Separation of Church and State

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
321

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]Bullmoose33 wrote:
Kennedy had the right idea.[/quote]

You mean the magic book about men making large bodies of water suddenly defy all known laws of physics SHOULDNT be what our entire legal system is based on?

How dare you. You’ll be set on fire for all eternity when you die - lets hope preying on your fear of the unknown will terrorize you to my way of thinking![/quote]You just may get it one day, but not today.
[/quote]

You are the worst condescending asshole on T-Nation. Never ask me what problem I have with christians, ever.[/quote]

Says the man that miss portrays the beliefs of a Senator and a President.[/quote]

Christians dont believe a man parted a sea by raising a staff?[/quote]

No, they believe God did through Moses and that he had to use a staff in order to do it. So do Jews and Muslims. But, we don’t believe in magic, a magic book, and what does parting a sea have to do with the fact that our moral laws are perfect. And, that the Catholic Church has one of the best legal systems as well as oldest legal systems in the world? One that America is based on, that England and most of Europe is based on, and that some countries live by partially or whole. And, that creating canon law created jurisprudence as well as other things that people take for granted.

I think you need to shut up now.[/quote]

Modern law is not based on canon law. It is based on english maritime law. The main difference is the presence of judge and juries in the english system. Canon law is based on “inquisition”. And I think everyones heard of that before.

322

I’m not religious in the slightest, but I do often wonder how people devoted to their beliefs rationalise this:

Assuming there is a god, how do YOU rationalise that YOUR religion is the RIGHT one and that ALL OTHERS ARE FALSE.

323

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
<<< You have to have faith in reason, faith in your reasoning faculties, >>>[/quote]Boy is that horribly wrong and does indeed explain everything. Faith, which is the gift of God, resurrects, frees and empowers reason. Not the other way around. Reason is a major component of the image of God in man which like everything else, is IMPOSSIBLE to use to God,s glory UNTIL it is born again into new life. This is where Aquinas, who was indeed a frightening genius, went horribly wrong as well. Don’t worry though. The pagans will be essentially on your side here. With a ringing endorsement like that you must be on the right track.
[/quote]

Um, faith IN God is a gift. Just like reasoning faculties, obviously. And, exactly how did Aquinas go horrible wrong?

The only people that are on my side are Christians. What? Just because I think reason is a good way to communicate between atheist and theist, I’m a pagan now?[/quote]

Reason is the only good way to communicate between any people.

Its interesting, really. Tirib denounces reason as the tool of fallen man… yet I’m fairly sure if we observed his daily life, we’d see him make a lot of decisions based on reason. Yet, when it comes to this one thing, reason is the enemy and a sign of death.

Why dont people like that do other reasonless things, like drive on lawns or go outside without pants on or eat glass? Why let reason dictate everything except religious belief?

324

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]Bullmoose33 wrote:
Kennedy had the right idea.[/quote]

You mean the magic book about men making large bodies of water suddenly defy all known laws of physics SHOULDNT be what our entire legal system is based on?

How dare you. You’ll be set on fire for all eternity when you die - lets hope preying on your fear of the unknown will terrorize you to my way of thinking![/quote]You just may get it one day, but not today.
[/quote]

You are the worst condescending asshole on T-Nation. Never ask me what problem I have with christians, ever.[/quote]

Says the man that miss portrays the beliefs of a Senator and a President.[/quote]

Christians dont believe a man parted a sea by raising a staff?[/quote]

No, they believe God did through Moses and that he had to use a staff in order to do it. So do Jews and Muslims. But, we don’t believe in magic, a magic book, and what does parting a sea have to do with the fact that our moral laws are perfect. And, that the Catholic Church has one of the best legal systems as well as oldest legal systems in the world? One that America is based on, that England and most of Europe is based on, and that some countries live by partially or whole. And, that creating canon law created jurisprudence as well as other things that people take for granted.

I think you need to shut up now.[/quote]

Modern law is not based on canon law. It is based on english maritime law. The main difference is the presence of judge and juries in the english system. Canon law is based on “inquisition”. And I think everyones heard of that before.
[/quote]

To use a word like inquisition is asking for prejudice as I am sure they have heard the word, but don’t know what it means. And, the modern law is still based on canon law, even if there is several steps to get there.

Canon Law deals with everything from property to misconduct.

325

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
So no politics at all?

I’m not trying to build any strawman arguments against you, I’m seriously wondering what you think the role of politics should idealistically be, if any.[/quote]

You got it. Mind your own business.[/quote]

Then who decides on laws?[/quote]

When FDR changed Wilson’s ‘Trading With the Enemy Act’ so that citizens could be considered the enemy, we stopped being a nation of Common Law and became a nation based upon Admiralty Law. Think of being on a ship – everything is done ‘at the pleasure of the captain’. Hence the vastly increasing powers of the Executive Branch.

326

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]Bullmoose33 wrote:
Kennedy had the right idea.[/quote]

You mean the magic book about men making large bodies of water suddenly defy all known laws of physics SHOULDNT be what our entire legal system is based on?

How dare you. You’ll be set on fire for all eternity when you die - lets hope preying on your fear of the unknown will terrorize you to my way of thinking![/quote]

SIAP

The parting of the “Red” Sea does not defy all known laws of physics. In fact, a large parting of water most likely did occur. There are non-religious historical records of a large tidal waves and winds in the area. If these waves and winds reached certain levels, they would have caused many rivers and seas to separate.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8015908/Biblical-parting-of-the-Red-Sea-could-have-happened.html

327

SIAP?

328

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
SIAP?[/quote]

SIAP = Sorry if already posted

In other words, I don’t have time to read the entire thread so I think I can cover my laziness by putting SIAP.

Ricky Bobby believes “with all do respect” has a similar purpose.

329

Actually, a man raising his arms and waters parting in direct relation to his arms raising completely defies the laws of physics.

Yeah, tidal waves and winds dont. But the bible doesnt say tidal waves and winds caused the seas to part. It says they parted because God parted them in concert with a man raising a staff.

330

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Actually, a man raising his arms and waters parting in direct relation to his arms raising completely defies the laws of physics.

Yeah, tidal waves and winds dont. But the bible doesnt say tidal waves and winds caused the seas to part. It says they parted because God parted them in concert with a man raising a staff. [/quote]

Even if God wanted to respect the laws of physics, he could have directed Moses to raise his arms at the exact moment God knew the water would part.

Please bear with me on this. But the point of the Bible is not to be a history or science book. It is to reveal truths about God.

For instance, the story of Noah’s Ark is not about a great flood. Whether or not a flood occured doesn’t matter. What matters is that God is telling the faithful, I could destroy everything if I wanted. But even if I did, I would preserve the faithful.

The parting of the Red Sea is similar. God can control the world. He can defy all things that seem possible. And God will use this power to protect his people.

The Bible manifests itself as stories because this was the easiest way to remember God’s teachings before people could write. People would remember a story (e.g., Daniel in the lions’ den) to convey a truth about God. You can image people gathered around a fire hearing the tale of Daniel.

331

[quote]McG78 wrote:
Please bear with me on this. But the point of the Bible is not to be a history or science book. It is to reveal truths about God.[/quote]

Except it tries to make historical and scientific claims. The moment you start talking about parting the oceans and parthenogenesis you have infringed upon the territory of science. The moment you start talking about genealogy, the accuracy of the history comes into play.

332

[quote]McG78 wrote:

Please bear with me on this. What matters is that God is telling the faithful, I could destroy everything if I wanted. But even if I did, I would preserve the faithful.[/quote]

Bullshit. What it is, in fact, is believers saying “if you dont agree with me, you’re in big trouble.”

God doesn’t exist. God cannot destroy anything, ever, and being “faithful” wont save me, you, or anyone else, from anything, ever. Stop trying to manipulate other people through fear, it basically makes you a terrorist.

333

I have a atheist friend (whom I have debated) that believes in parallel universes, time travel and teleportation (especially the former two).

Not all atheists believe those things but Im trying to illustrate a point that many atheists believe in such hypothetical nonsense yet completely scoff at the idea of a creator.

334

[quote]forbes wrote:
I have a atheist friend (whom I have debated) that believes in parallel universes, time travel and teleportation (especially the former two).

Not all atheists believe those things but Im trying to illustrate a point that many atheists believe in such hypothetical nonsense yet completely scoff at the idea of a creator. [/quote]

A creator? Maybe.

The exact creator Christians worship? Nope.

335

[quote]forbes wrote:
I have a atheist friend (whom I have debated) that believes in parallel universes, time travel and teleportation (especially the former two).

Not all atheists believe those things but Im trying to illustrate a point that many atheists believe in such hypothetical nonsense yet completely scoff at the idea of a creator. [/quote]

Technically time travel into the future has been proven but we aren’t able to achieve the speeds necessary to make it years into the future.
Look up atomic clocks

http://www.brianbosak.com/
Find:atomic

336

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:
I have a atheist friend (whom I have debated) that believes in parallel universes, time travel and teleportation (especially the former two).

Not all atheists believe those things but Im trying to illustrate a point that many atheists believe in such hypothetical nonsense yet completely scoff at the idea of a creator. [/quote]

A creator? Maybe.

The exact creator Christians worship? Nope.[/quote]

You can pretty much replace Christians with any religious group and you have my view on God. To claim to know the unknowable is unbelievably ridiculous, yet people try to do it anyway.

337

people have a tough time with coincidences. the catholic church for many years was synonymous with the Empire of Rome (after Constantine) and participated in many persecutions against supposed “heresy”, thus rendering the modern interpretation of Christianity often invalid, too much red tape and politicing. This is especially true of Catholics, which came to replace the pantheon of gods throughout the provinces of the empire.

338

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:
I have a atheist friend (whom I have debated) that believes in parallel universes, time travel and teleportation (especially the former two).

Not all atheists believe those things but Im trying to illustrate a point that many atheists believe in such hypothetical nonsense yet completely scoff at the idea of a creator. [/quote]

A creator? Maybe.

The exact creator Christians worship? Nope.[/quote]Definitely not THAT creator.

339

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]McG78 wrote:
Please bear with me on this. But the point of the Bible is not to be a history or science book. It is to reveal truths about God.[/quote]

Except it tries to make historical and scientific claims. The moment you start talking about parting the oceans and parthenogenesis you have infringed upon the territory of science. The moment you start talking about genealogy, the accuracy of the history comes into play.[/quote]

The accuracy of the history is only important if you believe the Bible is a literal account of what happened. Catholics do not; some Protestants do. Catholics don’t deny the existence of dinosauers because they aren’t in the Bible. Catholics accept some form of evolution because eventually the ooze had to come from somewhere. Catholics don’t care about whether the Garden of Eden existed. What is important, is what the stories say about God. Much like Jesus’s parables. They could all of been factual lies, but there truths are undeniable to Christians.

340

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:
I have a atheist friend (whom I have debated) that believes in parallel universes, time travel and teleportation (especially the former two).

Not all atheists believe those things but Im trying to illustrate a point that many atheists believe in such hypothetical nonsense yet completely scoff at the idea of a creator. [/quote]

A creator? Maybe.

The exact creator Christians worship? Nope.[/quote]Definitely not THAT creator.
[/quote]

The omnibenevolent one who is going to send me to a pit of fire for eternity?

The future seeing one who set up Adam and Eve to eat magical fruit so he could punish the rest of humanity forever and ever?

The loving one who sends plagues around, tells groups of people to exterminate other groups of people?

The one who refuses to simply show himself and prove his existence?

The “perfect” one who exibits imperfect characteristics, such as jealousy?

Yeah. That one doesn’t exist, not for a second. I dont doubt for a second that you tapped into something very real during your religious experience, Trib, and with every religious experience you have. I just reject the “big angry white man with a beard” image, and all the “miracles” that come along with Christianity.

I sincerely believe your interpretation of what happened to you is a result of your environment. If you had been born in another country, you would have attributed what happened to you to some other diety, or to enlightenment, or something else.