God stuff (experience, evolution, genesis, scripture)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Speaking of implications of your position, have you given any thought to if your American as a Christain theocracy comes to pass where are you going to go wheb they decide you are not Christ enough to be allowed to stay within it? Or the wrong flavour of Christainity?
Oe that your God does not want religion mixed into the decisions of tarriffs, rwtirement age or if a new National Park is a good idwa or not. Or on the local.level howcurgentvis pot hole repair compared to garbage pickup. Are there passagss that tell the reader of which subdivion should have their sewer lines replaced first ot where to locate the new firehall? God might think doin all this goes against his direct commands.
You have a very interesting and intriguing mind, Bad, though I suspect any possibility of an American Theocracy is remote indeed.
Speaking of implications of your position, have you given any thought to if your American as a Christain theocracy comes to pass where are you going to go wheb they decide you are not Christ enough to be allowed to stay within it? Or the wrong flavour of Christainity?
Oe that your God does not want religion mixed into the decisions of tarriffs, rwtirement age or if a new National Park is a good idwa or not. Or on the local.level howcurgentvis pot hole repair compared to garbage pickup. Are there passagss that tell the reader of which subdivion should have their sewer lines replaced first ot where to locate the new firehall? God might think doin all this goes against his direct commands.
If America had a theocracy and I was left out, I would continue to persuade people to change to do the right thing. Your described situation would not be favorable to me perhaps.
God does want religion mixed into decisions, every single thing must be parallel with His will. Now you are getting beyond explicit passages about "subdivision should have their sewer lines replaced....." but what is implied from scripture is that we all be honest and willing to advance to a healthy life style, that includes making rational decisions based on the well-being of all on all things.
Its really a utililitarian system.
You have a very interesting and intriguing mind, Bad, though I suspect any possibility of an American Theocracy is remote indeed.
I have always noted that the people who want a theocracy want "Their "Flavor Of Christianity (Or Flavour in Britain) to be at the top of the ruling class, and all others subservient to them. So If 3rd Street church of christ lobbies for a theocracy, then their pastors and deacons will be the ruling fathers of the nation, and if anyone represents a faith they do not like, such as Catholics, well, they have only Biblical references to put others to death . Witches would be burned too. If say, 2nd Baptist church was to gain control, then Mormons could be expunged from society. So the problem goes on from there.
In this Great nation of America, we have something called freedom. For many of us, it includes freedom from someone else's religion. And that is something that threatens some religions (who want 100% control of their flock) ...that people can choose to say NO and there is not a thing in the country they can do about it. Some whine and say "Well if we had a theocracy then you could not say NO"
Which is a good reason to maintain freedom, a separation of church and states as the constitution.
The Constitution, not the Bible, is the final authority in America. The Founding fathers avoided referencing any scriptural or mythological book by name, when forming the nation. They even explicitly said that congress (who unlike the church, has the authority to make laws and rules) that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Which means that Congress CANNOT pass or make laws establishing a theocratic rule as that would violate establishing a religion. Congress would have to choose which religion and rewrite the constitution, and with that, freedom is gone. The laws, the freedoms on which this nation has thrived and survived for centuries, gone thanks to someone's religious beliefs.
I have always suggested that if someone wants to live in a theocracy, try Iran. While not a true theocracy, the control and influence exerted by the Ayatollah there makes for conditions similar to one.
You have a very interesting and intriguing mind, Bad, though I suspect any possibility of an American Theocracy is remote indeed.
I too suspect the possibilty of an American theocracy is also very remote. I also susoect that a pure Christain theocracy would stay pure no libger than any other authocratic system. At least at t he Nation level. At a small.local lwvel the Hutterites show it does work. I would b et that at the same level a Communist or most. Other systems would too.Ot
I was only responding to Danny and his " it would be perfect" claims. And i do not think itwould be prrfect or safe for many folks that dont believecexactly as Danny does.n
And i think Americans are too proud of their contributions to modern democracies andcfreedons to throw it away for a empty promise of perfection..
I have always noted that the people who want a theocracy want "Their "Flavor Of Christianity (Or Flavour in Britain) to be at the top of the ruling class, and all others subservient to them. So If 3rd Street church of christ lobbies for a theocracy, then their pastors and deacons will be the ruling fathers of the nation, and if anyone represents a faith they do not like, such as Catholics, well, they have only Biblical references to put others to death . Witches would be burned too. If say, 2nd Baptist church was to gain control, then Mormons could be expunged from society. So the problem goes on from there.
In this Great nation of America, we have something called freedom. For many of us, it includes freedom from someone else's religion. And that is something that threatens some religions (who want 100% control of their flock) ...that people can choose to say NO and there is not a thing in the country they can do about it. Some whine and say "Well if we had a theocracy then you could not say NO"
Which is a good reason to maintain freedom, a separation of church and states as the constitution.
The Constitution, not the Bible, is the final authority in America. The Founding fathers avoided referencing any scriptural or mythological book by name, when forming the nation. They even explicitly said that congress (who unlike the church, has the authority to make laws and rules) that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Which means that Congress CANNOT pass or make laws establishing a theocratic rule as that would violate establishing a religion. Congress would have to choose which religion and rewrite the constitution, and with that, freedom is gone. The laws, the freedoms on which this nation has thrived and survived for centuries, gone thanks to someone's religious beliefs.
I have always suggested that if someone wants to live in a theocracy, try Iran. While not a true theocracy, the control and influence exerted by the Ayatollah there makes for conditions similar to one.
That's what they want. They don't want American democracy. They don't want freedom of religion. They want freedom of their religion.
If America had a theocracy and I was left out, I would continue to persuade people to change to do the right thing. Your described situation would not be favorable to me perhaps.
God does want religion mixed into decisions, every single thing must be parallel with His will. Now you are getting beyond explicit passages about "subdivision should have their sewer lines replaced....." but what is implied from scripture is that we all be honest and willing to advance to a healthy life style, that includes making rational decisions based on the well-being of all on all things.
Its really a utililitarian system.
A good response, thank you. Not tjat i agree wirh you on what is a healtht lifestyle and such but i did appreaciate the answer.
If America had a theocracy and I was left out, I would continue to persuade people to change to do the right thing. Your described situation would not be favorable to me perhaps.
God does want religion mixed into decisions, every single thing must be parallel with His will. Now you are getting beyond explicit passages about "subdivision should have their sewer lines replaced....." but what is implied from scripture is that we all be honest and willing to advance to a healthy life style, that includes making rational decisions based on the well-being of all on all things.
Its really a utililitarian system.
In a true theocracy, doing what you said here (continue to persuade people to change to do the right thing) would most likely end in your torture and death. If you were lucky, you would only be imprisoned at hard labor.
If you don't agree with the theocratic religion, you would be considered worthless, not even human, and would be eliminated from society.
You can find out. Move to Saudi Arabia, Iran, or any other theocratic country, and stand on the street corner preaching the Gospel. See how that ends for you.
In a true theocracy, doing what you said here (continue to persuade people to change to do the right thing) would most likely end in your torture and death. If you were lucky, you would only be imprisoned at hard labor.
If you don't agree with the theocratic religion, you would be considered worthless, not even human, and would be eliminated from society.
You can find out. Move to Saudi Arabia, Iran, or any other theocratic country, and stand on the street corner preaching the Gospel. See how that ends for you.
I know. It would be a good death. Painful but good.
In a true theocracy, doing what you said here (continue to persuade people to change to do the right thing) would most likely end in your torture and death. If you were lucky, you would only be imprisoned at hard labor.
If you don't agree with the theocratic religion, you would be considered worthless, not even human, and would be eliminated from society.
You can find out. Move to Saudi Arabia, Iran, or any other theocratic country, and stand on the street corner preaching the Gospel. See how that ends for you.
swap out the words "for religion" and add "doing the right thing as we think that is".
Its the exact same thing. Just without the words my-god-said -so.
again, it points to the separation of "bad religion" and "god belief". Mixing the two is just flat dangerous. As we see here.
You can't accept the implications of your position, always running from it.
No, I do not accept YOUR implications based on YOUR ignorance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyKurreto
What science is behind morality? Its only philosophy that touches morality, not science.
Thank you for admitting you are ignorant about what you are posting.
And while I agree morality is not a scientific field, the fact that scientific experiments have been done shows there is an overlap, from cross culture experiments to the famous Stanford prison experiment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyKurreto
You are just like Antony Flew of England who tried debating a Gospel preacher back in 1976, Dr. Flew was the most famous atheistic philosopher during several decades ago and he crumbled infront of seven thousand people in the audience when Thomas B. Warren who actually taught philosophy in colleges gave the moral argument and Dr. Flew couldnt do anything with it, just like you cant do anything with it.
I do not think many people knew who Flew was until Christians started using his mental decline as evidence of a genius who became religious.
And I have looked at this debate, it appears Flew had a problem with a trick question. Have you seen this debate, or are you just taking a part out of context?
And I have done something with it, I have pointed out how your argument says your god can not exist, and I have proven objective facts do not need a god, making the objective morality argument a failure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyKurreto
Nobody can, ever, so keep lying to yourself about it. Be rational and deal with the implications of your position!
Clearly it is you who is lying because you either have to admit your god can not exist, or the holocaust could be morally good if your god says so, something you have consistently ran away from.
I am showing the flaws in your argument, you are just repeating your flawed argument.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
