13, again). And admonishing Christians to obey the laws of the land as ordained by God.
This post was edited on 3/3/21 at 11:52 am
Posted on 3/3/21 at 11:56 am to TaderSalad
I'm not pro-Democrat, just saying the government has gotten bigger as the church has gotten smaller.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 11:58 am to T1
quote:
I'm not pro-Democrat, just saying the government has gotten bigger as the church has gotten smaller.
Yep, replacing God as a moral guide leads to larger and larger government, more laws, and more corruption (since government is made of men).
Replace God with men at your peril. Which is a strong reason to reject libertarianism as well as liberalism.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 11:59 am to Revelator
Question for non-Christian conservatives
Are you opposed to gay marriage and if so, why? I understand why Christian conservatives may oppose it.
Not looking for an argument, just curious.
Are you opposed to gay marriage and if so, why? I understand why Christian conservatives may oppose it.
Not looking for an argument, just curious.
This post was edited on 3/3/21 at 12:02 pm
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:02 pm to BiteMe2020
The democrats want to take the place of the church and have government be the savior.
Jesus was talking about personal one on one interaction when he mentioned taking care of the least of “your brethren” (people leave that off - it’s poor Christians in the church that he was talking about not random people on the street) of course there are other examples when we are to help people regardless of their eternal status as a witness. Liberal Christians want the government to do their job for them.
And the biggest mistake people make is that Christianity is a humanitarian or Social gospel. It’s not but it’s a supernatural gospel - the great commission is clear:
Mar 16:15 He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.
Mar 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
Mar 16:17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues;
Mar 16:18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well
(The snake - poison part isn’t talking about the idiots that test god. We had a man at our church get bit by a copperhead while logging - he kept working and nothing happened to him. Our pastor was in Romania during communism and they were thirsty but all they had access to was a poison well. He prayed and drank it and they were fine.)
Jesus was talking about personal one on one interaction when he mentioned taking care of the least of “your brethren” (people leave that off - it’s poor Christians in the church that he was talking about not random people on the street) of course there are other examples when we are to help people regardless of their eternal status as a witness. Liberal Christians want the government to do their job for them.
And the biggest mistake people make is that Christianity is a humanitarian or Social gospel. It’s not but it’s a supernatural gospel - the great commission is clear:
Mar 16:15 He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.
Mar 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
Mar 16:17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues;
Mar 16:18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well
(The snake - poison part isn’t talking about the idiots that test god. We had a man at our church get bit by a copperhead while logging - he kept working and nothing happened to him. Our pastor was in Romania during communism and they were thirsty but all they had access to was a poison well. He prayed and drank it and they were fine.)
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:04 pm to BiteMe2020
quote:What?
Which logical positions are those?
I bet at the end of the day, your atheism can't back up those logical positions at all.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:06 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
What?
Atheists often claim to have a logical basis for forming a version of objective morality.
They all fail.
I was curious as to whether there was a new argument for atheistic objective morality that I'd not heard before.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:09 pm to BiteMe2020
quote:I’ll be honest. I’ve thought about this question quite a lot.
So, Paul's writings in the New Testament should be disregarded?
Had they ever met in the flesh, I don’t think Jesus would have liked Saul very much. Jesus seems like a pretty accepting guy, and Saul kinda seems like a judgmental prick.
Would Jesus have LOVED him? Perhaps. But I don’t think he would have LIKED him very much.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:10 pm to BiteMe2020
Why don’t you think an atheist can successfully form a version of morality through logic?
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:12 pm to BiteMe2020
quote:
So, Paul's writings in the New Testament should be disregarded?
Perhaps Paul was wrong?
You are taking liberties that you should not be. Specifically, he(the OP) was referring to Jesus and that is what the response was to.
Next you are being combative in your approach while not understanding the above.
Then, I stated.. ok. If you want to talk about Paul, I'm willing... but understand that the response was specific to Jesus.
quote:
God's giving people the government that He decides (Romans 13, again). And admonishing Christians to obey the laws of the land as ordained by God.
Again, what's that to the topic? You seem to be suggesting that Paul is saying to the church to form a government and nation state on Romans 13.
He isn't.
This is the topic at hand when the OP is saying that his Christian values some times may not line up with a political philosophy.
His example was immigration. In short, you are on a very different topic than the OP. Or the point you are making isn't clear.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:15 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Had they ever met in the flesh,
According to Paul, they did meet in person.
This post was edited on 3/3/21 at 12:19 pm
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:16 pm to BiteMe2020
quote:My 2-cents.
Atheists often claim to have a logical basis for forming a version of objective morality.
I disagree with ANYONE who attempts to make a claim that some sort of “objective morality” is hard-coded into the operating system of the multiverse.
Now, once you have established the premises of a moral code for your society, that code can certainly be APPLIED in an objective manner.
Which is why I see much of this debate as being fruitless. If the vast majority of people in our society agree to the structures of a “western moral code,“ does it make any substantive difference whether that code was handed down from some deity or evolved organically? If we all live by it?
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:17 pm to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Why don’t you think an atheist can successfully form a version of morality through logic?
For the same reason you can't smell a color. Look, Sam Harris went to the effort of writing an entire book trying to justify a logic-based moral system, and the entire book boils down to "gratuitous human suffering is wrong and if you don't believe that then you're crazy". Now Harris can be an insufferable twat but he's no dummy, and that's the best he can do. It's not like this is a new question that nobody's attempted to answer before.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:18 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
. I’ve thought about this question quite a lot.
Paul should absolutely not be disregarded. You can stop thinking about that
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:20 pm to Revelator
quote:I chose my wording carefully when I said “in the flesh.”
According to Paul, they did meet.
Yes, Saul claims that he had a revelatiry experience with Jesus after the crucifixion.
If that interaction DID occur, one could infer that Jesus had become consciously aware of his divinity by that point (while there is lively debate about his understanding BEFORE the crucifixion). I suspect that conscious divinity would have colored his interaction with Saul.
This post was edited on 3/3/21 at 12:26 pm
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:21 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
If the vast majority of people in our society agree to the structures of a “western moral code,“
Is that the one the left is Hellbent on destroying?
The new code is whatever you can get away with* is "moral", which has always been the code for a certain level of society and above.
*or whatever a lawyer can bullshite away (see Simpson, O.J.)
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:22 pm to AggieHank86
"does it make any substantive difference whether that code was handed down from some deity or evolved organically? If we all live by it?"
I think it does because if religious people quit behaving in THIS current morality, the morality will change. Culture is mostly determined by the way people behave and if the people begin to behave in different morality, the culture will change.
Just because it evolved into this morality, credited to Jesus, doesn't mean it cannot change into an anti-Christian morality. I see signs of that happening currently.
I think it does because if religious people quit behaving in THIS current morality, the morality will change. Culture is mostly determined by the way people behave and if the people begin to behave in different morality, the culture will change.
Just because it evolved into this morality, credited to Jesus, doesn't mean it cannot change into an anti-Christian morality. I see signs of that happening currently.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:26 pm to T1
quote:
I'm not pro-Democrat, just saying the government has gotten bigger as the church has gotten smaller.
My apologies.
I have libtard friends who use that rational for voting libtarded and it makes me sick.
The church dropped the ball because politickin. Pastors started caring about 40 hr work weeks, banging interns, and running the church like an industry, and the attendees just watched as it all happened.
Posted on 3/3/21 at 12:27 pm to Flats
What’s is the Bible’s version of morality backed by?
Page 4 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News