Seeking Power in Jesus’ Name. The Patriot Church

[marindem01]

Because unlike my evangelical relatives I view the bible not as the word of God written by God.
I view it as man's interpretation of God's spoken word if he were to speak.
Man being flawed means of course there are going to be flaws in the bible.

There is no god, never has been. Man created god because he did not understand why sun was bright and the night was dark. Man made Rain gods, Water gods, Volcano gods....Man never runs out of gods because Man don't know shit.

[Glennfs]

I don't claim there is no deity. I DO, however, claim that it's obvious that there is zero proof that the God of the Bible exists, and LOTS of proof that it's just made up. As well as the other 10,000 gods that man has dreamed up.

I just believe in one less than you do.

So that would make you an agnostic

[Glennfs]

There is no god, never has been. Man created god because he did not understand why sun was bright and the night was dark. Man made Rain gods, Water gods, Volcano gods....Man never runs out of gods because Man don't know shit.

What is funny is that I believe in God and for proof all I need do is see the sky is blue and the grass is green.
But, at the end of the day if God doesn't grade on the curve we are all screwed.

[gounion]

So that would make you an agnostic

Incorrect. You don't understand what atheism is. You can't prove a negative, but there is zero proof that our universe didn't occur naturally.

But I KNOW that Jehovah didn't do it. It's easily disproven.

But one quick question - if we were created, who created the creator?

[Libertas]

What about the approximate 10 billion humans who lived and died without ever hearing of Christ?

Do they go to hell too?

[carmenjonze]

The most arrogant people are those who claim that theirs and only theirs is the correct way to worship or pay homage to the diety.
Followed closely by those who claim there is no diety

Welcome to white conservatism.

[sam lefthand]

What about the approximate 10 billion humans who lived and died without ever hearing of Christ?

Do they go to hell too?

One often ignored possibility is there being oblivion upon death.



It's the only theoretical possibility under occasional consideration which comes with its set of logistic considerations fully satisfied.

[carmenjonze]

What about the approximate 10 billion humans who lived and died without ever hearing of Christ?

Do they go to hell too?

Yes.

They call this deity a loving god, but really it’s just a reflection of their own misanthropy and self-hatred.

[carmenjonze]

Because unlike my evangelical relatives I view the bible not as the word of God written by God.
I view it as man's interpretation of God's spoken word if he were to speak.
Man being flawed means of course there are going to be flaws in the bible.

Then it’s no more a book of truths than the Sutras, or the Zend Avesta, or Jefferson’s Bible, or the Qur’an.

That also goes for all the books Protestants selectively tossed out.

[marindem01]

Then it’s no more a book of truths than the Sutras, or the Zend Avesta, or Jefferson’s Bible, or the Qur’an.

That also goes for all the books Protestants selectively tossed out.

Like Gospels according Mary and Judas.

[carmenjonze]

One often ignored possibility is there being oblivion upon death.



It's the only theoretical possibility under occasional consideration which comes with its set of logistic considerations fully satisfied.

Christian theology isn’t really about logic, though.

Neither are anyone else’s theologies.

[JoeMemphis]

What is funny is that I believe in God and for proof all I need do is see the sky is blue and the grass is green.
But, at the end of the day if God doesn't grade on the curve we are all screwed.

What I think of what other people do or do not believe as far as religion is concerned is irrelevant to anyone but me. The constitution says we have a right to believe as we choose. I guess that includes the right not to believe at all.

That works for me.

[gounion]

What I think of what other people do or do not believe as far as religion is concerned is irrelevant to anyone but me. The constitution says we have a right to believe as we choose. I guess that includes the right not to believe at all.

That works for me.

Would that the people you vote for felt that way. Most of them want to force their religion onto others by force of law.

[JoeMemphis]

Would that the people you vote for felt that way. Most of them want to force their religion onto others by force of law.

Some of them feel like they are being forced to live by someone else’s value system. Funny how that works.

The law says we have a right to believe as we choose and we have a right to vote. The laws we pass are shared values. We are supposed to live by those laws whether we like them or agree with them or not. It’s kinda the glue that holds this all together IMO. We have a right to expect people to abide by the laws and the constitution. If people want change, they need to get it done under the law and in the voting booth.

That’s what I believe.

[carmenjonze]

What I think of what other people do or do not believe as far as religion is concerned is irrelevant to anyone but me. The constitution says we have a right to believe as we choose. I guess that includes the right not to believe at all.

That works for me.

Constitutionality is a different issue, though. Personal belief or nonbelief is not contingent on the Constitution. That's just a matter of profession of belief/nonbelief/creed. etc., as far as the government is concerned. The government stays out of matters of personal belief.

For instance, prior to the Constitution, colonies could burn you at the stake or exclude you from public life if you weren't the right kind of Christian.

Let alone, not even Christian...It's why we have states like Maryland (Catholic), Rhode Island (Baptist), Virginia (Episcopalian), and such.

I guess slaughtering each other in centuries of wars of religion in the old countries wasn't enough for Europeans. :problem:

[carmenjonze]

Some of them feel like they are being forced to live by someone else’s value system. Funny how that works.

Is it funny?

You cannot name one time in the US when any group but conservative groups have imposed your lifestyle on everyone else by force of law and policy.

Lol the reason most African Americans and Latinos are Christians in the first place is because whites forced us to live by your value system.

Happily, we made that imposition unrecognizable to many of you.

The law says we have a right to believe as we choose and we have a right to vote. The laws we pass are shared values.

Were the segregation laws and eugenics laws you guys passed all over the country "shared values?"

Are the anti-CRT and anti-LGBTQ laws you guys are currently passing under the banner of conservative Christianity "shared values?" Or are those the so-called values conservative Christians think they are entitled to impose on everyone else.

We are supposed to live by those laws whether we like them or agree with them or not.

Conservative whites murdered people for moving into a neighborhood, shot people in the back for trying to enter some stupid school, and are currently on trial for getting violent in Charlottesville over some statue.

Moving into said neighborhoods, entering said schools, and putting a ballot in a box was all illegal. Depending on who you are.

[carmenjonze]

Glennfs claims the Bible is a book of truths.

Sure, it is.

1 Peter 2:18-20

18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.

19 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.

20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.

[Drak]

Some of them feel like they are being forced to live by someone else’s value system. Funny how that works.

The law says we have a right to believe as we choose and we have a right to vote. The laws we pass are shared values. We are supposed to live by those laws whether we like them or agree with them or not. It’s kinda the glue that holds this all together IMO. We have a right to expect people to abide by the laws and the constitution. If people want change, they need to get it done under the law and in the voting booth.

That’s what I believe.

Religion has no place in governance. I'm not sure what you're defending here when you say, "being forced to live by someone else's value system." Maybe you can be more specific.

[Libertas]

Religion has no place in governance. I'm not sure what you're defending here when you say, "being forced to live by someone else's value system." Maybe you can be more specific.

This is why we wont likely survive these hateful assholes who are as stupid as hateful.

What is it they hate? Oh, I know, universal healthcare. i.e.they cant tell you what it is other than the mysterious "socialism" that does not exist, never did.

Oh, and every con here and out there must immediately give us their Medicare and Social Security back at a minimum. And any unemployment check they ever got, any OSHA protection.

And if you use safe roads and breathe clean air, we want them back too.

idiots

[carmenjonze]

Some truth.

Exodus 21: 7-8

7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.

8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.

[Drak]

Glennfs wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:15 pm
Because unlike my evangelical relatives I view the bible not as the word of God written by God.
I view it as man's interpretation of God's spoken word if he were to speak.
Man being flawed means of course there are going to be flaws in the bible.

Then it’s no more a book of truths than the Sutras, or the Zend Avesta, or Jefferson’s Bible, or the Qur’an.

That also goes for all the books Protestants selectively tossed out.

We have a guy on the street corner who claims God speaks to him.

I don't really get what Glenn is saying though. I mean, if it's man's interpretation then it's not really a God, is it? And if it's God speaking through man, well then there's that guy on the street corner...

[JoeMemphis]

Religion has no place in governance. I'm not sure what you're defending here when you say, "being forced to live by someone else's value system." Maybe you can be more specific.

I don’t disagree that religion has no place in governance. But that does not mean that religious people don’t have a right to participate. Needless to say what informs one persons values isn’t necessarily the same for everyone. You might not agree with conservative values and conservatives won’t always agree with yours. The minority often feels out upon. But as long as it doesn’t violate the constitution, That’s the law.

[Drak]

I don’t disagree that religion has no place in governance. But that does not mean that religious people don’t have a right to participate. Needless to say what informs one persons values isn’t necessarily the same for everyone. You might not agree with conservative values and conservatives won’t always agree with yours. The minority often feels out upon. But as long as it doesn’t violate the constitution, That’s the law.

There are no values put upon Christians whereby they can't live as they see fit or believe, as long as they're not harming others. They don't have the right to push their religion into governance though, and force everyone else to live by their religious laws.

[Tao Jones Sr.]

I don’t disagree that religion has no place in governance.

Weasely.

RELIGION
HAS
NO
PLACE
IN
GOVERNANCE

That’s better.

[carmenjonze]

We have a guy on the street corner who claims God speaks to him.

I don't really get what Glenn is saying though. I mean, if it's man's interpretation then it's not really a God, is it? And if it's God speaking through man, well then there's that guy on the street corner...

Glennfs is espousing liberal theology. He's distinguished it from his evangelical relatives, and has said he's attended Presbyterian churches. That's pretty consistent with most PC(USA) present-day theologies. These are the influences

https://www.britannica.com/topic/theological-liberalism

The second stage of theological liberalism, Romanticism, lasted from the late 18th century to the end of the 19th. Marked by the discovery of the uniqueness of the individual and the consequent significance of individual experience as a distinctive source of infinite meaning, this premium upon personality and upon individual creativity exceeded every other value. The American and French revolutions provided the symbol of this spirit of independence and dramatically exemplified it in political action.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Immanuel Kant were the architects of Romantic liberalism. In theology, the German Friedrich Schleiermacher, called the father of modern Protestant theology, was outstanding. Unlike Kant, who saw in moral will the clue to man’s higher nature, Schleiermacher seized upon the feeling of absolute dependence as being simultaneously that which “signifies God for us” and that which is distinctive in the religious response. Thus, self-consciousness in this deep religious sense becomes God-consciousness. According to Schleiermacher, the Christian is brought to this deeper vein of self-consciousness through the man Jesus, in whom the God-consciousness had been perfected. The nurture of God-consciousness in relation to Jesus Christ, Schleiermacher believed, led to the creation of the church as a fellowship of believers.

The German Albrecht Ritschl dominated liberal Protestant theology after Schleiermacher, and two other German theologians, Wilhelm Herrmann and Adolf von Harnack, were Ritschl’s most prominent followers. In the United States, Horace Bushnell was the most significant liberal theologian. Another important liberal was Walter Rauschenbusch, leader of the Social Gospel movement.

The third period of theological liberalism, Modernism, from the mid-19th century through the 1920s, was marked by the discovery of the significance of historical time and an emphasis upon the notion of progress. The decisive events stimulating these interests were the Industrial Revolution and the publication of Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species (1859). A determined course emerged among Modernists to bring religious thought into accord with modern knowledge and to solve issues raised by modern culture. The study of Christian doctrine was transformed into the psychological study of religious experience and into the sociological study of religious institutions and customs and the philosophical inquiry into religious knowledge and values. Among important figures during this period were Thomas Huxley and Herbert Spencer in England, William James, John Dewey, Shailer Mathews, and Harry Emerson Fosdick in the United States, and Ernst Troeltsch in Germany.

He is probably also influenced, as many conservative US Protestants are, by Karl Barth. I am not the biggest fan of Barth. But interestingly enough, feminist theology, Black theology, Liberation Theology, all associated with politically-liberal Christianity, is influenced by Barth, as was the Confessing Church movement in Germany during the Third Reich.

And in another reversal, in the current day, there is a movement of US conservative Christians who hate gays calling themselves the "Confessing movement," as if they're protesting Hitler or whatever.