JB, I try to be understanding but they just continue to push. I don't like the idea that they are trying to force me to agree with it... I don't and never will.
JB, I try to be understanding but they just continue to push. I don't like the idea that they are trying to force me to agree with it... I don't and never will.
Smoke meth. Hail Satan.
That's what I was getting at, I was trying to make a point about people claiming it to be a first amendment issue.
No sir, there was no intent of snarkiness. My deception comment was simply my way of pointing towards the first deception which has been with us since ever since. The deception was used as a means to seperate man from God, the Prime Creator and only sovereign being in existence. No matter how we look at it, man and everything else is the property of God if one is willing to put aside pride. We are not sovereign beings. We are His property. God owns us. I for one have no problem with this concept. Is that not why we refer to God as Father, Master, Lord, etc?
God states that his law is supreme. We claim in the Constitution that our law is supreme. Only one can be. If we claim ours as supreme, then we are rejecting God. And this is not just the US Constitution, but all forms of governence since the children of Israel demanded that they have a king as written in 1 Samuel 8.
This passage is symbolic of man rejecting God enmasse. We humans demand we have our laws and reject his Laws. The result is that we are now dead to him until such a time where we turn back to his Law. The problem that we are faced with who we will call master. Will it be God or will it be man? We can not serve two masters.
The framers of the Constitution invoked the name of God into the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. This does not equate to giving allegiance to God. Read the words close and it is evident that man is declaring how things will be without any input from God. "We the People" is a proclomation absent of God. It is hubris. Vanity. Rejection of God's Law in favor of our law. God does not listen to those who reject him. He doesn't hear them. Is it any wonder why this nation is in turmoil? Why everything is a mess here and the world over? And why we have lost the security and freedom of God's caring? Many pray, but because we as a nation rejected God, he ignores us.
I know this is a viewpoint few want to hear. But it explains much of our problems. The confusion that I'm certain the people at the Tower of Babel experienced. Why is our government doing this awfulness to us? Why does it constantly try to take away our freedom? Why does it want to enslave us? I think the reason goes all the way back to the first deception. We believe we are as God as described in Genesis 3:5. And just a look at what God says will happen in 1 Samuel 8:11-18. It's a list of all the negative effects that the nation of Israel (and any nation for that matter) will experience. Then look at all the grievences listed in the DoI. They are so similar. Slavery is the result of rejecting God's law for man's law.
Just my thoughts on the matter. My apologies for unsettling anyone.
Lynx, your basic premise is wrong. The whole idea behind America is freedom from a state established religion. It doesn't matter that, in the past, America was a "mostly Christian" country. The law of the land is that we cannot have a state sponsored religion.
And as for your comments regarding "God's law" vs. "man's law," in all due respect that is the same sort of mentality that justifies the murder of abortion doctors in the name God.
You are in America. You have every right to worship God in whatever manner you wish. That right was guaranteed by the very Founders you view as hubris driven. Your right is absolute UNTIL it infringes on the rights of others.
I'm not picking on you, it's just that reading your last post, if we replace God with Allah, it reads like Muslim propaganda.
As for the turmoil in our nation, here is the reality: as we progress technologically, we will see more turmoil. I'm not sure these are "end times." People have been preaching about "end times," for over 2000 years. And they have the "proof" to back up their assertions. The early Christians in the late Roman Empire certainly thought the Vandals and Visgoths as the harbringers of end times. In the Middle Ages, the Black Plauge must have been a sign of the Apocalypse. Napoleon was thought of as the AntiChrist. There was end times talk in the American Civil War. The same for World War One. People believed the same about Hitler.
My point is that there has been "turmoil" throughout history. As societal norms change, each generation looks back wistfully at the "good old days."
I respect your conviction and have no intent to demean or ridicule you. As a Christian, I am very frustrated by the shaming of Christian symbols like Crosses and Nativity scenes. However, I believe we were adjured to live in this world, but not "be" of this world. As I said before, my hope is that everyone will know the saving grace of Jesus Christ and His sacrifice for our salvation, but the Bible also says it is appointed unto each man to find his salvation. I can no more force my fellow Americans to accept Christ with laws, than I could with a gun.
And as for your comments regarding "God's law" vs. "man's law," in all due respect that is the same sort of mentality that justifies the murder of abortion doctors in the name God.
You are in America. You have every right to worship God in whatever manner you wish. That right was guaranteed by the very Founders you view as hubris driven. Your right is absolute UNTIL it infringes on the rights of others.
I'm not picking on you, it's just that reading your last post, if we replace God with Allah, it reads like Muslim propaganda.
As for the turmoil in our nation, here is the reality: as we progress technologically, we will see more turmoil. I'm not sure these are "end times." People have been preaching about "end times," for over 2000 years. And they have the "proof" to back up their assertions. The early Christians in the late Roman Empire certainly thought the Vandals and Visgoths as the harbringers of end times. In the Middle Ages, the Black Plauge must have been a sign of the Apocalypse. Napoleon was thought of as the AntiChrist. There was end times talk in the American Civil War. The same for World War One. People believed the same about Hitler.
My point is that there has been "turmoil" throughout history. As societal norms change, each generation looks back wistfully at the "good old days."
I respect your conviction and have no intent to demean or ridicule you. As a Christian, I am very frustrated by the shaming of Christian symbols like Crosses and Nativity scenes. However, I believe we were adjured to live in this world, but not "be" of this world. As I said before, my hope is that everyone will know the saving grace of Jesus Christ and His sacrifice for our salvation, but the Bible also says it is appointed unto each man to find his salvation. I can no more force my fellow Americans to accept Christ with laws, than I could with a gun.
There's no legal tradition of that stuff, if we're going to be honest about it. There was no civilization that I know of that used that code. Comparing that to the Ten Commandments is like comparing Raelianism to Shinto.
Also, it's hardly "the law of the jungle". "Do not harm little children"? A pack of wolves or pride of lions would probably tell you that those are the tastiest. Some animals will kill offspring that aren't theirs. "Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal." Somebody forgot to let ducks know.
Some recommended reading is Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan, a treatise on the state of nature (a state of war) and the creation of social contract.
If it's as good as Locke's Second Treatise I'll definitely read it, but I can guarantee that it's not going to convince me that a religious group should be able to post their religious teachings on the state capitol while at the same time denying other groups the right to do the same. Let's not forget this isn't JUST about Satanism vs Christianity, they're just the first to test the double standard.
It really boils down to "in a country that advocates religious freedom, should my tax dollars be paid to maintain (since it was donated) a monument to religion(s) that aren't necessarily mine," and of course the answer is no regardless of the source/content of those teachings.
But this is oklahoma, the buckle of the Bible Belt, and as 1 member already put it, he's all for religious freedom except for certain religions.
Last edited:
Is it the thing that's posted, or the motive that's the issue? I have no problem with the thing. The motive (perceived or actual) is a little disconcerting.
Hobbes predates Locke by about 50 years, and Leviathan lays the groundwork that Locke, Rousseau and others expand upon. It's about as "fun" to read as David Hume... but the ideas were revolutionary. If anything, it shows that ethics need no divine basis.
I agree 100% it's definitely not the content of the monument, but the perceived state sponsored "nod" to the Judeo-Christian faiths
