re: Would you support government or Christian’s in the United States?

quote:

---

Do me a favor and define the word "God" in that sentence you just typed.

---

“God” (proper noun) - the single one specific imaginary creator of the universe, which is an amalgamation of Canaanite gods El, Asherah, Anat, and Baal, and Persian god Ahura Mazda, and Shasu/Midian god Yahweh, who is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and omni-benevolent, who provides free will, who rides on the clouds slinging lightning bolts from the storehouses in the firmament and who has to send messengers to do his bidding, who doesn’t know that his plans are often doomed to fail, and who creates evil and does evil things so we can know what good is, and who gave orders to sacrifice our firstborn children so that it would defile us, who has since changed his mind that child sacrifice is now detestable.

quote:

---

If you define it as it is used in the Bible

---

Yes, in my first post I specifically stated as stated in the Bible.

quote:

---

If you define it otherwise, then you don't really have a basis for discussion with those posters, do you?

---

Sorry, I don’t know what the hell you are talking about.

If the government is killing people based on their religion I would fight. Because that government is no longer American. It no longer follows the constitution. You have a natural right to worship or not worship God as you see fit. They may kill me but when I meet my maker I won’t have to explain why I sat back and did nothing.

quote:

---

Squirrelmeister

---

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that atheists are so angry.

quote:

---

That’s kind of a fallacy, but I’ll agree with you that morally-good Christian’s don’t condone the slaughter of innocent babies.

---

If you're referring to the No True Scotsman fallacy, that isn't accurate. The NTS fallacy is someone's arbitrary opinion about what a Scotsman (or whatever group they're referring to) actually is, while Christians have guidance on what a "true Christian" looks like, at least outwardly, as no one can judge the heart.

If someone claims to be a Christian and lives a life no different from a non-Christian, there is good reason to believe that person isn't truly saved, as a saved person will show fruits of their salvation in their works. That sort of behavior should result in church discipline, which ultimately may result in excommunication, which is an objective designation that the person is considered not to be a Christian. So no, it's not fallacious for Christians to talk in such terms.

quote:

---

It’s just that some Christians, who claim to be “true Christians”, who would maybe refer to you as “not a real Christian”, actually do justify the killing of children and babies en masse when they believe God said to do it

---

Not to get into this particular trope again, but you should understand more broadly that there is a difference between God commanding or permitting an action for a particular reason and purpose in history and Him commanding or permitting such actions as normative actions for everyday life for His people. Abraham was commanded to sacrifice his son (and was prevented from doing so) for a particular reason at a particular time in history. Christians are not commanded to sacrifice our children as a normative practice.

Your upvote downvote parameters is flawed.

I would fight anyone and any institutions that arbitrarily kills anyone on the basis of their religion or political beliefs.

quote:

---

Of course 99% of people are going to support any religion over being killed by their government. I don't understand the point you are trying to make.

---

Good point, but his question wasn’t whether they’d convert to some other religion or be slaughtered. That’s how Christianity spread though- it was both religion and government and neither paganism or Judaism was tolerated. Convert or die was how they evangelized after Rome adopted it as the official religion.

Islam, which is just an offshoot of a form of Christianity not supported by Rome that was practiced in Arabia, adopted the same practice for evangelism. Convert or die.

No other religions even tried to convert anyone. El Elyon -God most High - and father to the 70 sons of Asherah, divided the lands and set the boundaries of the states according to the people that lived there and assigned them one of his sons to be their patron deity. He assigned the nation state of Israel to his son Yahweh (which you would know as “the LORD”). See Deuteronomy 32:8-9

No other religion even felt the need to or wanted to evangelize, because that wouldn’t make any sense. Those people over there already had a god or gods… they wouldn’t want to worship mine anyway because mine has power over here, but not over there.

Yahweh couldn’t even accept worship of the Israelites in Egypt. The people had to wander out away from Egypt into the desert to worship him. Exodus 5, exodus 7:16

Naaman couldn’t leave Israel without taking two mule loads of Israelite soil with him so that he wouldn’t have to offer burnt offerings to other gods but rather so he could worship Yahweh. 2 Kings 5:17

Yahweh lost battles he guaranteed he would win (to Elisha the prophet) when he didn’t have home field advantage in 2 Kings 3:27.

The book of 1 Enoch, cherished as the most important book by the Dead Sea scrolls group called the Essenes (Jews who rejected the Pharisees and the Jerusalem temple practices) was the very first book with a concern of salvation for the gentiles. As Christianity is an offshoot of the Essene version of messianic Judaism, it was the first religion with the motivation for evangelism. It didn’t have real power until after Constantine and 30 years or so later became the official Roman religion. Islam is just a version of early Torah-observant Christianity also with goals for saving the gentiles.

The original premise of the OP should in my opinion focus more on radical Christianity and/or Islam attempting to exterminate non-believers.

quote:

---

Yes, in my first post I specifically stated as stated in the Bible.

---

No, you named some things God did in the Bible and that God ordered in the Bible.

You didn't define God.

Forget the Bible; you obviously can't handle that request. Just define the word according to the dictionary. I'll help you:

Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more
God
/gäd/
noun
1.
(in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.

The underlined part is my emphasis. It clears up the non-contradiction you've tried to convince yourself of.

quote:

---

You are better than this. Post something thought-provoking next time.

---

I apologize. The jaded 12 yr old comment was uncalled for. Accurate, but uncalled for. But seriously, don’t you find it ironic that you dedicate so much of your time and energy to debating something that you believe doesn’t exist? That you can’t seem to let a single religious post go without interjecting your own religious beliefs into every single thread? I mean, do you show up at the mall during Christmas and pull Santa’s beard off? Do you expend this much energy trying to convince people that aliens don’t exist? Sasquatch? Nessie? So, really, are you trying to convince us- or yourself? In either case- why?

Why are you so angry at something that “doesn’t exist?”

Now, on to something “thought provoking.” It’s just a hypothetical thought experiment.

What if… God is real? What if the Bible is true? What if all of those logically consistent, plausible and rational explanations to all of your contrived, context-less arguments… actually turn out to be correct? What if… your own pride, arrogance, and selfish desire to be the god of your own life- is literally the only thing preventing you from seeing it?

There is no such thing as objective morality.