True I guess but then that also means that the foundational Christian faith and it’s corresponding morality that made freedom and limited government possible also made it possible to endure slavery, inequality for women (and other races), as well as a host of other injustices perpetrated by those people that “had it right” back then.
[quote]storey420 wrote:
True I guess but then that also means that the foundational Christian faith and it’s corresponding morality that made freedom and limited government possible also made it possible to endure slavery, inequality for women (and other races), as well as a host of other injustices perpetrated by those people that “had it right” back then.[/quote]I was just thinking about you this morning. I kid you not. No it does mean what you said, but I have a feeling that explaining why for the 100th time won’t make any difference.
If it does not mean that then you do realize that it seems like cherry picking the best parts and ignoring the rest right? Its like saying that the founders were Masons and so being a Mason must be the necessary step for all of us to live righteously like the founders and their uphold the original principles of this country to save it from where it is headed.
PS. I’ve been incredibly busy with projects so not on here much but the year is winding down so more free time 
Some principles were foundational and defining. Those defining the morality of sex, marriage and family, among others, were and are utterly foundational. I have said why many times. Slavery was a tumor that opposed that foundation. It did not define it which is why we defeated it and continued to ascend right up until the blitzkrieg upon marriage and family in the 1960’s. Now here we are. All this financial disaster is the natural consequence of destroying our own moral foundation.
The way this country was designed from the beginning, she CANNOT ever ever EVER be stronger than her faithful families consisting of one man, one woman and their children for life. Gay, marriage, abortion, adultery, flagrant promiscuity and pornography up to our eyeballs is the inevitable outcome of what began in the 60’s. A country weak, divided and on the verge of financial collapse, with a man who would once have been properly identified as an enemy of the United Sates in he whitehouse are all the perfectly normal consequences of that celebration of immorality.
This is historic Christianity 101. The kind that was so prevalent at our founding and that saw us rise in record time and spectacular fashion to undisputed global superpower. THAT Christianity’s decline corresponds exactly to the decline of our nation.
“OHHHH HOHOHOHO!!! How ridiculous these guys like Trib are with their idiotic prehistoric beliefs and morality”. Fine. I’m good. As I’ve said. My citizenship is not of this world and my security has nothing to do with the decrepit whorehouse that now IS the United Sates. My victory was won in eternity in the mind of God the Father, in history 2000 years ago by God the Son and applied to me in 1984 by God the Holy Spirit.
If there is a last laugh it certainly won’t be mine. While filled with joy at the coming purification of His church I am not laughing at anybody. I do not rejoice at the loss of my country nor the loss of any person no matter how hateful they are to me.
[quote]kamui wrote:
Because, sometimes, memes are required.
[/quote]
When you don’t have a counter argument I suppose.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Some principle were foundational and defining. Those defining the morality of sex, marriage and family, among others, were and are utterly foundational. I have said why many times. Slavery was a tumor that opposed that foundational. It did not define it which is why we defeated it and continued to ascend right up until the blitzkrieg upon marriage and family in the 1960’s. Now here we are. All this financial disaster is the natural consequence of destroying our own moral foundation.
The way this country was designed from the beginning, she CANNOT ever ever EVER be stronger than her faithful families consisting of one man, one woman and their children for life. Gay, marriage, abortion, adultery, flagrant promiscuity and pornography up to our eyeballs is the inevitable outcome of what began in the 60’s. A country weak, divided and on the verge of financial collapse, with a man who would once have been properly identified as an enemy of the United Sates in he whitehouse are all the perfectly normal consequences of that celebration of immorality.
[/quote]
If only the religious hadn’t been saying this throughout history we might put a little more stock in it. The great depression was blamed on the loose morals of the 1920’s (imagine, jazz and Charleston Dance!) I can’t believe we have done anything right after Woodstock can you? (.And maybe you think we haven’t) Slave owners said could you imagine a world where blacks could vote?! A world where women are in the workplace? And now gay marriage. It’s the collapse of the world I tell ya. Girls marrying girls? Send us all to hell! He is coming and hell’s coming with him!
Our loose morals have ALWAYS created anything bad throughout history according to many. You are the same as the people hundreds of years before you. This will be the end of times. Times have never been this bad they said. It has always been thus. It will always be thus. And the sky continues to always, always, always be falling faster than ever. It’s coming NOW!
[quote]H factor wrote:<<< This will be the end of times. Times have never been this bad they said. It has always been thus. It will always be thus. And the sky continues to always, always, always be falling faster than ever. It’s coming NOW! >>>[/quote]Never said this and in fact said the opposite. God is in covenant with His church bride. NOT the United States. This country is not eternal. Her death should in no way be confused with the end of the world. LOL! Yep. There has always been and will always be sin until the end of the age and it will continue to kill everything and everyone in it’s path.
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
Because, sometimes, memes are required.
[/quote]
When you don’t have a counter argument I suppose. [/quote]
a counter argument to what ?
Zoological observations ?
His expression of the problem of Theodicy ?
His personnal feeling about religion ?
[quote]
I see it and I just see the same sort of hate and ignorance I see in racism. Maybe the Church got this one wrong, just like they got so many other things wrong through the course of history. You know, Galileo, deciding who has a soul, who is a savage, and who is a peon/innocent/partial soul simpleton. I don’t mean to rub it in, just the way I see it.[/quote]
His opinion about the Church. How wrong it was. How wrong it may be now ?
More theodicy. And, behind the rhetorical questions, more opinion.
I’m an atheist who happen to love History.
Nothing concern me here.
Except poor, overused Galileo.
[quote]kamui wrote:
[quote]H factor wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
Because, sometimes, memes are required.
[/quote]
When you don’t have a counter argument I suppose. [/quote]
a counter argument to what ?
Zoological observations ?
His expression of the problem of Theodicy ?
His personnal feeling about religion ?
Cool, I’m an agnostic/ ignostic who likes long walks on beaches paved with skulls and hot .50 casings fresh from my m2. By your logic and language I am probably categorized as an agnostic atheist, I’m familiar with the language and categorization, however I don’t buy into it.
If the Galileo example is bad, why don’t you go ahead and explain why it’s bad? The Galileo example is the quintessential example of Papal/Vatican abuse of power considering hindsight and Galileo’s popularity today. If I site and example of the Church and various diocese subverting the legal system by relocating priests who raped boys, you would probably say it is an old, tired, overused example as well right?
How many examples of misconduct must I site in order to formulate an inductive argument sufficient for your taste? I mean, child rape and Galileo are so passe and all…
I bring up theodicy/ the problem of evil a lot because of how slippery it is. Being raised Catholic myself, even having gone to Catholic schools my whole life I was never taught anything about the problem of evil until I hit College. I left an opening for Tirib on purpose, funny thing is I don’t think you even noticed the opening and went right after me for using, very used examples…
If you look at what I typed, and what Tirib typed it still leaves room for homosexuality to exist in a moral way. Really, think about why a young man who fears the fuck out of God might join the priesthood? It’s not that God would create an abomination that is going to go to hell… It’s that God, could have made it harder for certain people by making them homosexual, and their test in life is to not act on their very human sexual compulsions.
He didn’t bite, if he had I would bring up the fact that, perhaps God makes it harder on some of us, and therefore doesn’t create us all equal… Which isn’t a very strong place to be, but at least it might explain that God did create homosexuals and they have a it way way harder than the wealthy in terms of getting to heaven. Maybe the faithful should look at them with mercy rather than scorn.
For me these days, I look back and think about how many priests I knew growing up were homos? I get around priests and I can tell most of them are whole fruits that became priests… I get the feeling a lot of them realized they were full on flamers and out of fear of going to hell became priests. I imagine being raised strictly catholic, or whatever religion which may look at homosexuality, or homosexual acts as sin. Kid hits puberty and the girls don’t look cute… Just saying, think about what a young, devout kid who was simply wired to be gay might be going through… It’s friggin horrible… Just saying, that’s a messed up thing to do… Fear someone into faith… Nah, fear someone into not having sex and into priesthood… I had a rough time as a kid with the church, but I cant imagine what it would have been like to be gay and devout… Then to come into like puberty and think I’m an abomination? Some cold stuff right there.
You seem to be the sort to call me on everything. So, as to my dog zoological explanation… To the religious person the animal has no soul, to some degree is innocent and is going to do what it does… If an animal is a homosexual, and there are just shitloads of animals that display homosexual behavior, it’s hard to argue it’s an abomination because necessarily God made them that way considering animals have no free will. Where a person could be an abomination due to free will. A person could will himself to be homosexual, the animal cannot. If an animal can be a non abomination homosexual, then why can’t a human? I don’t want to have to explain everything but this is part of my reasoning, it’s from my understanding from being a catholic before.
I already get ahead more than once about Galileo on this board.
see here for example :
http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/judaeochristianity_is_false?pageNo=0
[quote]
How many examples of misconduct must I site in order to formulate an inductive argument sufficient for your taste? I mean, child rape and Galileo are so passe and all…[/quote]
How many examples of misconduct doesn’t matter.
To make your point you need more than mere examples of misconduct.
You need examples of essentially christian, essentially ecclesial misconduct.
in other word you need to prove that there is a causal link between A (being the Church) and B (some specific misconduct).
If you can do that, ONE example would be enough.
This is not only an opening. It’s a blackhole in the argument of evil.
If there is always a “room to exist in a moral way”, then there is no inconsistency between this existence of evil and an omnibenevolent creator.
[quote]
You seem to be the sort to call me on everything.[/quote]
actually, i called you on ONE and only one thing.
As i said, the rest of your post doesn’t concern me at all.
[quote]kamui wrote:
I already get ahead more than once about Galileo on this board.
see here for example :
http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/world_news_war/judaeochristianity_is_false?pageNo=0
[quote]
How many examples of misconduct must I site in order to formulate an inductive argument sufficient for your taste? I mean, child rape and Galileo are so passe and all…[/quote]
How many examples of misconduct doesn’t matter.
To make your point you need more than mere examples of misconduct.
You need examples of essentially christian, essentially ecclesial misconduct.
in other word you need to prove that there is a causal link between A (being the Church) and B (some specific misconduct).
If you can do that, ONE example would be enough.
This is not only an opening. It’s a blackhole in the argument of evil.
If there is always a “room to exist in a moral way”, then there is no inconsistency between this existence of evil and an omnibenevolent creator.
Eh, the whole omnibenevolent creator thing, necessarily has to give up one omnipower… Problem is people act like it’s so significant to say that God can’t do illogical things, like make a square circle. So what? Still omnipotent because he’s still the strongest thing in the universe if he exists this way. The most important things to hold onto are ideas that God is omniscient and all good. You wouldn’t want God to go forgetting about people’s goods and bads or he would be unjust, so God must have omniscience… God has to be all good, or he isn’t worth worshiping. End of the day you have to give him a crack on his omnipotent ways and it makes sense. You want to talk about old, dry stuff? You burn me for bringing up Galileo, so can I burn you for bringing up Aquinas and the specifics of omni powers? Nah, because it’s too fun to discuss.
By the way. I believe we aren’t on the same page. You are talking about the problem of evil, I’m already giving Tirib the idea that God is all good and omniscient because that’s the only way I make sense of it. I’m talking about the difference between what the CHURCH does right and wrong, which is run by men, not God.
Animals don’t bear the image of God like men do and the whole creation is under Adam’s curse. Of course there’s going to be the perversion of God’s created order in nature. The unnatural is natural in that environment. In a universe cursed by sin how could it be otherwise? Only the redeeming power of the blood and resurrection of Jesus Christ can fix the perversion of members of same sex defiling themselves and His covenant with one another.
Only humans can sin though because only humans, as bearers of God’s image are moral agents. No dogs go to heaven. Or hell. I don’t have a problem of evil btw. Philosophically speaking, evil is no problem for me.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Animals don’t bear the image of God like men do and the whole creation is under Adam’s curse. Of course there’s going to be the perversion of God’s created order in nature. The unnatural is natural in that environment. In a universe cursed by sin how could it be otherwise? Only the redeeming power of the blood and resurrection of Jesus Christ can fix the perversion of members of same sex defiling themselves and His covenant with one another.
Only humans can sin though because only humans, as bearers of God’s image are moral agents. No dogs go to heaven. Or hell. I don’t have a problem of evil btw. Philosophically speaking, evil is no problem for me.[/quote]
So, to you there is no such thing as an innocent form of homosexuality in humans, and when it’s displayed in animals, it’s the curse of Adam?
Is it possible for your gay priest (trust me, you have had gay priests) to go to heaven? Is it possible for homosexuality to exist and not be a sin in humans according to your beliefs? Are you the sort that acknowledges the merits of science and biology at the end of the day?
[quote]Severiano wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
…
[/quote]
Is it possible for your gay priest (trust me, you have had gay priests) to go to heaven? …[/quote]
I think you have your cast of characters confused, there, sport. Tir does not subscribe to any organization that has priests.
[quote]undoredo wrote:[quote]Severiano wrote:
Is it possible for your gay priest (trust me, you have had gay priests) to go to heaven? …[/quote]
I think you have your cast of characters confused, there, sport. Tir does not subscribe to any organization that has priests.
[/quote]Quite so. I have told this man numerous times (and I do mean numerous), that I am NOT Catholic and when I say “church” he should pretend the Roman Catholic church never existed. (my actual words to him). However to answer him in the same way I always do when asked these kinds of questions… yes.
There is NO sin more powerful than the blood and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If I take Jeffery Dahmer at his word and I think I do, then he’s in heaven. Serial Killer Jeffrey Dahmer and Christian Conversion, Jeffrey Dahmer and Forgiveness - Beliefnet While Mahatma Ghandi is probably in hell. THAT should settle any questions pertainnig to my view in this regard. Being a groovy dood does not get you into heaven. Being raised from death in sin to life in Christ does.
BTW, the redemption of a guy like Dahmer is exactly what I would expect from my God. Ohhh yes sir. =] Praise His holy name. David Berkowitz too. The son of sam serial killer is my brother in Christ and I’m glad to have him. The Lord God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is most exquisitely glorified by His dislpay of mercy and might in bringing unto Himself reprehensible famous criminals like these. I was on my way to the very same hell they were when Jesus came callin on me. These guys have far more credible testimonies than most of the people calling themselves Christians in these forums.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
If I take Jeffery Dahmer at his word and I think I do, then he’s in heaven. Serial Killer Jeffrey Dahmer and Christian Conversion, Jeffrey Dahmer and Forgiveness - Beliefnet While Mahatma Ghandi is probably in hell.[/quote]
I commend your consistency and conviction. You take your beliefs to their logical conclusions, that’s for sure.
That said, I take vast comfort in the near certainty that you are entirely mistaken and that you worship a false, deranged caricature of a deity. And if by some cruel, tragic twist you end up being correct about all this, I’d rather roast with Gandhi than bask in your slave-driver’s glory with Jeff and the gang.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
If I take Jeffery Dahmer at his word and I think I do, then he’s in heaven. Serial Killer Jeffrey Dahmer and Christian Conversion, Jeffrey Dahmer and Forgiveness - Beliefnet While Mahatma Ghandi is probably in hell.[/quote]
I commend your consistency and conviction. You take your beliefs to their logical conclusions, that’s for sure.
That said, I take vast comfort in the near certainty that you are entirely mistaken and that you worship a false, deranged caricature of a deity. And if by some cruel, tragic twist you end up being correct about all this, I’d rather roast with Gandhi than bask in your slave-driver’s glory with Jeff and the gang.[/quote]You say this because you understand neither the holiness of God nor the horror of sin. You also don’t understand the mercy and longsuffering kindness of a God who would Himself pay for such evil so I don’t have to.
There is absolutely a deliberate reason that God decreed the first sin to be a simple bite from a piece of forbidden fruit. One bite. CRRRUNCH. And every man, woman and child descended from Adam is plunged into eternal sin and death. It’s not the act my friend that God hates most. It’s the attitude. In the book of Proverbs chapter 6 verses 16-19 http://esv.scripturetext.com/proverbs/6.htm is described 7 things God hates. What’s number one on that list? Murder? adultery? pedophilia? homosexuality? cannibalism? Those and plenty more are all horrific, but no. Haughty eyes is number one. The proud look from a proud heart that says “I AM better than YOU.” “I will decide what’s best.” “I don’t think I like the way God does things.” Ya know what God hates worse than Jeffery Dahmer’s sick, twisted and perverse behavior? The eyes that look upon him in self righteous disdain, as if to say “WELL!!! I would NEVER do something like THAT. hmmff, so there”. You already have and far worse.
I have sinned right in God’s face as a believer who knew better with no excuse. I dare not demand justice or Jeffery Dahmer may be the one judging ME. Jesus Christ, the eternally begotten Son of the most high God, was born a true man, lived flawlessly under His own law and then died in punishment as a transgressor in the place of those whom He would save. When He rose again, His life defeated MY death. And Jeffery Dahmer’s. I am no better than he is and I embrace him as my brother. If Ghandi died in his idolatrous worship of false gods, then he is not my brother and I grieve his loss to everlasting perdition. What I am saying to you now is simply historic Christianity. It only seems extreme because of how rare it’s become nowadays. I certainly do not hope so, but if you persist in this rebellion, your self deluded comfort will be very short lived. I am not trying to make you angry, but if by telling you the truth I do? I can live with that. I CANNOT live with knowing that in my misplaced desire to avoid offending man, that I have in so doing betrayed my God who saved me through the preaching of another of His faithful servants.
Jesus is to me not a button I pin on the rest of my life. He IS my life. Literally. As is the case with every one of His true disciples.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Ya know what God hates worse than Jeffery Dahmer’s sick, twisted and perverse behavior? The eyes that look upon him in self righteous disdain, as if to say “WELL!!! I would NEVER do something like THAT. hmmff, so there”. You already have and far worse.
[/quote]
I am pretty sure that I have not.
Like, in the 120% range sure.
Cause, you now, killing prostidudes, cannibalism and trying to build your own living sex toys by selectively damaging other peoples brains…thats far out there man…
Lol SMH, if Gandhi’s in hell and Dahmer isn’t and I get to heaven…I’ll personally ask to be escorted downstairs.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2065289,00.html
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
The eyes that look upon him [Jeffrey Dahmer] in self righteous disdain, as if to say “WELL!!! I would NEVER do something like THAT. hmmff, so there”. You already have and far worse.
[/quote]
Emphasis mine.
I’ve quoted this in the hope that you’ll read it, regret it, and have some kind of epiphany.