| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Dana" |
| Date: |
17 Jun 2005 07:50:51 PM |
| Object: |
Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments
By Doug Patton (08/27/03)
Do not expect Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore to surrender in his fight to
keep the Ten Commandments on display in the rotunda of the state's Supreme
Court building. Moore, a principled man whose judicial temperament is guided
and molded by his belief that there is a God and He is watching, is not
motivated by what may happen to his career as a judge. He is not moved by
the whims of other judges whose rulings are based not in law, but rather in
the blowing, drifting opinions of contemporary societal mores.
Most Americans have no idea of the gravity of the drama unfolding at the
Supreme Court building in Montgomery. Jaded and numbed by fifty years of
abuse by an out-of-control judiciary that usurps the will of the people and
their elected representatives by making law from the bench, it seems we no
longer have any collective memory of what our precious founding documents
say, let alone what they mean.
Just what is it that engenders such hatred by liberals toward The Ten
Commandments? Which of these laws of nature and of nature's God strikes such
fear and loathing in the hearts of the Left?
Is it Commandment number six ("Thou shalt not kill" - or, more accurately
translated, "Thou shalt not commit murder")?
Perhaps it is number eight ("Thou shalt not steal").
Or maybe they just can't stand number nine, ("Thou shalt not bear false
witness).
Is there any thinking person who could look at those three rules and say
that society would be better off if they were disregarded?
How about number ten ("Thou shalt not covet")?
The truth is that it is the first few commandments that cause apoplectic
fits on the Left. Number one especially drives them crazy: "Thou shalt have
no other gods before me." This is followed by, "Thou shalt not make unto
thee any graven image," "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in
vain" and the ever-popular "Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy."
Add to those the admonition to "Honor thy father and mother" and to hear the
Left talk you would think that Ayatollah Roy had set up shop in the Alabama
Supreme Court building.
John Adams once said that the American Constitution was written for a moral
and a religious people, and that it is wholly inadequate for the governing
of any other.
Today's liberals would scoff at such a sentiment. They would claim that
Adams wanted to limit American citizenship exclusively to Christians. Quite
the contrary. Adams understood that free people cannot be coerced into
believing anything against their will. But he also understood that a free
people can recognize the truth when they see it, and that it was only the
self-governing man or woman who can truly be free.
Adams and the other Founders possessed a wisdom that comes only to people
who know that their rights are granted by their Creator, not by other men,
and that government is instituted among men to acknowledge and defend those
rights.
The Founders recognized that lawlessness breeds anarchy, which brings the
terrible power of tyranny down upon the people. They knew that those who
fled to these shores seeking religious and economic freedom did so not for
the right simply to do what they wanted to do, but rather for the right to
do what they ought to do.
In a perfect America, where the Constitution was revered and God was
exalted, we would all know such freedom. Instead, we have traded our
birthright for a society filled with self-indulgence and a debate over
whether it is appropriate to acknowledge God in public.
May God give us a million more Roy Moores.
--
I read the Prize Cases to stand for the proposition
that the President has independent authority to repel
aggressive acts by third parties even without specific
congressional authorization, and courts may not review
the level of force selected.
Campbell v. Clinton, 203 F.3d 19, 27 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (Silberman,
J., concurring)
.
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 12:29:33 PM |
|
|
"1776Dead" <zepp#22111776dead@nospamzeppscommentaries.com> wrote in message
news:4g1ie11loga33ac3ti43h3u6qm307kghpk@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:08:44 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"1783 Dead" <zepp1783#2211finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:vcqhe1pdqikl6n08me8nsf4kehop42lvgp@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:09:55 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"1783 Dead" <zepp1783#2211finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:5dkhe1hn87pfueu7epfgsep8i3qmecvq1t@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 07:35:16 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:k63he1lrt6dfslco7pg6j9i4d75tl9ec21@4ax.com...
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:25:14 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
(snip)
Your lack of familiarity with American history is duly noted.
Where?
Just about anywhere between 1600 and 2004, I would say.
That's when, not where and has nothing to do with the irrelevant
question.
OK, where, exactly, is American history located?
The interesting thing about this, different question, is that you had to
ask
it. In any case, American history is generally located on or in, as it
were,
some type of media, artifact or mind and is pretty well disseminated by
various methods throughout the world.
Ah. So not only have you a poor grasp of the English language, but
you aren't very good at trying to bluster your way out of
predicaments.
I guess, what you've just written makes sense to you. Read what I've written
below this passage again. Although that exercise will most likely prove
futile, as you will forget the first sentence by the time you read the last
one.
Do you wear a homing device so your caretakers can find you when you get
lost? They are reported to work very well for people who are incapable of
maintaining a rational thought process that requires more than one step
towards a conclusion. You might want to consider that...before
considering
anything else.
I will, just as soon as you tell me how the Ten Commandments translate
into American law.
Now why would I want to do that, unless of course, you can accurately tell
me what American law is based on and referenced to.
.
|
|
|
| User: "1776Dead" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 12:56:51 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:29:33 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"1776Dead" <zepp#22111776dead@nospamzeppscommentaries.com> wrote in message
news:4g1ie11loga33ac3ti43h3u6qm307kghpk@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:08:44 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"1783 Dead" <zepp1783#2211finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:vcqhe1pdqikl6n08me8nsf4kehop42lvgp@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:09:55 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"1783 Dead" <zepp1783#2211finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:5dkhe1hn87pfueu7epfgsep8i3qmecvq1t@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 07:35:16 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:k63he1lrt6dfslco7pg6j9i4d75tl9ec21@4ax.com...
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:25:14 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
(snip)
Your lack of familiarity with American history is duly noted.
Where?
Just about anywhere between 1600 and 2004, I would say.
That's when, not where and has nothing to do with the irrelevant
question.
OK, where, exactly, is American history located?
The interesting thing about this, different question, is that you had to
ask
it. In any case, American history is generally located on or in, as it
were,
some type of media, artifact or mind and is pretty well disseminated by
various methods throughout the world.
Ah. So not only have you a poor grasp of the English language, but
you aren't very good at trying to bluster your way out of
predicaments.
I guess, what you've just written makes sense to you. Read what I've written
below this passage again. Although that exercise will most likely prove
futile, as you will forget the first sentence by the time you read the last
one.
You are trying to specify the physical location of American history.
Hey, good luck with that.
Do you wear a homing device so your caretakers can find you when you get
lost? They are reported to work very well for people who are incapable of
maintaining a rational thought process that requires more than one step
towards a conclusion. You might want to consider that...before
considering
anything else.
I will, just as soon as you tell me how the Ten Commandments translate
into American law.
Now why would I want to do that, unless of course, you can accurately tell
me what American law is based on and referenced to.
This little think called the United States Constitution. Ever hear of
it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 01:01:49 PM |
|
|
"1776Dead" <zepp#22111776dead@nospamzeppscommentaries.com> wrote in message
news:c17ie1th21dsmninhrpiaoojt0oskh6fgv@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:29:33 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"1776Dead" <zepp#22111776dead@nospamzeppscommentaries.com> wrote in
message
news:4g1ie11loga33ac3ti43h3u6qm307kghpk@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:08:44 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"1783 Dead" <zepp1783#2211finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:vcqhe1pdqikl6n08me8nsf4kehop42lvgp@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:09:55 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"1783 Dead" <zepp1783#2211finestplanet.com> wrote in message
news:5dkhe1hn87pfueu7epfgsep8i3qmecvq1t@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 07:35:16 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:k63he1lrt6dfslco7pg6j9i4d75tl9ec21@4ax.com...
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:25:14 -0500, "Kelo Disaster"
<Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
(snip)
Your lack of familiarity with American history is duly noted.
Where?
Just about anywhere between 1600 and 2004, I would say.
That's when, not where and has nothing to do with the irrelevant
question.
OK, where, exactly, is American history located?
The interesting thing about this, different question, is that you had
to
ask
it. In any case, American history is generally located on or in, as it
were,
some type of media, artifact or mind and is pretty well disseminated
by
various methods throughout the world.
Ah. So not only have you a poor grasp of the English language, but
you aren't very good at trying to bluster your way out of
predicaments.
I guess, what you've just written makes sense to you. Read what I've
written
below this passage again. Although that exercise will most likely prove
futile, as you will forget the first sentence by the time you read the
last
one.
You are trying to specify the physical location of American history.
Hey, good luck with that.
Do you wear a homing device so your caretakers can find you when you
get
lost? They are reported to work very well for people who are incapable
of
maintaining a rational thought process that requires more than one
step
towards a conclusion. You might want to consider that...before
considering
anything else.
I will, just as soon as you tell me how the Ten Commandments translate
into American law.
Now why would I want to do that, unless of course, you can accurately
tell
me what American law is based on and referenced to.
This little think called the United States Constitution. Ever hear of
it?
That's the wrong answer; it used to be the right answer, but not anymore.
However, since you brought it up there is some groundwork worth mentioning
but it will have to be later.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
27 Jul 2005 01:19:49 PM |
|
|
In article "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
<paleostinian@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122482890.584100.41050@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
CB wrote:
80% of the signers of the DOI were Christians, once again YOU are in the
minority
Interesting, I would have expected 100% of the singners of the
Declaration of Independence to call themselves Christians.
But for me the more interesting question is: would they consider Pat
Robertson a Christian?
Important to remember that almost all of the +1000 or groups and
denominations calling themselves Christians here today started after
the signing of the DOI. And that many of these denominations don't even
consider each other Christian. For example, many (in some cases most)
members of any one of these Christ-based groups would consider members
of the other groups I list to be false-Christians: Pentacostals,
Unification Church (Moonies), Urantians, Seventh-Day-Adventists,
Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Scientists, Mormons...
So trying to second-guess the "Christian values" of our founding
fathers through the lens of today's most influencial religious umbrella
(evangelical fundamentalism) is really nothing but an excercise in
self-service.
"For I am the Lord, I change not" (Malachi 3:6a). "Jesus Christ the same
yesterday, and to day, and for ever" (Hebrews 13:8).
http://www.bible.com/answers/agift.html
Hmmmm.... Am I the only person who sees the irony is juxtaposing these
two verses?
First God, this eternal God who changes not, sets up a highly legalistic system
of some 612 commands, every one of which must be obeyed, and eventually
gets so annoyed over the fact that no one can live up to all that that He
drowns the entire world.
And then one day He suddenly goes "HEY! NEW DEAL! SINS FORGIVEN!
LAWS SIMPLIFIED! EAT WHAT YOU WANT! THE SABBATH IS MADE FOR Y'ALL,
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND! SUCH A DEAL! IT'S A WHOLE NEW COVENANT!!!",
and brings Jesus into the picture,
Seems to me He changes bunches.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "CB" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 07:08:02 AM |
|
|
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dc8j85$cni$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
In article "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
<paleostinian@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122482890.584100.41050@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
CB wrote:
80% of the signers of the DOI were Christians, once again YOU are in
the
minority
Interesting, I would have expected 100% of the singners of the
Declaration of Independence to call themselves Christians.
But for me the more interesting question is: would they consider Pat
Robertson a Christian?
Important to remember that almost all of the +1000 or groups and
denominations calling themselves Christians here today started after
the signing of the DOI. And that many of these denominations don't even
consider each other Christian. For example, many (in some cases most)
members of any one of these Christ-based groups would consider members
of the other groups I list to be false-Christians: Pentacostals,
Unification Church (Moonies), Urantians, Seventh-Day-Adventists,
Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Scientists, Mormons...
So trying to second-guess the "Christian values" of our founding
fathers through the lens of today's most influencial religious umbrella
(evangelical fundamentalism) is really nothing but an excercise in
self-service.
"For I am the Lord, I change not" (Malachi 3:6a). "Jesus Christ the same
yesterday, and to day, and for ever" (Hebrews 13:8).
http://www.bible.com/answers/agift.html
Hmmmm.... Am I the only person who sees the irony is juxtaposing these
two verses?
First God, this eternal God who changes not, sets up a highly legalistic
system
of some 612 commands, every one of which must be obeyed, and eventually
gets so annoyed over the fact that no one can live up to all that that He
drowns the entire world.
And then one day He suddenly goes "HEY! NEW DEAL! SINS FORGIVEN!
LAWS SIMPLIFIED! EAT WHAT YOU WANT! THE SABBATH IS MADE FOR Y'ALL,
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND! SUCH A DEAL! IT'S A WHOLE NEW COVENANT!!!",
and brings Jesus into the picture,
Seems to me He changes bunches.
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing has
changed for them.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't think
you have in in you.
--
CB
"Liberty is not to be enjoyed, indeed it cannot exist, without the habits of
just subordination; it consists, not so much in removing all restraint from
the orderly, as in imposing it on the violent."
--Fisher Ames
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 03:24:26 PM |
|
|
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dc8j85$cni$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
In article "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
{...}
"For I am the Lord, I change not" (Malachi 3:6a). "Jesus Christ the same
yesterday, and to day, and for ever" (Hebrews 13:8).
http://www.bible.com/answers/agift.html
Hmmmm.... Am I the only person who sees the irony is juxtaposing these
two verses?
First God, this eternal God who changes not, sets up a highly legalistic
system
of some 612 commands, every one of which must be obeyed, and eventually
gets so annoyed over the fact that no one can live up to all that that He
drowns the entire world.
And then one day He suddenly goes "HEY! NEW DEAL! SINS FORGIVEN!
LAWS SIMPLIFIED! EAT WHAT YOU WANT! THE SABBATH IS MADE FOR Y'ALL,
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND! SUCH A DEAL! IT'S A WHOLE NEW COVENANT!!!",
and brings Jesus into the picture,
Seems to me He changes bunches.
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing has
changed for them.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't think
you have in in you.
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with my observation that you
have given us two conflicting Bible verses here: the first says that God does
not change; the second underscores how much He actually did change,
change his stance away from his original 612-strict-law, Israelites-only, covenant.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "CB" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
29 Jul 2005 05:43:11 AM |
|
|
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dcbetq$37q$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dc8j85$cni$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
In article "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
{...}
"For I am the Lord, I change not" (Malachi 3:6a). "Jesus Christ the
same
yesterday, and to day, and for ever" (Hebrews 13:8).
http://www.bible.com/answers/agift.html
Hmmmm.... Am I the only person who sees the irony is juxtaposing these
two verses?
First God, this eternal God who changes not, sets up a highly
legalistic
system
of some 612 commands, every one of which must be obeyed, and eventually
gets so annoyed over the fact that no one can live up to all that that
He
drowns the entire world.
And then one day He suddenly goes "HEY! NEW DEAL! SINS FORGIVEN!
LAWS SIMPLIFIED! EAT WHAT YOU WANT! THE SABBATH IS MADE FOR Y'ALL,
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND! SUCH A DEAL! IT'S A WHOLE NEW COVENANT!!!",
and brings Jesus into the picture,
Seems to me He changes bunches.
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing has
changed for them.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't think
you have in in you.
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with my observation that you
have given us two conflicting Bible verses here: the first says that God
does
not change; the second underscores how much He actually did change,
change his stance away from his original 612-strict-law, Israelites-only,
covenant.
The only conflict is with your thirst to be loved by God. Unable to feel His
love you've become bitter and demand proof of His existence, history or the
Jewish people aside.
--
CB
If there were a goofy cult that prescribed eating your own excrement,
liberals would ponder its
deeper meaning and treat it with respect.
--Ann Coulter
When Johnny Comes Slinking Home
FrontPageMagazine.com | December 13, 2001
.
|
|
|
| User: "DuhIdiot" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
30 Jul 2005 02:56:09 AM |
|
|
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> in news:LJnGe.17728$h.3904@bignews6.bellsouth.net
decided this was a worthy use of a keyboard:
CB
If there were a goofy cult that prescribed eating your own excrement,
liberals would ponder its
deeper meaning and treat it with respect.
And again surgeons must dig irony-meter shrapnel out of my flesh! A Jesus
freak's sig decries the lending of credibility or respect to goofy cults
prescribing bizarre beliefs and actions.
Better to eat your own excrement than to go to church Sunday morning and be
fed someone else's...
.
|
|
|
| User: "CB" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
30 Jul 2005 10:47:01 AM |
|
|
"DuhIdiot" <jmSasPhbAurMn@alltel.net> wrote in message
news:Xns96A3281EA8071jmashburnalltelnet@63.223.7.253...
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> in news:LJnGe.17728$h.3904@bignews6.bellsouth.net
decided this was a worthy use of a keyboard:
CB
If there were a goofy cult that prescribed eating your own excrement,
liberals would ponder its
deeper meaning and treat it with respect.
And again surgeons must dig irony-meter shrapnel out of my flesh! A Jesus
freak's sig decries the lending of credibility or respect to goofy cults
prescribing bizarre beliefs and actions.
Better to eat your own excrement than to go to church Sunday morning and
be
fed someone else's...
I see where people call you "DuhIdiot"
--
CB
Matthew 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if
the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
29 Jul 2005 11:52:42 AM |
|
|
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dcbetq$37q$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dc8j85$cni$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
In article "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
{...}
"For I am the Lord, I change not" (Malachi 3:6a). "Jesus Christ the
same
yesterday, and to day, and for ever" (Hebrews 13:8).
http://www.bible.com/answers/agift.html
Hmmmm.... Am I the only person who sees the irony is juxtaposing these
two verses?
First God, this eternal God who changes not, sets up a highly
legalistic
system
of some 612 commands, every one of which must be obeyed, and eventually
gets so annoyed over the fact that no one can live up to all that that
He
drowns the entire world.
And then one day He suddenly goes "HEY! NEW DEAL! SINS FORGIVEN!
LAWS SIMPLIFIED! EAT WHAT YOU WANT! THE SABBATH IS MADE FOR Y'ALL,
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND! SUCH A DEAL! IT'S A WHOLE NEW COVENANT!!!",
and brings Jesus into the picture,
Seems to me He changes bunches.
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing has
changed for them.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't think
you have in in you.
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with my observation that you
have given us two conflicting Bible verses here: the first says that God
does
not change; the second underscores how much He actually did change,
change his stance away from his original 612-strict-law, Israelites-only,
covenant.
The only conflict is with your thirst to be loved by God. Unable to feel His
love you've become bitter
Actually, my friends regard me as annoyingly cheerful.
and demand proof of His existence,
How outrageous of me! All He wants is my entire being; who the hell do I
think I am to ask for some reason to suppose He's not a total fiction?
history or the Jewish people aside.
Still failing to address, I see, my question as to how an "eternal and unchanging" God
could suddenly declare a completely new deal as regards his moral covenant with man.
And of course those "Jewish people" you refer to remain Jewish people precisely
because they belive that He -- unchanging, perfect, and eternally the same -- did
in fact NOT suddenly do a theological 180.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "CB" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
30 Jul 2005 10:33:38 AM |
|
|
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dcdmsq$54d$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dcbetq$37q$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dc8j85$cni$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
In article "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
{...}
"For I am the Lord, I change not" (Malachi 3:6a). "Jesus Christ the
same
yesterday, and to day, and for ever" (Hebrews 13:8).
http://www.bible.com/answers/agift.html
Hmmmm.... Am I the only person who sees the irony is juxtaposing
these
two verses?
First God, this eternal God who changes not, sets up a highly
legalistic
system
of some 612 commands, every one of which must be obeyed, and
eventually
gets so annoyed over the fact that no one can live up to all that
that
He
drowns the entire world.
And then one day He suddenly goes "HEY! NEW DEAL! SINS FORGIVEN!
LAWS SIMPLIFIED! EAT WHAT YOU WANT! THE SABBATH IS MADE FOR Y'ALL,
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND! SUCH A DEAL! IT'S A WHOLE NEW
COVENANT!!!",
and brings Jesus into the picture,
Seems to me He changes bunches.
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet
a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing
has
changed for them.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't
think
you have in in you.
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with my observation that you
have given us two conflicting Bible verses here: the first says that
God
does
not change; the second underscores how much He actually did change,
change his stance away from his original 612-strict-law,
Israelites-only,
covenant.
The only conflict is with your thirst to be loved by God. Unable to feel
His
love you've become bitter
Actually, my friends regard me as annoyingly cheerful.
A sign of insecurity is one who puts on a facade for show
and demand proof of His existence,
How outrageous of me! All He wants is my entire being; who the hell do I
think I am to ask for some reason to suppose He's not a total fiction?
His creation
history or the Jewish people aside.
Still failing to address, I see, my question as to how an "eternal and
unchanging" God
could suddenly declare a completely new deal as regards his moral covenant
with man.
You'd have to understand what's meant by "out went the old and in with the
new" means first or what the Promise was that God made to Abraham, through
Isaac and how His Seed would pass down through the line of King David to
Mary, the mother of Jesus.
But since you do not understand what we Christian, including Messianic Jews
inherit through God's Promise made to Abraham (another Promise was given to
Ishmael), your ignorant arrogance would never understand the Covenant.
And of course those "Jewish people" you refer to remain Jewish people
precisely
because they belive that He -- unchanging, perfect, and eternally the
same -- did
in fact NOT suddenly do a theological 180.
A hint of understanding?
CB
--
Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is
liberty.
2 Corinthians 3:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
30 Jul 2005 12:40:41 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 11:33:38 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dcdmsq$54d$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
snip
The only conflict is with your thirst to be loved by God. Unable to feel
His
love you've become bitter
Actually, my friends regard me as annoyingly cheerful.
A sign of insecurity is one who puts on a facade for show
In other words if an atheist appears to be bitter, that is evidence
that you are correct; and, if an atheist appears to be cheerful, that
is evidence that he is putting on a facade.
and demand proof of His existence,
How outrageous of me! All He wants is my entire being; who the hell do I
think I am to ask for some reason to suppose He's not a total fiction?
His creation
You have no evidence that there was a creation, i.e. you are assuming
your conclusion.
snip
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Erb" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
30 Jul 2005 12:44:54 PM |
|
|
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:qgene1d44befi6t977ba6f6cf6s9f81fc8@4ax.com...
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 11:33:38 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dcdmsq$54d$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
snip
The only conflict is with your thirst to be loved by God. Unable to
feel
His
love you've become bitter
Actually, my friends regard me as annoyingly cheerful.
A sign of insecurity is one who puts on a facade for show
In other words if an atheist appears to be bitter, that is evidence
that you are correct; and, if an atheist appears to be cheerful, that
is evidence that he is putting on a facade.
Well, one has to be able to hold on to a belief regardless of the evidence
if one is going to be a fundamentalist of any religion (or ideology). The
easiest way to do that is to define away all contrary evidence. It's not
rational, but do you really expect rationality from such a person?
.
|
|
|
| User: "CB" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
30 Jul 2005 02:05:13 PM |
|
|
"Scott Erb" <scotterb@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:q0PGe.515035$cg1.49015@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:qgene1d44befi6t977ba6f6cf6s9f81fc8@4ax.com...
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 11:33:38 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dcdmsq$54d$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
snip
The only conflict is with your thirst to be loved by God. Unable to
feel
His
love you've become bitter
Actually, my friends regard me as annoyingly cheerful.
A sign of insecurity is one who puts on a facade for show
In other words if an atheist appears to be bitter, that is evidence
that you are correct;
It's evidence of a separation from God. Even though I may get mad at the
sinful nature of others AND may self, I forgive when effort is 'evident' of
repentance and correction. My definition of Liberalism is of someone who
doesn't give a ***** about correction and is determined to further his
inappropriate behavior out of self gratification.
and, if an atheist appears to be cheerful, that
is evidence that he is putting on a facade.
Actually the words were, "annoyingly cheerful".
How often do we see homosexuality on display as flamboyant, care free and
self absorbed? All for the illusion of happiness...in my humble opinion.
Well, one has to be able to hold on to a belief regardless of the evidence
if one is going to be a fundamentalist of any religion (or ideology). The
easiest way to do that is to define away all contrary evidence. It's not
rational, but do you really expect rationality from such a person?
The history of the Jewish people, the historical record of the Bible, both
Old and New Testament should be enough for the rational man to conclude
there 'is' a God.
Atheists put their trust in theories like Evolution, Darwinism and
Psychology, which have only been around for a few years. Christians put
their faith in time tested, historical world history.
You be the judge of which is the best choice to live by.
(opps, asking a Lib to 'judge' or segregate between Good & Evil or choose
wisely or poorly isn't politically correct)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Erb" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
30 Jul 2005 05:22:02 PM |
|
|
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote in message
news:paQGe.18435$Ie1.10612@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Scott Erb" <scotterb@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:q0PGe.515035$cg1.49015@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
In other words if an atheist appears to be bitter, that is evidence
that you are correct;
It's evidence of a separation from God. Even though I may get mad at the
sinful nature of others AND may self, I forgive when effort is 'evident'
of
repentance and correction. My definition of Liberalism is of someone who
doesn't give a ***** about correction and is determined to further his
inappropriate behavior out of self gratification.
Yet many people are very spiritual, and many even believe in God, but are
not Christian.
In fact, I do not see much of a correlation between happiness and belief in
God, either positive or negative.
and, if an atheist appears to be cheerful, that
is evidence that he is putting on a facade.
Actually the words were, "annoyingly cheerful".
That means someone who is so fundamentally optimistic and cheerful that the
pessimists around get annoyed. It usually means someone very happy and
satisfied with life.
How often do we see homosexuality on display as flamboyant, care free and
self absorbed? All for the illusion of happiness...in my humble opinion.
No more than someone who proclaims their religion flamboyantly, on display
and self-absorbed...(hint: look in the mirror).
Well, one has to be able to hold on to a belief regardless of the
evidence
if one is going to be a fundamentalist of any religion (or ideology).
The
easiest way to do that is to define away all contrary evidence. It's
not
rational, but do you really expect rationality from such a person?
The history of the Jewish people, the historical record of the Bible, both
Old and New Testament should be enough for the rational man to conclude
there 'is' a God.
No, not at all. Here's something you can chew on:
http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~erb/spirit.htm
The fact is, there are many religions, and the one you believe is usually an
accident of birth. Christianity has modernized dramatically in order not to
die out, it isn't the same faith as it was centuries ago.
Atheists put their trust in theories like Evolution, Darwinism and
Psychology, which have only been around for a few years. Christians put
their faith in time tested, historical world history.
Not at all, Christianity has modernized to adapt to science and remain
relevant. Islam is just starting that process. And Hindu and Confucian
belief systems are also time tested.
You be the judge of which is the best choice to live by.
Well, that is obvious -- every person judges for themselves.
(opps, asking a Lib to 'judge' or segregate between Good & Evil or choose
wisely or poorly isn't politically correct)
Most liberals believe there is evil in the world.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
31 Jul 2005 04:08:18 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 15:05:13 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
"Scott Erb" <scotterb@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:q0PGe.515035$cg1.49015@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:qgene1d44befi6t977ba6f6cf6s9f81fc8@4ax.com...
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 11:33:38 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dcdmsq$54d$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
snip
The only conflict is with your thirst to be loved by God. Unable to
feel
His
love you've become bitter
Actually, my friends regard me as annoyingly cheerful.
A sign of insecurity is one who puts on a facade for show
In other words if an atheist appears to be bitter, that is evidence
that you are correct;
It's evidence of a separation from God. Even though I may get mad at the
sinful nature of others AND may self, I forgive when effort is 'evident' of
repentance and correction. My definition of Liberalism is of someone who
doesn't give a ***** about correction and is determined to further his
inappropriate behavior out of self gratification.
Oh, I see, you are saying that bad people are bad; only you have
arbitrarily inserted "liberal" for "bad". All of which means you are
saying nothing at all.
and, if an atheist appears to be cheerful, that
is evidence that he is putting on a facade.
Actually the words were, "annoyingly cheerful".
How often do we see homosexuality on display as flamboyant, care free and
self absorbed?
I don't know. How often?
All for the illusion of happiness...in my humble opinion.
You are far from humble. The above has revealed you as an arrogant
and not very bright bigot, who describes people you do not like as bad
and then uses that definition as evidence that they are bad.
Well, one has to be able to hold on to a belief regardless of the evidence
if one is going to be a fundamentalist of any religion (or ideology). The
easiest way to do that is to define away all contrary evidence. It's not
rational, but do you really expect rationality from such a person?
The history of the Jewish people, the historical record of the Bible, both
Old and New Testament should be enough for the rational man to conclude
there 'is' a God.
That could be discussed, if the Bible was an historical record.
Atheists put their trust in theories like Evolution, Darwinism and
Psychology, which have only been around for a few years. Christians put
their faith in time tested, historical world history.
Your ignorance is overwhelming.
You be the judge of which is the best choice to live by.
(opps, asking a Lib to 'judge' or segregate between Good & Evil or choose
wisely or poorly isn't politically correct)
Oops, your bigotry and retardation is showing again.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Erb" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
31 Jul 2005 05:43:54 AM |
|
|
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:it4pe1t2a1tl21mlv50ck4cg2e3aeiu7eo@4ax.com...
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 15:05:13 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
How often do we see homosexuality on display as flamboyant, care free
and
self absorbed?
I don't know. How often?
All for the illusion of happiness...in my humble opinion.
You are far from humble. The above has revealed you as an arrogant
and not very bright bigot, who describes people you do not like as bad
and then uses that definition as evidence that they are bad.
Or, he has his religion on display as flamboyant, care free and
self-aborbed. (see above) All for the illusion of happiness.
Well, one has to be able to hold on to a belief regardless of the
evidence
if one is going to be a fundamentalist of any religion (or ideology).
The
easiest way to do that is to define away all contrary evidence. It's
not
rational, but do you really expect rationality from such a person?
The history of the Jewish people, the historical record of the Bible,
both
Old and New Testament should be enough for the rational man to conclude
there 'is' a God.
That could be discussed, if the Bible was an historical record.
It's probably a mix of myth and history, but no more persuasive about who
god might be than Hindu texts, Buddhist texts, and the Koran, among others.
Atheists put their trust in theories like Evolution, Darwinism and
Psychology, which have only been around for a few years. Christians put
their faith in time tested, historical world history.
Your ignorance is overwhelming.
Ignorance of both science and Christianity. The Christian belief system of
today is very different than it was 500 years ago.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Canyon" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
30 Jul 2005 03:39:33 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 17:44:54 GMT, "Scott Erb"
<scotterb@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Well, one has to be able to hold on to a belief regardless of the evidence
if one is going to be a fundamentalist of any religion (or ideology). The
easiest way to do that is to define away all contrary evidence. It's not
rational, but do you really expect rationality from such a person?
"define away all contrary evidence" <LOL> That's pretty much Erb's
MO..
--
Here's Martin McPhillip's brilliant disassembling of
Scott Erb from back in the good old old days.
**************************************************************************
Here you bash Pale Rider for defining socialism
as the people "owning the means of production"--
11/9/99
Pale Rider:
Look, Scott, socialism is where the people
own the means of production collectively and
capitalism is where they own it
individually.
Erb:
Wrong. There are many different forms of
each ideology, it can't be so
simplistically turned into a dichotomy.
Social Democracy in fact is defined
as a type of socialism which embraces
private property. You need to learn more
about the variations within the ideologies.
--------
Here you bash Schneider with the same
definition of socialism that you bash Pale
Rider for using--
4/10/97
Erb:
Mikey, you really do need to learn how
concepts are defined before you use
them. Socialism is not the same as state
capitalism of the sorts the East
Asian NICs used to industrialized and enter
the world economy. Socialism is
the state OWNING the means of production.
State planning is something
different. It can be criticized, but your
attempt to argue by labelling is
not only logically fallcious, but you don't
even know what the concepts mean!
You really aren't too bright, are you?
cheers, scott
--------
Here you are asking Pale Rider "Where do
you get this stuff" for using the definition of socialism
you used when you told Schneider that "you
don't even know what these concepts mean!"--
11/10/99--
Pale Rider:
Defined by who? If the MOP is not
owned collectively it ain't
socialism. That's what socialism is.
Erb:
You assert that, but its NOT TRUE!
You are simply wrong. Where
do you get this stuff?
----------------
Here you say that "social democracy"
is a form of socialism, insisting that the
"collective ownership" definition of socialism
is only properly used to define "orthodox Marxism"--
11/9/99--
Erb:
Social Democracy is a form of socialism
defined by its acceptance
of markets and private ownership of the means
of production.
Pale Rider:
In order for an economic system to
be defined as socialism the means
of production must be owned by the
people collectively, otherwise it
isn't socialism because that's
what socialism is.
Erb:
No, you're mixing orthodox Marxian
thought with socialism. Marx's
"scientific socialism" (an
objectivist philosophy based on the
truthbeing knowable and objectively
provable) had that kind of statement,
but many socialists of different
outlooks disagree considerably with
Marx on this.
-------------
Here, when Sabotta calls Sweden "socialist"
and is answered by Anders that Sweden is
not socialist, you agree with Anders, and
draw a sharp distinction between "social
democracy" and "socialism"---
11/14/95
John Sabotta:
But since virtually everybody - including
Sweden's admirers - consider Sweden to
be some form of socialist state,
your insistance that it is not
is unusually perverse.
Anders (from Sweden, apparently):
In my opinion it is your "everybody knows"
arguments that are perverse. If you look
at the facts you will find that Sweden
is no less capitalistic and in many
ways more free, compared to the US.
Erb:
Quite true. The poster apparently doesn't
understand the difference between Social
Democracy and Socialism as defined as a
planned economy with the state owning the
means of production. People throw out
socialism to describe everything they
don't like (here in Maine I heard someone
accuse another of being a socialist
because they supported a manditory seat belt
law!).
-------------
Here, without mentioning the term "social
democracy" you refer to the "Swedish Socialists"
and the system they created in, I assume, Sweden,
and in this context you allud
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
29 Jul 2005 08:37:22 AM |
|
|
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote in message
news:LJnGe.17728$h.3904@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
snip
The only conflict is with your thirst to be loved by God. Unable to feel
His
love you've become bitter and demand proof of His existence,
Oh is THAT why we ask for evidence. How convenient. Idiot.
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
Science doesn't burn people at the stake for disagreeing - Vic Sagerquist
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rob Brown" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
29 Jul 2005 10:07:53 AM |
|
|
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote in message
news:LJnGe.17728$h.3904@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
The only conflict is with your thirst to be loved by God. Unable to feel
His love you've become bitter and demand proof of His existence, history
or the Jewish people aside.
--
CB
Damn, you gush ***** like an open firehose. Too much exposure to toxic
religious rhetoric and the magic book of nonsense will do that.
Had to delete caustic drivel. Ann Coulter, now there's a right wing role
model. Vile *****.
Rob Brown
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rob Brown" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 12:51:40 PM |
|
|
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote in message
news:iT3Ge.12806$Ie1.4194@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Simple? Sure if you simplemindedly accept ***** like that with the
uncritical, unquestioning fawning, groveling attitude sycophants of magic
guys use. Outside of that what you wrote above is meaningless nonsense.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing has
changed for them.
More meaningless nonsense.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't think
you have in in you.
Courage my *****! It doesn't take courage. It takes the ability to suspend
critical thinking and accept ***** of the goofiest kind.
Here's an example.There are magic guys who only speak to special people and
sometimes tell them to kill people who don't do what the magic guy told the
special people to tell everyone else to do.
I have the courage not to believe or concede to that. I fearlessly reject
all attempts to force any magic guy on me! That's real courage. Have your
magic guy contact my people if he wants any credibility. His proxies are
unconvincing and tedious.
--
CB
"Liberty is not to be enjoyed, indeed it cannot exist, without the habits
of
just subordination; it consists, not so much in removing all restraint
from
the orderly, as in imposing it on the violent."
--Fisher Ames
Your signature reveals you as the butt boy for authority that you are.There
is no freedom except individual, personal freedom.
Rob Brown
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rob Brown" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 01:26:54 PM |
|
|
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote in message
news:iT3Ge.12806$Ie1.4194@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet a
mystery for the unbeliever.
-- cary
Some other things that are a mystery to me but not to the believers.
1)The Virgin Mary manifesting herself on a grilled cheese sandwich.
2)The Virgin Mary manifesting herself in a water stain on a window.
3) Jesus' eyes appearing on a wooden bathroom door.
4) Statues bleeding blood, vegetable oil and chicken fat.
5) Magic healing wells and springs.
6) Jesus on all kind of stuff, potato chips, clouds, bad photographs,
stains on lots of stuff.
7) Crop circles......oops sorry those are different more benign believers
in goofy things.
All these things have many believers and yet they remain a mystery to me. I
wonder why?
Rob Brown
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 10:22:24 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 18:26:54 GMT, "Rob Brown" <bbrown@csmflorida.com> wrote:
"CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote in message
news:iT3Ge.12806$Ie1.4194@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet a
mystery for the unbeliever.
-- cary
Some other things that are a mystery to me but not to the believers.
1)The Virgin Mary manifesting herself on a grilled cheese sandwich.
2)The Virgin Mary manifesting herself in a water stain on a window.
3) Jesus' eyes appearing on a wooden bathroom door.
4) Statues bleeding blood, vegetable oil and chicken fat.
5) Magic healing wells and springs.
6) Jesus on all kind of stuff, potato chips, clouds, bad photographs,
stains on lots of stuff.
7) Crop circles......oops sorry those are different more benign believers
in goofy things.
And although there's nothing mysterious or supernatural about them, at least
crop circles do exist. <G>
All these things have many believers and yet they remain a mystery to me. I
wonder why?
Rob Brown
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 07:23:36 AM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 08:08:02 -0400, "CB"
<CB@prayforme.com> let us all know that:
"Cary Kittrell" <cary@afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
news:dc8j85$cni$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu...
In article "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> writes:
<paleostinian@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122482890.584100.41050@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
CB wrote:
80% of the signers of the DOI were Christians, once again YOU are in
the
minority
Interesting, I would have expected 100% of the singners of the
Declaration of Independence to call themselves Christians.
But for me the more interesting question is: would they consider Pat
Robertson a Christian?
Important to remember that almost all of the +1000 or groups and
denominations calling themselves Christians here today started after
the signing of the DOI. And that many of these denominations don't even
consider each other Christian. For example, many (in some cases most)
members of any one of these Christ-based groups would consider members
of the other groups I list to be false-Christians: Pentacostals,
Unification Church (Moonies), Urantians, Seventh-Day-Adventists,
Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Scientists, Mormons...
So trying to second-guess the "Christian values" of our founding
fathers through the lens of today's most influencial religious umbrella
(evangelical fundamentalism) is really nothing but an excercise in
self-service.
"For I am the Lord, I change not" (Malachi 3:6a). "Jesus Christ the same
yesterday, and to day, and for ever" (Hebrews 13:8).
http://www.bible.com/answers/agift.html
Hmmmm.... Am I the only person who sees the irony is juxtaposing these
two verses?
First God, this eternal God who changes not, sets up a highly legalistic
system
of some 612 commands, every one of which must be obeyed, and eventually
gets so annoyed over the fact that no one can live up to all that that He
drowns the entire world.
And then one day He suddenly goes "HEY! NEW DEAL! SINS FORGIVEN!
LAWS SIMPLIFIED! EAT WHAT YOU WANT! THE SABBATH IS MADE FOR Y'ALL,
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND! SUCH A DEAL! IT'S A WHOLE NEW COVENANT!!!",
and brings Jesus into the picture,
Seems to me He changes bunches.
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world.
Sin is a myth, and a dead jew's blood can't do anything.
To live as a human being takes courage. I don't think you have
it in you.
Don
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 10:06:37 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 08:08:02 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing has
changed for them.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't think
you have in in you.
We aren't the ones hiding behind a myth. Take your sky pixie, your "holy book"
and your dead Jew on a stick and put 'em where the sun never shines.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 10:23:05 AM |
|
|
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:d0the11gsiqfp9s49t126dktann0oktblc@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 08:08:02 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing has
changed for them.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't think
you have in in you.
We aren't the ones hiding behind a myth. Take your sky pixie, your "holy
book"
and your dead Jew on a stick and put 'em where the sun never shines.
Ah, I've heard that chapter and verse before. You must be an Atheitic holy
man, one who is hell-bent on controlling and conforming religious practice
through government control.
And, a particularly nasty one at that!
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 03:38:24 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:23:05 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:d0the11gsiqfp9s49t126dktann0oktblc@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 08:08:02 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing has
changed for them.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't think
you have in in you.
We aren't the ones hiding behind a myth. Take your sky pixie, your "holy
book"
and your dead Jew on a stick and put 'em where the sun never shines.
Ah, I've heard that chapter and verse before. You must be an Atheitic holy
man, one who is hell-bent on controlling and conforming religious practice
through government control.
And, a particularly nasty one at that!
What a strange fantasy you have. The Christian churches in the West
enjoy great political power especially in the US, yet they continually
talk about the horrible persecution they endure. It must be one of
those religious mysteries.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 04:35:33 PM |
|
|
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:ebgie1hkkhqctoand7ph1cmvq01g9hrq0t@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:23:05 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:d0the11gsiqfp9s49t126dktann0oktblc@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 08:08:02 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet
a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing
has
changed for them.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't
think
you have in in you.
We aren't the ones hiding behind a myth. Take your sky pixie, your
"holy
book"
and your dead Jew on a stick and put 'em where the sun never shines.
Ah, I've heard that chapter and verse before. You must be an Atheitic
holy
man, one who is hell-bent on controlling and conforming religious
practice
through government control.
And, a particularly nasty one at that!
What a strange fantasy you have. The Christian churches in the West
enjoy great political power especially in the US, yet they continually
talk about the horrible persecution they endure. It must be one of
those religious mysteries.
Fantasy? There's a mystery for you.
Oh well, please elaborate on the "great political power" that the Christian
churches have in the US. While you're at it you might explore the
conditions on their tax-exempt status and how the Kelo decision might affect
their "great political power".
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
28 Jul 2005 11:42:02 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 16:35:33 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:ebgie1hkkhqctoand7ph1cmvq01g9hrq0t@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:23:05 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:d0the11gsiqfp9s49t126dktann0oktblc@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 08:08:02 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but yet
a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing
has
changed for them.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't
think
you have in in you.
We aren't the ones hiding behind a myth. Take your sky pixie, your
"holy
book"
and your dead Jew on a stick and put 'em where the sun never shines.
Ah, I've heard that chapter and verse before. You must be an Atheitic
holy
man, one who is hell-bent on controlling and conforming religious
practice
through government control.
And, a particularly nasty one at that!
What a strange fantasy you have. The Christian churches in the West
enjoy great political power especially in the US, yet they continually
talk about the horrible persecution they endure. It must be one of
those religious mysteries.
Fantasy? There's a mystery for you.
Oh well, please elaborate on the "great political power" that the Christian
churches have in the US.
The president of the US is a professed Christian. He claims his
decisions are guided by god. He consults with Christian ministers
before making decisions. The overwhelming majority of the US Congress
are professed Christians.
While you're at it you might explore the
conditions on their tax-exempt status
Horrors! You mean to say that their privileges are not unlimited?
Obviously that is one step away from being thrown to the lions. I
heard a rumor that the churches were not actually forced to accept a
tax-exempt status, that they could just function like the rest of us,
but that is probably just part of the horrible persecution.
and how the Kelo decision might affect
their "great political power".
Adversely one would hope.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kelo Disaster" |
|
| Title: Re: Why The Left Hates The Ten Commandments |
29 Jul 2005 08:47:44 AM |
|
|
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:5ncje1tb32vjfnoodaclbepmk6pemei1g7@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 16:35:33 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:ebgie1hkkhqctoand7ph1cmvq01g9hrq0t@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:23:05 -0500, "Kelo Disaster" <Living@USSA.com>
wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:d0the11gsiqfp9s49t126dktann0oktblc@4ax.com...
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 08:08:02 -0400, "CB" <CB@prayforme.com> wrote:
The Blood of Christ washes away the sins of the world. Simple but
yet
a
mystery for the unbeliever.
Those who are condemned by the law do not live under grace. Nothing
has
changed for them.
To become a new creature in Christ takes courage to change. I don't
think
you have in in you.
We aren't the ones hiding behind a myth. Take your sky pixie, your
"holy
book"
and your dead Jew on a stick and put 'em where the sun never shines.
Ah, I've heard that chapter and verse before. You must be an Atheitic
holy
man, one who is hell-bent on controlling and conforming religious
practice
through government control.
And, a particularly nasty one at that!
What a strange fantasy you have. The Christian churches in the West
enjoy great political power especially in the US, yet they continually
talk about the horrible persecution they endure. It must be one of
those religious mysteries.
Fantasy? There's a mystery for you.
Oh well, please elaborate on the "great political power" that the
Christian
churches have in the US.
The president of the US is a professed Christian. He claims his
decisions are guided by god. He consults with Christian ministers
before making decisions. The overwhelming majority of the US Congress
are professed Christians.
And, you would expect what, from a country that is estimated to be 80+%
Christian? What's your alternative? Minority rule? Utopia?
While you're at it you might explore the
conditions on their tax-exempt status
Horrors! You mean to say that their privileges are not unlimited?
Obviously that is one step away from being thrown to the lions. I
heard a rumor that the churches were not actual | | | | | | | | |
