Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Tony Perkins :: Townhall.com Columnist
Always Faithful
by Tony Perkins
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


* * *

The following article is from the July issue of Townhall Magazine and is co-authored by Rev. Dale Lee.  To subscribe to twelve issues of Townhall Magazine and receive a free copy of Raymond Learsy's Over a Barrel: Breaking Oil's Grip on Our Future, click here.

* * *

Religious faith has long been valued as an essential contributor to our national greatness. Thomas Jefferson, in his second inaugural address, declared: “I shall need, too, the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our fathers, as Israel of old, from their native land and planted them in a country flowing with all the necessaries and comforts of life, who has covered our infancy with His Providence and our riper years with His wisdom and power.”

Jefferson believed that God had led “our fathers” and blessed the nation’s birth and growth.

President George Washington, in his farewell address, emphasized his conviction about the necessity of religion to our national welfare. “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity,” he declared, “religion and morality are indispensable supports.”

One cannot read Lincoln’s second inaugural address, which refers to God in various ways 14 times, without sensing his intense struggle to help a religious nation understand in transcendent language the tragedy of the Civil-War then plaguing the country. For Lincoln and the divided nation he led, faith was the only comfort at such a time of national sorrow.

Washington made a point of kissing the Bible as he took the oath for the first time. He added four words to the constitutionally prescribed oath of office. Every President since has followed his example. In his book “Who Are We?,” Harvard professor Samuel Huntington, quoting English historian Paul Johnson, writes, “America’s religious commitment ‘is a primary source—the primary source, I think—of American exceptionalism.’” That America is exceptional is beyond dispute. That real faith in the true God has helped make us so is also undeniable. Consider just two ways that faith makes America great.

First, faith elevates the value of individual human life. Faith teaches that a loving Creator has fashioned each of us and consequently we have irreducible value because He made us in His image. Faith teaches that we have a purpose greater than pleasing ourselves, greater than maintaining our personal safety or acquiring wealth. Because people of faith value human life, we give generously to those in need. According to the just-released “2008 Index of Global Philanthropy,” published by the Hudson Institute’s Center for Global Prosperity, religious Americans are giving record amounts of aid to poor countries.

* * *

This article is from the July issue of Townhall Magazine.  To subscribe to twelve issues of Townhall Magazine and receive a free copy of Raymond Learsy's Over a Barrel: Breaking Oil's Grip on Our Future, click here.

* * *

People of faith personally gave $8.8 billion in 2006, compared to official U.S. government aid of $23.5 billion that year. Professor Arthur C. Brooks writes in “Who Really Cares,” his trenchant analysis of the sociology of charity, “Religious people are far more charitable than secularists, no matter what their politics.” Religious Americans are the most generous people on the planet, because, thanks to faith, we understand the value of individuals.

Because people of faith value human life, we serve others, asking nothing in return but the joy of helping. Who can forget the incredible response of the faith community after Hurricane Katrina? Church buildings were converted into houses of refuge, safety and provision. Supplies were amassed and distributed around the clock, while incompetence and confusion paralyzed government. What motivated this spontaneous and enormous outpouring of compassionate service? People of faith know something of a “greater love,” a love that cannot be replicated by any other ideology or dictum. Faith elevates the value of individual human life and prompts generosity and service to others. These qualities, among many others, make America great.

Second, faith creates responsible citizens. The Founders understood that, without religion, our form of government could not long survive. James Madison, the “father of the Constitution,” displayed a Christian understanding of the nature of man when he wrote, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.” And his advocacy of a system of “checks and balances” indicates his awareness of man’s selfish nature and hunger for power. He, therefore, fought fiercely for religious freedom, which would produce social virtue. For Madison, like Washington, faith was an indispensable support for political prosperity.

Faith helps produce citizens who are responsible and ethical, who respect law and authority. We work to uphold values that strengthen society such as marriage, family, productivity, creativity, patriotism and respect for civil rights. We must remember that Martin Luther King Jr. was a reverend who headed the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Few would dispute that America is a better country and the world a better place because of the contributions of this man of faith and the many others like him.

Faith also reminds Americans of our dependence upon Almighty God. In that knowledge, we have become a nation of prayer. In recognition of the National Day of Prayer, the president and all 50 governors signed proclamations this year acknowledging this special day of worship. We are a greater nation for it. “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord,” the Psalmist wrote (Ps. 33:12).

Ultimately, our faith as a nation is strong and real because we have always known that God is the author of our liberties. Our coins and currency, our monuments and our momentous public occasions all include this acknowledgment. Whereas some ideologies are willing to deploy women and children as human bombs to take the lives of the innocent, our nation instructs its soldiers not to leave any fallen comrade on the battlefield, but to risk their own safety, and even the mission, to bring the wounded back. It is no wonder that the motto of the U.S. Marine Corps is “Semper Fidelis—Always Faithful.”

That is a motto fit for our nation as well.

* * *

This article is from the July issue of Townhall Magazine.  To subscribe to twelve issues of Townhall Magazine and receive a free copy of Raymond Learsy's Over a Barrel: Breaking Oil's Grip on Our Future, click here.

* * *

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Tony Perkins is President of the Washington, D.C.-based Family Research Council.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Townhall columns. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Jefferson and Lincoln religious???
He even edited and wrote his own version of the bible. its called the The Jefferson Bible
"Thomas Jefferson believed that the ethical system of Jesus was the finest the world has ever seen. In compiling what has come to be called "The Jefferson Bible," he sought to separate those ethical teachings from the religious dogma and other supernatural elements that are intermixed in the account provided by the four Gospels. He presented these teachings, along with the essential events of the life of Jesus, in one continuous narrative.

As for Lincoln
Lincoln never joined a church nor ever made a clear profession of standard Christian beliefs. While he read the Bible in the White House, he was not in the habit of saying grace before meals. Lincoln's friend Jesse Fell noted that the president "seldom communicated to anyone his views" on religion, and he went on to suggest that those views were not orthodox: "on the innate depravity of man, the character and office of the great head of the Church, the Atonement, the infallibility of the written revelation, the performance of miracles, the nature and design of . . . future rewards and punishments . . . and many other subjects, he held opinions utterly at variance with what are usually taught in the church."
George Washington on the other hand was a more traditional christian.

Speaking of Thomas Jefferson....
"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

Hmmm. Wonder what Jefferson MEANS by that...? Christianity never was a part of the common law? Hmmmmm. Sounds like one of those godless pinko commies Ann Coulter is always telling us about.



"It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Apocalypse], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to General Alexander Smyth, Jan. 17, 1825


Did Jefferson just call the Book of Revelations the "ravings of a maniac"? Blasphemous man.


"The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814


Thomas is doubting the divinity of the Gospels now?? I'm SCANDALIZD. Hand me my smelling salts! Parts are not "genuine"? The writing is the "fabric of very inferior minds"?


Oh. Our foundering fathers are vexing us at every turn. At least we have the patsy Perkins to shake his pom-poms for men who did not believe in a personal God (after all, they were children of the Enlightenment).

Another overpaid faith-head columnist
>…religious Americans are giving record amounts of aid to poor countries. <

…by giving money to religious charities with a missionary prostyletising zeal that spreads religious ideology including deadly ideas like abstinence programmes. Non-religious charities are more efficient and trustworthy.

> People of faith know something of a “greater love,” a love that cannot be replicated by any other ideology or dictum. <

Other ideologies and dictums cannot compete with the ideology/dictum of christianity on the subject of love? Evangelicals love less because their greater commitment is to booking a seat in heaven, no matter what happens to fellow humans. Such special pleading for faith is hot air.

> Faith elevates the value of individual human life and prompts generosity and service to others. These qualities, among many others, make America great. <

The death penalty and deaths from backstreet abortions are most common in the most religious parts of the world. Islamic faith and Catholic faith together put the lie to this fallacy.

> Second, faith creates responsible citizens. The Founders understood that, without religion, our form of government could not long survive. <

So atheists are not responsible citizens? That is obviously wrong. More faithful hand-waving without evidence. In god we trust, but facts are optional.

> Faith helps produce citizens who are responsible and ethical, who respect law and authority. <

Atheists make up 0.23% of the US prison population although the proportion in the general population is at least 15%. At that rate of difference the faithful should be locked up as a precaution.

> We work to uphold values that strengthen society such as marriage, family, productivity, creativity, patriotism and respect for civil rights. <

…As long as those involved are christian and not gay…

Stuart

Will get's it wrong...
First off, read "America's God and Country, a book of quotations..." by federer.
Will's lack of context and typical left wing spin misses the point.
Of course jefferson had doubts and questions about faith, the bible, etc. AS did just about every founder. Every Christian has doubts and questions along the line. That is where faith comes in. Having said that, to read the writings and quotations(unselectively)of the founders and principles whom shaped this nation is to understand why we started as a nation fouinded on Judeo-Christian principals and values. Even Jefferson whom was not known to be particularly religious, understood that the Republic could not survive without those underlying moral values intrinsic to Christianity as a cornerstone. If one is to be objective in the study, there can be no doubt that to a man, the founders intended a nation of religious and moral people as requisite to survival. They knew well the history of Ancient Greece and Rome.

To Know You

No one asked you to go to the cross for me
But it is when I stand on one knee that I am lifted by your grace that is in me

No one asked you to suffer for me
But it is by your pain that I know the truth of your word

No one asked you to die for me
But it is by your love that I know to love

I asked that you live
And it is when you rose that I know that you know of me

Of all my transgressions the lowest is when I knew not of your love for me

That I could envy the power of the Lord
That I should be without his wisdom and his mercy

For it is through his wisdom that I know to love the Lord
And it is because of his mercy that I know that the Lord loves me

Forgive me Lord that I now know of you so that I may now be with you

By John

Perkins
Perkins is right and it's why the fact that our administration tortures people is so outrageously wrong and evil.

John
Jesus did not ask me if I wanted him to 'die for me'. What arrogance to tell me that I need 'saving', then say that I am the focus of his judicial execution. I do not need anyone to die for me. You can keep your cult of death.

Stuart

John
Well stated. It's the love of God that he sent his son Jesus to die for the sins of the world and it's up to all to simple choose that or not. I Corithians 1:18 says the preaching of the cross is foolishness to them that don't believe.

What the naysayers always fail to say
While the naysayers and malcontents are busy maligning the faith of the Founders and Believers throughout the history of the nation, they always neglect to mention, in their pseudo-intellectual rants, the fact that they have no more logically coherent answer for the questions of life than those they are dismissing.

Objecting to another's philosophy is intellectually lazy if it's not follwed by a more comprehensive explanation.



And, will...
Sodomy is not the answer.

American exceptionalism
"In his book “Who Are We?,” Harvard professor Samuel Huntington, quoting English historian Paul Johnson, writes, “America’s religious commitment ‘is a primary source — the primary source, I think — of American exceptionalism.’” That America is exceptional is beyond dispute. That real faith in the true God has helped make us so is also undeniable."

"Ultimately, our faith as a nation is strong and real because we have always known that God is the author of our liberties."

The above assertions are fine as fas as they go, but they give the impression that is all is well with America. We have some big challenges facing our nation, and I see little indication that our nation is stepping up to these issues in a way that tells me we are going to live up to our moral heritage.

It seems to me we have a tendency to rest on our laurels. Instead, we need to face up to a number of serious moral failings that are presently threatening the very survival of this exceptional nation.

those who do not
learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece say hello to Will and Stu and EVERY homosexual and atheist who posts on this thread. They have already chosen death over life. They ARE the living dead.

people, re-read the article
The author discusses FAITH, not specific religious dogma, as a vital part of the American success story.

Honestly, you've let your bizarre, hateful fear of ANY higher power get in the way of clear reason! No one made you read this article! I am amazed at the number (and vehemence) of the spittle-strewn, unreasonable and, frankly, illogical responses to this article. You folks seriously need a therapist (one with some form of FAITH!)

Any (sane) person who has FAITH has moments of doubt, or questions, about their chosen RELIGION--it's called being a Human Being, and does NOT negate the underlying FAITH.

Anyone who seriously wants to argue that our founding fathers were not men of FAITH, needs to be honest (at least with themselves) about every single spoken or written word from those men. I would hope that a learned, powerful Man would question everything! It makes his acceptance of the Divine much more sweet.

trutolife
The truth is Jesus was paid more interest to men who divorce than he ever did homosexuals. In other words, McCain, Rush, and Murdock are in very big trouble. But, topping all that would be the torture loving RWers. I think that would be Dante's 8th level of hell.

Principles
American Independence was Achieved Upon the Principles of Christianity
John Adams
http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/adamsprinciples. html


prin·ci·ple (prin's?-p?l) pronunciation
n.

1. A basic truth, law, or assumption: the principles of democracy.
2.
1. A rule or standard, especially of good behavior: a man of principle.
2. The collectivity of moral or ethical standards or judgments: a decision based on principle rather than expediency.
3. A fixed or predetermined policy or mode of action.
4. A basic or essential quality or element determining intrinsic nature or characteristic behavior: the principle of self-preservation.
5. A rule or law concerning the functioning of natural phenomena or mechanical processes: the principle of jet propulsion.

quote
John Adams

"The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite, and these Principles only could be intended by them in their Address, or by me in my Answer. And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity, in which all those Sects were united: And the general Principles of English and American Liberty, in which all those young Men United, and which had United all Parties in America, in Majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her Independence."

We have an uneducated public, who do not even know the Founding Principles of America.

The reason being is fools are given a voice today like no other time in the history of the world.
A few such fools are on this thread

We have outright liars
Teaching lies against the Founders and the Principles America was established in.

There were no deists among the Founders, not a single one of them, as deists like Tom Paine was despised by them all.

John Adams hated Tom Paine, as did all the other Founders for his promotion of deism.
Today, we have factual liars teaching in the public schools the Founders were deists, all the while the truth from their own mouth show they hated deism.

JOHN ADAMS TO BENJAMIN RUSH

JANUARY 21, 1810

[Thomas Paineís] political writings, I am singular enough to believe, have done more harm than his irreligious ones. He understood neither government nor religion. From a malignant heart he wrote virulent declamations, which the enthusiastic fury of the times intimidated all men, even Mr. Burke, from answering as he ought. His deism, as it appears to me, has promoted rather than retarded the cause of revolution in America, and indeed in Europe. His billingsgate, stolen from Blount's Oracles of Reason, from Bolingbroke., Voltaire, Berenger, &c., will never discredit Christianity, which will hold its ground in some degree as long as human nature shall have any thing moral or intellectual left in it. The Christian religion, as I understand it, is the brightness of the glory and the express portrait of the character of the eternal, self-existent, independent, benevolent, all powerful and all merciful creator, preserver, and father of the universe, the first good, first perfect, and first fair. It will last as long as the world. Neither savage nor civilized man, without a revelation, could ever have discovered or invented it. Ask me not, then, whether I am a Catholic or Protestant, Calvinist or Arminian. As far as they are Christians, I wish to be a fellow-disciple with them all.
http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/adamsletters.htm l


I am cutting and pasting
from a Jefferson scholar. Please read carefully:


In spite of right-wing Christian attempts to rewrite history to make Jefferson into a Christian, little about his philosophy resembles that of Christianity. Although Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence wrote of the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God, there exists nothing in the Declaration about Christianity.

Although Jefferson believed in a Creator, his concept of it resembled that of the god of deism (the term "Nature's God" used by deists of the time). With his scientific bent, Jefferson sought to organize his thoughts on religion. He rejected the superstitions and mysticism of Christianity and even went so far as to edit the gospels, removing the miracles and mysticism of Jesus (see The Jefferson Bible) leaving only what he deemed the correct moral philosophy of Jesus.

Distortions of history occur in the minds of many Christians whenever they see the word "God" embossed in statue or memorial concrete. For example, those who visit the Jefferson Memorial in Washington will read Jefferson's words engraved: "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every from of tyranny over the mind of man." When they see the word "God" many Christians see this as "proof" of his Christianity without thinking that "God" can have many definitions ranging from nature to supernatural. Yet how many of them realize that this passage aimed at attacking the tyranny of the Christian clergy of Philadelphia, or that Jefferson's God was not the personal god of Christianity?


Jefferson aimed at laissez-faire liberalism in the name of individual freedom, He felt that any form of government control, not only of religion, but of individual mercantilism consisted of tyranny. He thought that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, any more than our opinions in physics or geometry.


Stupid arguments are given credence
By uneducated hateful men all across America.

Such an argument I am speaking of is the US Constitution does not preach the Gospel of Christianity.

OF COURSE IT DOESN'T.

The US Constitution is about Government, NOT religion.

Its about Law not Faith.
Faith of the people Created the Constitution.
Americans were already Christians and there was no need to evangelize Christianity in America.
95 Percent of Americans WERE CHRISTIANS ALREADY.

53 of the men out of the 56 names on the Declaration of Independence and Constitution were Church going Christians.

The God haters of today cannot stand it, they hate this truth so bad they fight with all sorts of stupid arguments as I mention.

The US Constitution is not a gospel tract, it is the Founders agreement for a United Government of all men.
Believers and unbelievers alike.

The principles that were the GUIDE FOR THE US CONSTITUTION COMES FROM THE CHRISTIAN FAITH.

The God the Founders mention in the D of I is the God and Father of Jesus Christ.
It is HE who they all prayed to, right from the very first Congress


Taft
Re-read the Inferno. Be sure to pay special attention to the 7th level of hell:" The stench here is overpowering... who committed violence against God and nature are showered with flakes of fire that rain down against their naked bodies. Blasphemers and sodomites writhe in pain, their tongues more loosed to lamentation, and out of their eyes gushes forth their woe.

The Founders all said
In unison, elect only decent moral men to public office.

This ADMONITION has been ignored today, and is why we have idiots, fools, morons and immoral perverts in government today causing all the problems we have to deal with.

When we all transgress the Laws of God and ignore the Godly advice of the Founders, we pay for our transgression in hundreds of ways.

Gods Laws cannot be abolished or ignored, as to ignore them is to bring the suffering of a nation.

Because of the inventions of today radio, tv, movies, magazines, the voices of the idiots get heard loudest of all.
And liars and morons run the media services, people who have the morals of a snake.

Is there no healing for this?
Yes there is, a return to the Principles of the Christian Faith.
Instead of returning to these only answer for all the problems of today, these principles are mocked and scorned by perverts, immoral degenerates.

Religious faith won’t do…


‘Religious faith has long been valued as an essential contributor to our national greatness.’ – Tony Perkins


We understand what you are trying to say, but in this culture you must define what you mean by religious faith. American Constitutionalism is the product of a specific faith rooted in Biblical Christianity. This is the faith our Pilgrim forefathers brought with them to New England.

There are many false religions including Islam and Darwinism that oppose liberty and many faiths within Christianity that never produced liberty. There are many faiths within Protestantism. Now which faith are you talking about?

What is different about the faith of our forefathers that caused liberty to take root and grow? Most Americans today who are people of faith will not acknowledge that our Founders were men of faith whose Christianity was based on Scripture alone which made them children of the Reformation. We who are products of the public schools have been robbed of our heritage.

With open Bible, the New Covenant ideas of the priesthood of all believers and the equality of all men before God and the law became the foundation for modern political democracy. Ecclesiastical totalitarianism died a slow but certain death and with it the civil monarchy and aristocracy. The ideas of federalism and bicameralism were adopted to limit the concentration of power over ‘we the people’.

Now the point is this: The Constitution does not exist apart from its cultural context. Without this theological foundation our understanding of the Constitution is altogether skewed. It is NOT the product of autonomous man, but renewed man using his reason guided by revelation.

[Word limit: finished on the blog]

Jefferson was a deeply religious man
Who held the Teaching of Jesus Christ above every man who ever lived on this earth.
And pointed all men to Jesus Christ for what to believe in.

Because religion and faith were so important to Americans and it held the highest of values for all of them, they had to find a way through all the mistakes of nations of the world they studied to find the answers for a Government based in Liberty for all.

Not an easy process, and it took a higher wisdom to find an answer, and they all PRAYED for an Answer in how to Form this More Perfect Union

After they had debated and found no solution, no answers were forth coming in what the answers were to Unite all the people in, and Form a UNITED STATES, they all TURNED TO GOD FOR AN ANSWER.

They debated as to where government fit in with their Faith in Jesus Christ, including Thomas Jefferson.
Jefferson was against any sort of government as seen in Europe, with the Church and State issue seen over there.

The Church of England had ABUSED ITS POWERS.
The Catholics of European Nations had ABUSED ITS POWER.
This is what Jefferson was against ans spoke out strongly against religion and where it went WRONG.
But on the other hand, He supported the TRUE FAITH on God Jesus Christ taught.
And is why he himself said: 'I AM A CHRISTIAN'

It is also why he copied, NOT WROTE ANY SCRIPTURES.
He COPIED EXISTING SCRIPTURES he held SACRED.

The Words and Teaching of Jesus Christ.
Whom he honored all the days of his life.


Jefferson's Bible
Has been used by the God hating anti_Christian bigots of today in twisting this publication that only containS the Teachings of Jesus Christ TO IMPUGN Christianity.

God hating sinners, whose conscience are defiled, by their sins and hate for God, some are right here, trying to side track the truth os this article with their sordid conversation and hate speech against God and Christianity.

I suggest to all who care for the truth to ignore their posts and avoid arguing with he liars, it just takes it all off the subject of this article.
Stay focused in the topic and ignore them.

Truth is, Christians established The United States, and its time, way past time to put the liars and the reprobates in their place.

All it takes it to teach the truth of God, His Word is the most powerful of all speech.
Truth cannot ever be defeated, never.

Give them no ground by acknowledging their lies.
Jefferson tells us all by his own mouth the value of religion was to him.

The following is the preamble with the accompanying bill as originally composed by Jefferson:

"SECTION I. Well aware that the opinions and belief of men depend not on their own will, but follow involuntarily the evidence proposed to their minds; that Almighty God hath created the mind free, and manifested his supreme will that free it shall remain by making it altogether insusceptible of restraint; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments, or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, who being lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either,..
http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/biog/lj12.htm

John Adams learned from learned men
Christians
The only faith that allows liberty for all

"I believe with Justin Martyr, that all good men are Christians, and I believe there have been, and are, good men in all nations, sincere and conscientious"

http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/adamsletters.htm l

Justin Martyr
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-sol e.html

Afar from mortals place the holy God,
Nor ever think that He, like to thyself,
In fleshly robes is clad; for all unknown
Is the great God to such a worm as thou.
Divers similitudes He bears; at times
He seems as a consuming fire that burns
Unsated; now like water, then again
In sable folds of darkness shrouds Himself.
Nay, even the very beasts of earth reflect
His sacred image; whilst the wind, clouds, rain,
The roll of thunder and the lightning flash,
Reveal to men their great and sovereign Lord.
Before Him sea and rocks, with every fount,
And all the water floods, in reverence bend;
And as they gaze upon His awful face,
Mountains and earth, with the profoundest depths
Of ocean, and the highest peaks of hills,
Tremble: for He is Lord Omnipotent;
And this the glory is of God Most High.

But he was not the only man initiated in the knowledge of God; for Sophocles also thus describes the nature of the only Creator of all things, the One God:

There is one God, in truth there is but one,
Who made the heavens and the broad earth beneath,
The glancing waves of ocean, and the winds;
But many of us mortals err in heart,
And set up, for a solace in our woes,
Images of the gods in stone and brass,
Or figures carved in gold or ivory;
And, furnishing for these, our handiworks,
Both sacrifice and rite magnificent,
We think that thus we do a pious work.


Taft
We don't know the present state of hearts of McCain, Rush, Murdock, or anyone else who has divorced or done anything against the word of God. Romans 3:23 says ALL (of mankind who can comprehend sin) have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Repentance through Christ is what puts us in right relationship with God. There are also, people who get divorced for no fault of their own and they are not held accountable for that; I Cornthians 7:15 is one example.

As far as torture, some of the light things done to our enemies to extract information from those who want to kill Americans (defenseless children, included) is not what I call torture.

Torture is, however, beheadings, hangings, cutting off body parts and stuffing them in the mouth; leaving their love ones to mourn over such horror. It's capturing people and holding them for years with no word of where they are to the families.

It emboldens our enemies to hear Americans criticize America on it's tactics when they do so much worse; they are probably calling us idiots.

I say we don't do enough. I say do whatever is necessary W/I stricter guidelines to save our people from harm. Strength is what the enemy understands and respects.

Our enemy's training is probably stricter.

Torture is a mother aborting her own baby.

It's strange that I never hear those who are against this administration complain about what the terrorists do.

Talent's Revisionism
You say "We have outright liars"

And then you say "The principles that were the GUIDE FOR THE US CONSTITUTION COMES FROM THE CHRISTIAN FAITH."

But that is not what Adams said. You even quoted him and missed what he said. Yes, he mentions Christian principles, but those that are common among the sects: " in which all those Sects were united"--which exactly are those? Well, they are those that are eternal: "are as eternal and immutable", and thus outdate Christianity, namely, in the paragraph you omit, "Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System." And contrary to your beliefs, he includes "In favour of these general Principles in Phylosophy, Religion and Government, I could fill Sheets of quotations from Frederick of Prussia, from Hume, Gibbon, Bolingbroke, Reausseau and Voltaire, as well as Neuton and Locke: not to mention thousands of Divines and Philosophers of inferiour Fame."


you say "The God the Founders mention in the D of I is the God and Father of Jesus Christ."

Sorry, as stated in the Declaration, the Creator refers to "the Laws of Nature and Nature's God." He refers to "eternal and immutable" natural law.

So, yes, we do have what you name call outright liars, and name call fools given a voice, fools in this thread.

They are those whose historical revisionism is hysterical.

lonestarblues
Um - slight problem with your post.

"eternal" does not "outdate Christianity" and I doubt very seriously if your interpretation of that phrase is what Mr. Adams had in mind.

As usual, you make your error by assuming an early 21st century mindset in a late 18th century mind.

Gandalf
"'eternal' does not 'outdate Christianity' and I doubt very seriously if your interpretation of that phrase is what Mr. Adams had in mind."

Sorry, but Christianity is barely over 2K years old. Hardly eternal. Now I will agree that the truths it borrowed from the Jews, the Greeks and the Romans, among others, are eternal. Not what Adams had in mind? He said "Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System." Did I misquote or cherry pick him the way Talent did? Hardly. The 21st century mindset is all yours. Look at what Adams said, look at all that he said. He's not speaking of Christianity the way you do. And he did not speak of and credit only Christianity, but much, much more. I don't have a problem crediting Christianity's contribution, alongside many other contributions Adams mentions. Do you?

A major list of Fallacies
Tony Perkins speaks very highly of faith, as do many at the Family Research Council. But faith like everything has a dark side. Yes, it has been scientifically shown that people of faith give more to charities and that by any measure is a good thing. However, it has also shown that people of faith are more likely to be bigoted and dogmatic and that holds civilization back.

It's also seriously egregious to use excessive quote mining to prove a point. Yes, the founding fathers said a lot about faith, both for and against, but that does not prove a point. That doesn't make faith any better or worse than it already is. The constitution still clearly states that the government shall not endorse or patronize any religion, including Christianity. And just because Christians are the majority doesn't mean they deserve special access. That's not what this statement in the constitution denotes.

It is also worth mentioning the inherent foundational bias. The FRC is a very right-wing conservative organization. They are bias towards a certain conclusion about faith so it's not accurate to draw conclusions from them. It's also not accurate to get ideas of policy from them because of their bias. Perkins and his organization have their own way of thinking and that's fine, but not when it attempts to influence the government. That is a fundamental threat to the free society we treasure as Americans.

www.constitution.org/primarysources/adam
as was in his Almighty power to do, but to exalt it by its influence on reason alone; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible,
Jefferson

Word for word
John Adams

quote
John Adams

"The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite, and these Principles only could be intended by them in their Address, or by me in my Answer. And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity, in which all those Sects were united:


"The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence

Written by John Adams

And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity,

written by John Adams

Word for word.

Needs no interpretation
He spoke and wrote English

I think lonestar speaks Greek is the source of his problems understanding English.

Everyone can read it for yourself here

American Independence was Achieved Upon the Principles of Christianity
John Adams
http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/adamsprinciples. html

Talent Again Cherry Picks
What's the going rate for cherry picking these days, Talent?

"Word for word."

This is word for word:

What you cite: "The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite, and these Principles only could be intended by them in their Address, or by me in my Answer. And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity, in which all those Sects were united:"

What follows the colon: " And the general Principles of English and American Liberty, in which all those young Men United, and which had United all Parties in America, in Majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her Independence.

"Now I will avow, that I then believed, and now believe, that those general Principles of Christianity, are as eternal and immutable, as the Existence and Attributes of God; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System. I could therefore safely say, consistently with all my then and present Information, that I believed they would never make Discoveries in contradiction to these general Principles. In favour of these general Principles in Phylosophy, Religion and Government, I could fill Sheets of quotations from Frederick of Prussia, from Hume, Gibbon, Bolingbroke, Reausseau and Voltaire, as well as Neuton and Locke: not to mention thousands of Divines and Philosophers of inferiour Fame."

Needs no interpretation
He spoke and wrote English

I think Talent speaks cherry pick.

More John Adams
"The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by fictitious miracles?"
-- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, June 20, 1815

"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses."
-- John Adams, "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America" 1787-88

"Thirteen governments thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind."
--ibid

More John Adams
"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?"
-- John Adams, letter to FA Van der Kamp, December 27, 1816

"Indeed, Mr. Jefferson, what could be invented to debase the ancient Christianism which Greeks, Romans, Hebrews and Christian factions, above all the Catholics, have not fraudulently imposed upon the public? Miracles after miracles have rolled down in torrents."
-- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, December 3, 1813

"The priesthood have, in all ancient nations, nearly monopolized learning.... And, even since the Reformation, when or where has existed a Protestant or dissenting sect who would tolerate A FREE INQUIRY? The blackest billingsgate, the most ungentlemanly insolence, the most yahooish brutality is patiently endured, countenanced, propagated, and applauded. But touch a solemn truth in collision with a dogma of a sect, though capable of the clearest proof, and you will soon find you have disturbed a nest, and the hornets will swarm about your legs and hands, and fly into your face and eyes."
-- John Adams, letter to John Taylor, 1814

lonestarblues
Perhaps it's unfair of me to expect a secularist to understand the inference when a believer uses the term "eternal" and then brings in temporal references.

It is obvious that he is subsuming all those principles he is referring to under the heading of "eternal principles" which he derives, first and foremost, from his faith in the God of the Bible.

Perhaps it might help if you tried to understand that Mr. Adams had an entirely different understanding of the "principles of Christianity" than you do.

Trust me on that. Trust me that he is not speaking of Christianity the way you do.

lonestarblues
Your quotes do not demonstrate his rejection of true Christian faith but his abhorence of those who have deluded it into something other than what its Founder intended. His letters to Jefferson were attempts to help him reconcile his rejection of true Faith due to his abuse at the hands of an abusive rector in his youth.

lonestarblues
" I don't have a problem crediting Christianity's contribution, alongside many other contributions Adams mentions. Do you? "

No, I do not. What I have a problem with is you attempting to show that by his use of these other gentlemens' quotations that he is somehow attempting to say that they, and not his faith, are the source of his inspiration.

What he is saying is that all Truth is God's truth and he can demonstrate truth through any vehicle he needs to because it is the air we breathe.

Remember, he is not defending the Truth of the Bible here. He is defending principles of liberty but he is saying that they derive from God.

Understanding Liberals

Guiding principles, Christian
Not muslm
Not buddist
Not secularist

Delaware; Article 22 (1776) "Every person who shall be chosen a member of either house, or appointed to any office or place of trust...shall...also make and subscribe the following declaration, to whit:

'I,_____, do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ His only Son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed for evermore; and I do acknowledge the holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by divine inspiration'"


Georgia; Article VI (1777) "The representatives shall be chosen out of the residents in each county...and they shall be of the Protestant religion..."

Maryland; Article XXXV (1776) "That no other test or qualification ought to be required...than such oath of support and fidelity to this State...and a declaration of a belief in the Christian religion."


Massachusetts; First Part, Article II (1780) "The governor shall be chosen annually; and no person shall be eligible to this office, unless...he shall declare himself to be of the Christian religion."

Others to follow.(lack of space on 1 post)

Like Adams said
American Independence was Achieved Upon the Principles of Christianity
John Adams

http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/adamsprinciples. html


States made it clear
New Hampshire; Part 2, (1784) "[Provides that no person be elected governor, senator, representative or member of the Council] who is not of the protestant religion."

New Jersey; Article XIX (1776) "...no Protestant inhabitant of this Colony shall be denied the enjoyment of any civil right...; all persons, professing a belief in the faith of any Protestant sect...shall be capable of being elected into any office of profit or trust, or being a member of either branch of the Legislature."

North Carolina; Article XXXII (1776) "That no person, who shall deny the being of God or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments,...shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State.

Pennsylvania; Frame of Government, Section 10 (1776) "And each member [of the legislature]...shall make and subscribe the following declaration, viz.:

'I do believe in one God, the creator and governor of the universe, the rewarder to the good and the punisher of the wicked. And I do acknowledge the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine inspiration.'"


South Carolina; Article III (1778) "[State officers and privy council to be] all of the Protestant religion."

Vermont; Declaration of Rights, III (1777) "...Vermont; Frame of Government, Section 9 (1777) "And each member [of the legislature],...shall make and subscribe the following declaration, viz.:

'I do believe in one god, the Creator and Governor of the universe, the rewarder of the good and punisher of the wicked. And I do acknowledge the scriptures of the old and new testament to be given by divine inspiration, and own and profess the protestant religion.'"

lonestar does not speak English well
Adams spoke directly as the the topic of Principles.

Here it is again

"The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite, and these Principles only could be intended by them in their Address, or by me in my Answer. And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity,"

http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/adamsprinciples. html

lonestar is speaking about every but Principles.
Thats ok, Adams did not stutter and spoke clear English.

"The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence...
And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity,"

John Adams


Declaration of Independence
The Unanimous Declaration
of the Thirteen United States of America

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another.....
====

Dissolve political bonds is clear English, and is what the D of I is all about.
If my topic was what the D of I is all about, I need only the first paragraph.
"to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another....."


Due to space and readers attention, it is impossible to put up the entire D of I in one post.
But, if one wanted a certain part of it that adresses the issue he is talking about, he quotes just the part needed from the D of I to address the topic he is speaking of.
This is not "cherry picking" the argument some very densse people use to avoid the plain English of a topic they do not like to see in print.


When the subject is what principles the United States were United in, John Adams told us in clear English.


Word for Word
The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite, and these Principles only could be intended by them in their Address, or by me in my Answer. And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity,
John Adams
http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/adamsprinciples. html

Being a talent scout
For a Super Power(no one's business),I found the easiest way to know a real talent from a false talent, a simple formula.

Intelligence that is basic in honest people.
The dumbest people I ever had to deal with was always the ones who thought they were intelligent, and above everyone else.

Not speaking of average intelligence, but they think they are above everyone else in intelligence, and are always the biggest morons of all.
Genuine, blue ribbon idiots think they are the smartest people on earth.

There is something about the mental attitude of an arrogant person that cause's him to shut out any voice in the world, but his own, and the voices he himself approves of.

He simply cannot hear any voice that teaches him anything, as he knows it all already.
There is no end to his arguments, he will argue with a sign post.

Never believing in anything but what he sees and places his faith in, in own thoughts.

On the subject of Principles, no one can find any statement from the Founders that deny that the United States is Founded in Christian Principles.

They will go off and sek quotes about religion that the topic has nothing to do with the Principles America was established in.
But are the arguments about religion and govenment before the 1st Amendment was adapted.
No one will find any further arguments from the Founders about religion after 1791 and the 1st A. was added.

That A. stopped all the arguments and United them





Gandalf
"Perhaps it's unfair of me to expect a secularist to understand the inference when a believer uses the term 'eternal' and then brings in temporal references."

So now who's "assuming an 21st century mindset in a late 18th century mind"? What he meant is shows by what he, Adams, explained he meant.

"It is obvious that he is subsuming all those principles he is referring to under the heading of "eternal principles" which he derives, first and foremost, from his faith in the God of the Bible."

Who is he here? Talent, yes, true, but Adams, no, that is not what Adams says.

"Perhaps it might help if you tried to understand that Mr. Adams had an entirely different understanding of the "principles of Christianity" than you do."

Perhaps it would help if you tried to understand that Mr. Adams had an entirely different understanding of the "principles of Christianity" than you do.

"Your quotes do not demonstrate his rejection of true Christian faith but his abhorence of those who have deluded it into something other than what its Founder intended."

Yes, on that we agree 100%. And those would be among His followers.

"What I have a problem with is you attempting to show that by his use of these other gentlemens' quotations that he is somehow attempting to say that they, and not his faith, are the source of his inspiration."

All I have done is balance out the cherry picking of talent, that has been shown quite clearly. Do you think his faith is the source of his cherry picking and name calling?

"What he is saying is that all Truth is God's truth and he can demonstrate truth through any vehicle he needs to because it is the air we breathe."

If that were so he would provide both sides of Adams' views on Christianity and allow the truth to come out of its own accord instead of by fiat and name calling.

Gandalf
"He is defending principles of liberty but he is saying that they derive from God."

I have no problem with his or your faith in that belief, but Adams saw liberty this way: "In favour of these general Principles in Phylosophy, Religion and Government, I could fill Sheets of quotations from Frederick of Prussia, from Hume, Gibbon, Bolingbroke, Reausseau and Voltaire, as well as Neuton and Locke: not to mention thousands of Divines and Philosophers of inferiour Fame."

Gandalf, which do you prefer, the truth or half a truth? Which would Jesus? Which would your God? It is true what Talent says Admas said Adams said but it is also true Adams said more, as I have shown. Talent does the same with Jefferson, repeating Jefferson said "I am a Christian" and it is true Jefferson said that but it is also true Jefferson said so much more, read for yourself what Jefferson had to say about the "The Life and Morals of Jesus" @ http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/jeffbsyl.html .

Gandalf
This is where we agree, let's start from there, perhaps we'll understand each other better:

"We have now, it Seems a National Bible Society, to propagate King James's Bible, through all Nations. Would it not be better to apply these pious Subscriptions, to purify Christendom from the Corruptions of Christianity; than to propagate those Corruptions in Europe Asia, Africa and America! ... Conclude not from all this, that I have renounced the Christian religion, or that I agree with Dupuis in all his Sentiments. Far from it. I see in every Page, Something to recommend Christianity in its Purity and Something to discredit its Corruptions. ... The Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount contain my Religion."
--John Adams, Letter to Thomas Jefferson, Nov 4, 1816

If this is true, and Adams says it, given the 10 commandments and the Sermon on the Mount, what parts of Christianity are pure and which corrupt? What did Adams think was true Christianity? You're the Christian, tell me what you think he meant.

Another lie one tells
Having read Jefferson for may years as the most prolific writer of the Founders, I have a good understanding of the man in his religious views and his politics.


From here, one place one can find 2700 quotes on all the different topics of religion and government.

Thomas Jefferson on Politics & Government
http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeffcont.htm
Table of Contents

This collection contains over 2,700 quotations from the writings of Thomas Jefferson. To download the special collection of over 400 quotations, see the option at the end of the Table of Contents.

Having read this I know full well Jefferson said much more than "I AM A CHRISTIAN"

Its quite obvious he said more.
But as to the BASIC in what Jefferson thought of HIMSELF WAS, HE WAS A CHRISTIAN.
Right from HIS OWN MOUTH.
Who cares what lonestar thinks about it?

His opinion means nothing.
Jefferson being the subject, not lonestar, who can say what he is, he cannot say what Jefferson was.

Everything Jefferson spoke to and about all stemmed from his own right to tell all men who he was and what he believed.
Jefferson was NOT SHY.
He spoke very BOLDLY.
And NOTHING ELSE he said ERASES THIS:

"I AM A CHRISTIAN"

Thomas Jefferson


ah, lonestarblues,
You are going to have to argue with talent scout yourself. I am not here to defend his point of view. Hew is much too politically motivated for my tastes.

lonestarblues
We still disagree on the original quotes and their interpretation and you want me to delve into Adams' understanding of Christianity?

The very first Americans fled
Europe for religious freedom.

Fleeing the power of the State to dictate their conscience, forcing religious views on the citizens of Europe.
And is a perversion of the Christian Faith.

That perversion of the Christian Faith held to in Europe is what the comments the Founders spoke about, and never wanted to have that sort of power here in America.

In Forming a Government that had to address this topic, the subject itself brought up all the arguments of where the duty of Government concerning religion lay.


This argument still is very much alive today, between Protestants and Catholics.
The Pope once held the power over European States, and the Priests of both the Protestants under the Curch of England and the Catholic Church corrupted the Teachings of the Christian Faith.

Leaving the very example of Jesus Christ and the Apostles out of the picture all together.
Using religion, the Christina Religion to Force their will on the people.
And is why the Pilgrams left England and came here.

Americans were 95 percent Christian.
How is it then possible for any one to believe the Christian Faith is not the Principles they followed in Forming the Government of the United States?

Historically, honestly they cannot do it.

Christianity is the very cause for the Government of Amercia Uniting under a Constitution based in Christian teaching and Principles.

lonestar
Alright. I see they are related, but it will have to wait until I come back form my nightly walk.

ah, your bias is showing
Gandalf writes:
9:18 PM EST

ah, lonestarblues,
You are going to have to argue with talent scout yourself. I am not here to defend his point of view. Hew is much too politically motivated for my tastes.
===
ts:
You have no idea what my motivations stem from.
No more than I knows yours.
I do nothing here you do not do.
Post my thoughts, just like you do and are free to do.
And not once have I judged your person or personal motives, and you will not be the judge of mine.
Once you learn that, you can debate any point you like and if its logic based in facts, is acceptable for thinking over.
You have offered me nothing but advice.
My advice for you is mind your own business and post on topic.

I do not come here to follow you around leanring what I can say.
I know you must think I am supposed to by a former post you made to me.
Yet the facts are, you are wasting your time trying to instruct me on what to say.
Capiche?

talent scout writes,

"lonestar does not speak English well"

-------------------------------

talent scout also writes,

"The dumbest people I ever had to deal with was always the ones who thought they were intelligent, and above everyone else"

--------------------------------

talent scout tells us,

"I think lonestar speaks Greek is the source of his problems understanding English."

(no, I did not "enhance" the dreadfulness of that sentence in any way. I simply cut and pasted. Talk about sentences sounding like bad translations from another language.)


---------------------------------



lonestar, even when I disagree with your posts, I take a good deal of pleasure in your quick mind and literacy.

My writing of English
Is with words I understand what they mean.

Much better than will does.
Understanding the English words has nothing to do with how one types in a use of words.

I like it how this reads, it says exactly what I am wanting to say.

will of a rerobate and is expected to come along and mock me, but in truth mocks his own stupidity and high degree of ignorance.

I may not be a a very good writer or typist, but what I got to say is exactly what I do say.
will is one of the morons who actually thinks of himself as intelligent.


This is beautifully written


"I think lonestar speaks Greek is the source of his problems understanding English."

I could have added "and" but it is not any clearer, just easier for morons to read.


"I think lonestar speaks Greek and is the source of his problems understanding English."

"lonestar does not speak English well"
Is so true.
He simply does not understand what the English word "principle" means.

American Independence was Achieved Upon the Principles of Christianity
John Adams
http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/adamsprinciples. html

All my posts
I have stayed with the topic.
Sorry for answering the morons

Gandalf
"You are going to have to argue with talent scout yourself."

I'm done with that, just wanted to show Adams said more.

"We still disagree on the original quotes and their interpretation and you want me to delve into Adams' understanding of Christianity?"

I thought that was your focus, Adams' Christianity, his faith. Given what you've said so far, I'm just interested in more of your view of it.

"Alright. I see they are related, but it will have to wait until I come back form my nightly walk."

Thanks for looking at it. If not tonight, tomorrow, or some other time. Enjoy the walk.


Sigh, clumsy fingers
His statement on the 10 Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount could only be uttered by someone who understood the connection between both and their relevance in defining Christianity. Imagine Ted Kennnedy, Pelosi, Chris Dodd, or Joseph Biden uttering that statement today and perhaps you can get some idea of the difference in mindsets between early 21st century American Elites and late 18th century elites.

He obviously took Jesus's answer to the scribe in Mark 12:28-32 and understood it,

Make my day
Just keep me out of your posts, highly appreciated.
===

lonestarblues writes:
"You are going to have to argue with talent scout yourself."

I'm done with that, just wanted to show Adams said more.
====
Never asked for you to talk to me to begin with.
Stay away from me

good old TJ
he alsio believed that the same god allowed him to own slaves, have a mistress or two or three from those slaves and have children by them . ofcourse he felt bad all the time he was having sex with them but why not. its easy enough. good old TOMMY .

American Generosity vs. Taxation
American Christians tithe a portion of their earnings to many churches, schools, institutions, and places overseas. We take great comfort in being able to improve the lives of the less fortunate; however, we DO mind being forced to tithe to causes we don't support. Taxing Americans to raise revenue for social programs is actually forced tithing, and we resent having to donate to the cause; giving to the "more fortunate" who get an income without having to go out and earn it. In that case, charity starts at home, and I'd rather donate my tax/tithing dollars to my household or a needy family in my community. I want to say who and what I help.


Brickhouse
How anti-democratic of you. Why don't you stand on your front lawn and shout in a loud, clear voice that you cede your residence from the nation?

Some of us are sick of paying extra taxes to make up for the churches who have opted out of that responsibility. For a nation that has a constitutional secular principle, this 'forced tithing' is just as offensive.

Stuart

ValiantForTruth
> There are many false religions including Islam and Darwinism that oppose liberty and many faiths within Christianity that never produced liberty. There are many faiths within Protestantism. Now which faith are you talking about? <
_____________________________________________

How is ‘Darwinism’ a faith? How does Darwin ‘oppose liberty’?

Stuart

Gandalf
> While the naysayers and malcontents are busy maligning the faith of the Founders and Believers throughout the history of the nation, they always neglect to mention, in their pseudo-intellectual rants, the fact that they have no more logically coherent answer for the questions of life than those they are dismissing. Objecting to another's philosophy is intellectually lazy if it's not follwed by a more comprehensive explanation. <
________________________________________________

That’s exactly what evolutionary biologists say about creationists, including the intellectually lazy intelligent design charlatans.

Stuart

Stuart
You have it exactly backwards and have obviously not been reading the published writings of the scientists and other intellectuals who make up the majority of the proponents of Intelligent Design. I'd hardly say that Dean Kenyon has not given a more comprehensive explanation than his own original thesis when he was an evolutionary chemist.

Obviously you are offended by the implications of ID. I can't help you with that. That's something you're going to have to work out for yourself.

lonestarblues
Keep in mind that it is neither Thomas Jefferson, nor John Adams, nor some guy calling himself "Gandalf" in a glorified internet chatroom who define Christianity, OK?

That might help as well.

Thanks again
Talent Scout, as I've written before, I always
learn something from your posts.
I grew up in S. Mass. in an age when we learned
that we were founded by Christians. In that era, we had opening exercises consisting of
a scripture verse, the Lords Prayer and the Pledge. And my teachers, most descended from
settlers that came in the 1600's or 1700's, so
we got filled with information regarding the Revolution. I suppose that was because they had
relatives that started it, (while mine were on the receiving end of the shot heard round the world.)
I believe it may be in proverbs, not sure where
it says not to throw pearls before swine. Or
as the adages says, there is none so blind as those who will not see. And there are a plethora of blind mice on this thread. The arrogance of self will could be comical if it weren't so sad, as the story of the Rich Man
and Lazarus points out.

The Influence of Christianity
Is the power that United the States to form a more perfect union.

Tea Party
I am refreshed in spirit in seeing a free mind as you possess.

Above indoctrination of the times we live in.
I think God America was established by Christians whose Faith in Jesus Christ is the Founding Principle of the Most perfect Union of any people who ever lived on this planet, outside of ancient Israel.

The example of good government came from the study of the Jewish Nation of Israel, as mentioned by Benjamin Franklin in 1787 when he spoke of that truth and it United the Founders to all agree to PRAY to God for the answers for the Constitution and Government all of them could Unite in.

Franklin spoke of their study of all former Republics, and found them all wanting for being an example of good government.
This is when he quoted Psalms 127:1

127:1 Hebrew OT: WLC (Consonants & Vowels)
????? ??????????? ?????????? ?????????? ? ??????????? ????? ?????? ? ??????? ??????? ???? ?????????? ????????????????? ?????? ? ?????? ????????

1864

"EXCEPT THE LORD BUILD THE HOUSE"

by William Cullen Bryant

EXCEPT THE LORD BUILD THE HOUSE -

Ancient of Days! except thou deign

Upon the finished task to smile,

The workman's hand hath toiled in vain,

To hew the rock and rear the pile. -

Oh, let thy peace, the peace that tames

The wayward heart, inhabit here,

That quenches passion's fiercest flames,

And thaws the deadly frost of fear. -

And send thy love, the love that bears

Meekly with hate, and scorn, and wrong,

And loads itself with generous cares,

And toils, and hopes, and watches long. -

Here may bold tongues thy truth proclaim,

Unmingled with the dreams of men,

As from His holy lips it came

Who died for us and rose again. - -

The Principles of Christianity
Are the only source for Liberty of the human mind.
The principles of the Christian Faith is Founded in Liberty.
John 8:32 -
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

John 8:36 -
If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

The freedom of so many today is not the Liberty Jesus Christ brings in overcoming all bondage of men and flesh, but they are free only from Righteousness, and their liberty captures their minds to spiritual bondage and darkness.

Romans 6:20 -
For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness

All those who live in sin are free alright, free from righteousness.
Jesus Christ brings the Truth of God and is the Source for Liberty that United the American States.

Honored as the Source of Liberty in this nation since its beginning, and now attacked by the dark forces of the unrighteous, who honor nothing but their own will and and unrighteousness.

This is the message that brings Liberty, and it changed the world
Luke 4:18 -
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

Sorry about this
127:1 Hebrew OT: WLC (Consonants & Vowels)
?????
===
It was in Hebrew, and it will not allow the letters of Hebrew.

Psalms 127

:1
Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.


This very Scripture was quoted by Benjamin Franklin at the 1st Constitutional Convention after the Founders had done their best to find the right formula for our Government that would form a more perfect Union.

They had studied ancient Greece and Rome and found them wanting.
They had studied the nations of Europe and found them wanting.

Leaving them in a state of mind of understanding they did not know how to Unite the people by the power of their own reasoning.

They had come to their wits end, and were in a dead lock of disagreements.
In this climate Ben spoke up and pointed all to Pray for an answer in how to Unite the States under a Federal Government.

"The Constitutional Convention had been meeting for five weeks, and had hit a perilous deadlock. The large states were insisting that congressional representation be based on population; the smaller states wanted a one-state-one-vote rule. The entire effort to create a stronger union was in jeopardy. Eighty-one-year-old Benjamin Franklin, quiet during most of the deliberations, then addressed the group. According to James Madison's notes, here is what happened next."

http://www.beliefnet.com/resourcelib/docs/21/Benjamin_Frank lins_Request_for_Prayers_at_the_Constitutional__1.html






Gandalf
"His statement on the 10 Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount could only be uttered by someone who understood the connection between both and their relevance in defining Christianity. Imagine Ted Kennnedy, Pelosi, Chris Dodd, or Joseph Biden uttering that statement today and perhaps you can get some idea of the difference in mindsets between early 21st century American Elites and late 18th century elites."

Yes, I see that in the left's turn to Christianity lately. But I would argue there ar just as many so-called conservatives, religious conservatives who are politically liberal, who also differ greatly from views of the 18th century.

"He obviously took Jesus's answer to the scribe in Mark 12:28-32 and understood it."

And applied it to Christians who had corrupted the teachings of Jesus.

"Keep in mind that it is neither Thomas Jefferson, nor John Adams, nor some guy calling himself "Gandalf" in a glorified internet chatroom who define Christianity, OK?"

Very true. Every Christian seems to have his or her own definitions of faith and God. Way I figure is since Christianity is about a personal relationship with God, those differences in denominations, sects and individuals are only natural.

On another forum someone asked where in the Bible you find “God helps those who help themselves" and a number of Christians cited passages like 2 Thessalonians 3 and such. Fact is it's not in the Bible, it's an aphorism from Franklin's “Poor Richard's Almanac”. If it doesn't appear in the Bible, then where did Franklin come up with the idea? What does this say about the 18th century Christian view of God?

No need to answer, but it is an interesting question, even for a nonbeliever like myself, considering the influence of Christianity.

Ben Franklin speaks
Mr. President

The small progress we have made after 4 or five weeks close attendance & continual reasonings with each other-our different sentiments on almost every question, several of the last producing as many noes as ays, is methinks a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the Human Understanding. We indeed seem to feel our own want of political wisdom, since we have been running about in search of it. We have gone back to ancient history for models of Government, and examined the different forms of those Republics which having been formed with the seeds of their own dissolution now no longer exist. And we have viewed Modern States all round Europe, but find none of their Constitutions suitable to our circumstances.


They had come to a dead lock of disagreements.
No man knew how to break it.
They had tried reason and knowledge and it had failed them.

Ben spoke of the failure of their ability to reason as a path to find Unity.
And said:

In this situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings? In the beginning of the Contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection.- Our prayers, Sir, were heard, & they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending providence in our favor.

I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?

seperate the man from the question
Ranger29 writes: - 11:45 AM EST
Subject: Talent Scout...I guess Philemon
isnt in your Bible.
====
ts:
This man is dishonest so its a waste of time thinking he asks this in sincerity to know the answer taught by the Principles of Christianity.

But the question itself deserves an answer of what Christianity teaches about Philemon and all who were slaves.

To find what Paul taught us Christians about such a circumstance in how to deal with it in understanding the Will of God, we cannot do that unless we read what the Bible says and teaches.




Philemon:
8 Wherefore, though I might be much bold in Christ to enjoin thee that which is convenient,

9 Yet for love's sake I rather beseech thee, being such an one as Paul the aged, and now also a prisoner of Jesus Christ.

10 I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds:



12 Whom I have sent again: thou therefore receive him, that is, mine own bowels:





15 For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever;

16 Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord?

17 If thou count me therefore a partner, receive him as myself.

18 If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account;

19 I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it: albeit I do not say to thee how thou owest unto me even thine own self besides.

20 Yea, brother, let me have joy of thee in the Lord: refresh my bowels in the Lord.

21 Having confidence in thy obedience I wrote unto thee, knowing that thou wilt also do more than I say.


More on this in another post.....

Captivity led Captive
Principles of Christianity
Ephesians 4:
7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.

8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.

9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?

10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

The path to Liberty is right through the heart of bondage.
Jesus Christ was Free
He was not obligated to die for any man, He did so willingly.

To bring the Liberty of Truth found only in God, Jesus had to defeat the source of Bondage and all slavery of both flesh and spirit.

Jesus went into Hell itself, and tore the door off its hinges.

Destroying the powers of darkness that come though the Fear of Death.

Through fear of death, evil and wicked men force their will on other men.


Hebrews 2:
14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.


Mankind enslaves other men, and is not of God.
On the other hand, accepting Jesus Christ is also a bondage to God.
But his bondage is the source for Free Will, as He has made NO LAW against doing Good, only evil.

Paul explained this frame of mind in Philemon.

Philemon 1
Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ, ..

Being a prisoner himself to Jesus Christ, who brings Liberty and Life and triumps over sin and death.
Leading Captivity Captive by destroying the power of fear and death, through the Promise of Life.
more...


Back to Philemon& Christian Principles
Slavery is a creation of men.
It was not in the Creation of God from the Beginning.

Adam was Created a Free Man.
He has no one over him to boss him around or to pay homage to.
This is the ideal Will of God and the Law of Nature.
Nature itself grants all men Liberty.
The Nature of God, and pointed to by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence.

Here, read it again, let it sink in.

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to ...

assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them,..


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,..

Understanding this basic Christian Principle as the very source for the Liberty America has been established in has been lost on the masses of people today.
Who have been indoctrinated to hate this truth that is the only Source for Liberty.


"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,"

Slavery had existed and created in America by the British.
Not the US Government.

It existed before there was a United States of America.
Built on the principles of Christianity that opposes the bondage of slavery, and preached by Christians in America as Sin.

Sin it is, and America paid dearly for this transgression against the Laws of nature and Natures God in the Civil War.

Still paying that sin off, today.


Proving a lie
Ranger29 - 12:26 PM EST
Subject: BTW TAlent Scout...if you want to claim
I am lying about something...prove it.
====

What is truth?
One must know the truth to be able to recognize a lie.

A lie is not a person.
A lie is words.
There are two kinds of liars.
Intentional liars and unintentional liars.

Many sincere people tells lies, unintentionally, all of us can look at our own experience in this world to see this is true.

Most lies are unintentional lies, and only a wicked man lies intentionally.
I consider this man the latter from all experience with this screen name "robert"

He intentionally distorts all subject here, he intentionally attacks other persons with mockery and false accusations, he lies intentionally in my judgment.
Based on his actions and words.
He respects no rule here and has been tossed off TH many times, and he goes under and around all rules to even be here posting.
This is an intent to lie, and is his entire character as seen here on TH.

All men lie, but most of us do so unintentionally and robert is not an unintentional liar, but one dedicated to lying




There is no proof
An intentional liar will accept as proof.
It does not exist in his mind, as he considers he is the truth.

NO facts matter to him, he is agenda driven to force his views on other men, the very characteristic of all liars and the father of lies, the devil himself.

One truth is all there is, the Truth of the Creator of men.
And every mouth that will not confess this truth, either by intent or ignorance is lying against the Truth.

We hold THESE TRUTHS...
One Truth, One Source of Truth BUT...
More than ONE truth applicable to life on this earth.
Here Jefferson mentions these truths applicable from the ONE Source of Truth.

The D of I

We hold these truths to be self-evident,

(first truth)... that all men are created equal,

(2nd truth)..that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,


(3rd Truth)..that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. —


(4th truth)..That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,


(5th truth).. deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

(6th truth).. — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,

(7th truth)..and to institute new Government,

(8th truth).. laying its foundation on such principles (Christian Principles "God of Nature" as seen in Adam and Eve)


(9th truth)..and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

lonestarblues
If you don't mind my asking, what, exactly, is the point of your response to my latest post?

Gandalf
Hmm, that what you say is true in more ways than you think. Just as the founding principles are more than Christian because Christianity itself is founded on more. And then we're back to those eternals, those universals like the golden rule or do no harm.

Not really sure what your question is asking.

lonestarblues
And what, exactly, do you think Christianity is founded on if it is, indeed, founded on "more"?

Gandalf
Judaism, as well as Greek and Roman philosophy.

Rather than discuss all that it adopted or adapted to, one might better ask what was the unique contribution of Christianity?

Golden rule? Not various forms of it had already existed.

Monotheism, no, that comes from Judaism.

Natural law, no, that comes from Aristotle through Cicero to Aquinas who merged it to Christian faith.

So, what? One thing I can think of is this. Previous religions, or faiths, if you prefer, were social in nature, a part of politics, like Islam still is. Christianity introduced the notion of personal salvation, of a personal relationship with God.

Thus it is founded on many other things, but is unique in its personal aspect.

Perhaps there's more hat you can think of.

Says it all
Harvard professor Samuel Huntington, quoting English historian Paul Johnson, writes,

“America’s religious commitment ‘is a primary source—the primary source, I think—of American exceptionalism.’”

That America is exceptional is beyond dispute. That real faith in the true God has helped make us so is also undeniable. Consider just two ways that faith makes America great.

Many more than 2, but
First, faith elevates the value of individual human life.

Faith teaches that a loving Creator has fashioned each of us and consequently we have irreducible value because He made us in His image. Faith teaches that we have a purpose greater than pleasing ourselves, greater than maintaining our personal safety or acquiring wealth.

Because people of faith value human life, we give generously to those in need. According to the just-released “2008 Index of Global Philanthropy,” published by the Hudson Institute’s Center for Global Prosperity, religious Americans are giving record amounts of aid to poor countries.


Mark Twain
"faith is believing something you know ain't true."


Christian Principles?
"Faith teaches that a loving Creator has fashioned each of us and consequently we have irreducible value because He made us in His image."

This was already established as a principles by Judaism which was the first in recorded history to say that all people are equal before the law, whether the lowly slave or the Godly king. We can thank Christianity for borrowing that and passing it on. But it's not a unique Christian principle.

"Faith teaches that we have a purpose greater than pleasing ourselves, greater than maintaining our personal safety or acquiring wealth."

I can't think of a religion or philosophy that doesn't say this. This is a universal principle and not unique to Christianity.

If Christianity adopted and adapted to these principles, that is good, but can someone think of a principle unique to Christianity?

lonestarblues
Chhristianity is distinguished by the extent to which its adherents are required to believe literally things that are absurd.

Stuart

Gandalf
> You have it exactly backwards and have obviously not been reading the published writings of the scientists and other intellectuals who make up the majority of the proponents of Intelligent Design. I'd hardly say that Dean Kenyon has not given a more comprehensive explanation than his own original thesis when he was an evolutionary chemist. Obviously you are offended by the implications of ID. I can't help you with that. That's something you're going to have to work out for yourself. <
________________________________________________

Does laughing out loud at absurdity count as taking offense?

Please do make yourself familiar with ID’s most famous publication:
http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.html

What is an ‘evolutionary chemist’?

Stuart

Principles of Christianity built America
Course it takes a moral person to live up to the higher principles the Faith of Christians are taught, its way too high for the immoral men of speaking out of ignorance on this thread.

This is a known spiritual truth, and spoke of by such men as Solomon.

Proverbs 24:7 -
Wisdom is too high for a fool: he openeth not his mouth in the gate.

Wisdom is just to high for them to enter into, and they prefer the ignorance of fools.
Its what the word fool really means.

Liberty comes from God, and that leaves the fools without this Liberty cause they reject God, yet the truth is, God has rejected them and allowed them to think they are so smart and prove how stupidity is their own self built prison

The Principles the Founders held to and followed are from God, and this is why its too high for fools.
Fact is, the real world produces many more fools than it does wise men.
In this day and time.

Think about this
How the dumbest people, you have come across are the ones who think they are smarter than everyone else.

They are the very definition of morons, and example of the power of ignorance to decieve.
Lack of knowledge is a certain path to stupidity and an fanatical desire to talk, having gaping mouths of worthless speech.
Fools never learn this.

Its simply above their heads
Proverbs 19:3 -
The foolishness of man perverteth his way: and his heart fretteth against the LORD.

Proverbs 21:30 -
There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.

Yet it remains hidden until the fool opens his mouth.
Last thing you will ever see from a fool, is a quietness.
Their upper body is not even normal, not when seen through spiritual eyes.
They appear to be all mouth in the spiritual world, and are never ending recordings of the same speech over and over again.

Do not bother telling me to not use scriptures, I do not care what the morons believe in.
And I know and understand this, there is no reasoning with morons.

And to argue with them is to become just like the idiots yourself.

God deliver me from these fools is a daily prayer when I read TH and the subject is Faith, Christianity, the Constitution and its Principles that Faith in Jesus Christ Created.
Its the same morons who not only come to such threads but do so with a fanatic pursuit.

Showing how important this subject is to them to mock with genuine ignorance yet think of themselves as smart.

Its a Law of God and Natures God.
Morons never shut up, nor can be reasoned with.




A long road
From Jerusalem to Philadelphia, for the Birth of a New Nation Under God.


The Principles as taught by Jesus Christ were slowly being applied to more and more people.

From the 1st Christian Church at Jerusalem, all Jews, to the Churches of Rome, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians, Antioch, Iconium, Derbe, Tarsus, Seleucia, Lycia, Perga, Sidon, Tyre, Pamphylia Cyprus and the known world of the 1st century.

From these Christian Principles that spread across the entire known world, wise men learned and began to teach these Principles.
From St. Augustine to Martin Luther
From William the Conqueror to Thomas Jefferson

From Justyn Martyr to Benjamin Franklin.

John Milton to Plymouth Rock
Its and endless history of the Voices of the Wise men who learned from the Principles of Christianity, that gave Birth to a new nation under God.

The United States of America.
And morons today who know nothing of the Bible, this history, the meaning of it all, have the gall to mock it and think they are smarter than everyone else who ever lived or living today.

Some of these morons are here in this thread


All that and a bag of chips 1
Hi lonestar. I’m really not stalking you. I was hoping someone else would answer the question you posed, but since it doesn’t look like anyone is going to.

Lonestarblues: If Christianity adopted and adapted to these principles, that is good, but can someone think of a principle unique to Christianity?


Yes, the relationship between religion and morality goes back to the earliest history of mankind, but according to John A. Hardon, S.J. in a paper entitled Morals and Theology, here is what’s unique to Christianity . . . .

“It is axiomatic in the Christian faith that religion and morality cannot be separated, at the risk of destroying the essence of moral conduct and leaving man's will a prey to his passions and unreasoning drives. To the casual reader the answer of Christ to the questioning Pharisees may seem like a platitude. They asked Him, "Master, which is the greatest commandment of the Law?" He told them, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind, That is the greatest commandment. It comes first. The second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself. Everything in the Law and the prophets hangs on these two commandments."(3) Behind his statement stands the ethical system of Christianity, whose prior concern is with the things of God, on the premise that everything in the moral order derives meaning only from Him.

It's all that part 2
The role of religion in Christian morality implies far more than presupposing God as divine lawgiver without whom morals would be without objective foundation; it also means more than recognizing that the primary focus of ethics is on the Creator, who has first claim on man's allegiance and love. Built into Judaeo-Christianity is the fact that God has specially entered the world of human knowledge and communicated to mankind a revelation by which He teaches what men should believe and do as a condition of their salvation. Without this super-natural dimension we would have only a shell of Christian morality and hardly the shadow of its true substance.
The English word "revelation" is derived from the Latin revelare, which means the manifestation or disclosure of something that was previously hidden. In this sense the Scriptures and theology speak of revelation as any communication that God makes of Himself or His dealings with the human race.
Every religious system in history implies a relation between the Deity and man and therefore presupposes some kind of knowledge of God. But where other religions emphasize and practically identify religion as self-instructive, Christianity lays stress on the need for God's intervention to teach men what they could never or only with difficulty have learned otherwise.
The same mode of reasoning may be applied to the moral law, which is the logical consequence of God's existence, since it is unthinkable that an allwise Creator would establish an order in the universe without wanting us to observe it, and place sanctions on our disobedience. So, too, we reason to the presence of spiritual forces in nature from the effects they produce that are not material, i.e., not perceptible to the senses.

It's all that part 3
We are able to think in terms of universal concepts, knowing not only men but humanity, and not only taxes but taxation; we know how real are love, liberty and happiness. Yet who ever measured the length of patience with a slide rule or weighed an act of charity on the scales?
All these realities, though abstract and spiritual, or even divine, we may recognize and in some degree understand without special intervention on the part of God. Just using our faculties of sense and reason on the objects of nature will yield a considerable harvest of truth.
But revelation, properly so-called, is not natural. The truths it communicates may be naturally knowable like the Ten Commandments, or above reason like the Trinity, but the mode of communication is not by way of rational deduction or natural intuition. It is always a personal manifestation from God to man, whereby He speaks and man listens; He breaks through the normal channels of cognition and addresses Himself directly to the human mind – whether by infusing knowledge or stimulating the senses or any way He chooses to convey His thoughts without dependence on the laws of nature.

It's all that part 4
As regards naturally knowable truths, the verdict of history is that without special illumination from on high beyond the ordinary processes of nature, the generality of men would not attain the fullness and perfection of religious and moral knowledge. For though absolutely speaking human reason can by its native powers arrive at a true and certain knowledge of a personal God and also of the natural law which the Creator has written in the hearts of men, still not a few obstacles prevent reason from using its natural ability effectively. The truths that refer to God and our relations with Him completely transcend the sensible order; and when there is question of their practical application and realization, they call for self-surrender and considerable sacrifice. In the acquisition of such truths, the mind is further hampered by the impulses of the senses and imagination, and by evil passions stemming from original sin. As a result men easily persuade themselves that what they do not wish to be true is false or at least doubtful.” --John A. Hardon, S.J. His complete paper can be found at http://www.therealpresence.org


Jen: As much as you would like to believe that Christianity has no unique principle that one couldn’t get in some other way, nothing could be farther from the truth. You might get bits and pieces of the truth elsewhere, but it will always remain incomplete. Face it, Christianity has it all. So although, Christians are imperfect, Christianity itself is perfect. Nothing else can compete. I think the majority of people (including our founding fathers) realize this, whether they fully understand why it is that Christianity is unique or not.

Christians Principles, Amer.s Foundation
The reading material of the Founders is a Library of Books and Articles of wisdom passed on to each Generation.
Find out what Educated the Founders by opening and reading for yourself where they found the knowledge and the Principles they Established this New Nation Under God
HERE:
http://www.constitution.org/primarysources/primarysources.h tml


What Principles are in power today in America?


Its a waste of good time
Jen writes: 12:10 PM EST

Hi lonestar. I’m really not stalking you. I was hoping someone else would answer the question you posed, but since it doesn’t look like anyone is going to.
===
ts:
You are welcome to engage him and run around in circles if you like.
Its all you will get

There is no answer for him, that he accepts, outside of he is the only voice that ever lived who knows it all.

Hope I answered your question of why I do not bother with this man any longer.
Been there done that and have better things to do

Stu
You say "Chhristianity is distinguished by the extent to which its adherents are required to believe literally things that are absurd."

You mean things you don't believe? To say they are absurd is to say they are unreasonable, but they can't be proven one way or another.

Talent's Beam
You say "Liberty comes from God, and that leaves the fools without this Liberty cause they reject God, yet the truth is, God has rejected them and allowed them to think they are so smart and prove how stupidity is their own self built prison"

But Christianity teaches submission to God. In order to submit, two things must be true, you are to begin with at liberty to chose, and if you so choose, you give up that liberty when you submit. So explain again how liberty comes from God? Include reference to how Adam and Eve had to disobey God's command to gain knowledge and liberty to choose between good and evil.

"How the dumbest people, you have come across are the ones who think they are smarter than everyone else"

So why do you think you're smarter and that your opinions have more value?

"God deliver me from these fools"

Not even God can save you from yourself, only you can do that by following Jesus. But I suggest you first take the beam out of your own eye.

"Law of God and Natures God"

Still rewriting history, I see. Opinions are of value only in as much as they align with reality. It's "Laws of Nature and Nature's God".

"Justyn Martyr"

First Christian to merge Christianity with Greek philosophy. Just a little history.

See this Jen
"Justyn Martyr"

First Christian to merge Christianity with Greek philosophy. Just a little history.
====
No
He was already educated in Greek philosophy, and had rejected all of it that was wrong for Christian Principles, using sound reason.





Greek Philosophy did not over take Christianity, but Christianity over took Greek Philosophy.

Expansion of the church

Nothing is so remarkable about this era as the expansion of the church, geographically. Starting in Jerusalem in about AD 50, by the end of the third century Christianity had penetrated to most of the Roman world..
The extent which the church achieved is shown well in this map:
http://www.becomingcloser.org/History/new_pa1.jpg



The testimony of the ancient writers who were not Christians can fairly be summarized by two things:

* First, the Christians believed strange things – things like the Resurrection. It was inconceivable to the scholarly that anyone could believe such things.
* Second, the Christians themselves were loyal, law-abiding citizens, given to charity. Indeed one emperor complained that the Christians not only took care of their own poor but the rest of Rome’s as well.

They were seen as "extremists" and the rulers were scared of Christianity and its spreading influence.

All the way here, to America, and the Principles that established America, Christian.


Justyn Martyr, Justyn was one of the first to attempt to harmonize Christianity with Greek philosophy alright. His appeals to reason, his clear exposition of the faith, led him to debate both with the Jews and with the Greek philosophers.

His analysis of what Christians believe tells us a great deal about how Christians used the New Testament. Justyn was martyred about AD 165; evidently bringing faith and reason together was dangerous then too.

Christians have always been reasonable, as seen in the United States Constitution, written by Christians.






Jen
Hiya!

Jen "I’m really not stalking you."

Not at all. I enjoy our discussions. If I left you hanging in previous thread, let me know and I'll go back. Only so much time though.

me "If Christianity adopted and adapted to these principles, that is good, but can someone think of a principle unique to Christianity?"

you citing John A. Hardon, S.J. in a paper entitled Morals and Theology, here is what’s unique to Christianity: "It is axiomatic in the Christian faith that religion and morality cannot be separated, at the risk of destroying the essence of moral conduct and leaving man's will a prey to his passions and unreasoning drives."

But that is true of every religion and philosophy I know of. It's not unique.

He goes on "He told them, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind, That is the greatest commandment. It comes first."

But that is not a moral command, morality has to do with choices between good and evil in interaction with others. Your relation with Jesus is not moral, but spiritual. Note, I am not arguing that your beliefs do not influence you to be morally good, still, I would think, most of that comes from examples from Jesus as man, not as God.

"...presupposing God as divine lawgiver without whom morals would be without objective foundation"

But this presupposition is faulty for if morals are objective and not subjective, absolute and not relativistic, then they are so regardless the question of God.

Jen
...

Concerning a natural moral order, the Scholastic Franciscus Suarez (I assume your familiar with), from _De Legibus ac Deo Legislatore_, 1619: "Even though God did not exist, or did not make use of His reason, or did not judge rightly of things, if there is in man such a dictate of right reason to guide him, it would have had the same nature of law as it now has.[/quote]

And on the same natural moral order, Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius, from _De Iure Belli ac Pacis_, 1625: "What we have been saying would have a degree of validity even if we should concede that which cannot be conceded without the utmost wickedness, that there is no God."


Father John A. Hardon: "Built into Judaeo-Christianity is the fact that God has specially entered the world of human knowledge and communicated to mankind a revelation by which He teaches what men should believe and do as a condition of their salvation."

First off, Judeo-Christianity is Christian, not Judaic, and prior to it's coinage in the 50s, it was generally used in reference to animosity between the two religions, not compatibility.

Second, if that's a fact why do he and so many have great difficulty explaining God and faith? If it's a matter of knowledge, even revealed, there ought to be reasonable explanations.

Father John A. Hardon: "Christianity lays stress on the need for God's intervention to teach men what they could never or only with difficulty have learned otherwise."

Judaism depended on contracts between God and His Chosen People. Mohammed claimed the same. Again, not unique.

Jen
Father John A. Hardon: "The same mode of reasoning may be applied to the moral law, which is the logical consequence of God's existence, since it is unthinkable that an allwise Creator would establish an order in the universe without wanting us to observe it, and place sanctions on our disobedience. So, too, we reason to the presence of spiritual forces in nature from the effects they produce that are not material, i.e., not perceptible to the senses."

And yet I think it, and many others have as well. That it's unthinkable to him is not reason moral law must be the logical consequence of God's existence. Again, if moral law if absolute and objective then it is so regardless the question of God. And if spiritual forces did produce unnatural effects in nature, then they would violate the very laws of nature. Why would God create laws only to violate them? Seems most unreasonable.

Father John A. Hardon: "We are able to think in terms of universal concepts.... All these realities, though abstract and spiritual, or even divine, we may recognize and in some degree understand without special intervention on the part of God. Just using our faculties of sense and reason on the objects of nature will yield a considerable harvest of truth."

OK. But I think he confuses physical natural law and moral natural law.

Jen
Father John A. Hardon: "But revelation, properly so-called, is not natural. The truths it communicates may be naturally knowable like the Ten Commandments, or above reason like the Trinity, but the mode of communication is not by way of rational deduction or natural intuition. It is always a personal manifestation from God to man, whereby He speaks and man listens; He breaks through the normal channels of cognition and addresses Himself directly to the human mind – whether by infusing knowledge or stimulating the senses or any way He chooses to convey His thoughts without dependence on the laws of nature."

If so then he should explain exactly how it happens, in ways that are testable, falsifiable, since he's making scientific claims about "infusing knowledge" and "stimulating the senses". Besides to comprehend, understand and know these things requires reason. Case in point, Trinity, it cannot be known by reason, as he says, but relegated to mystery, and unquestionly believed. Nor can it be communicated. Nor can faith. Nor can God.

Father John A. Hardon: "As regards naturally knowable truths, the verdict of history is that without special illumination from on high beyond the ordinary processes of nature, the generality of men would not attain the fullness and perfection of religious and moral knowledge."

The verdict of history? From our last discussion, Jen, you should know, from your litany of evils in the world, this illumination has made no significant difference.

Jen
Father John A. Hardon: "As a result men easily persuade themselves that what they do not wish to be true is false or at least doubtful.”

Which is just as true of Father John A. Hardon a anyone.

Jen "As much as you would like to believe that Christianity has no unique principle that one couldn’t get in some other way, nothing could be farther from the truth."

Still waiting for something unique other than what I said about a personal relationship with God.

Jen "You might get bits and pieces of the truth elsewhere, but it will always remain incomplete. Face it, Christianity has it all."

Subjective belief. One held by believers of any religion. Again, not unique.

When the Apostle Paul
Left Jerusalem for Rome as a prisoner, being taken to Rome, he went into a world of people who knew nothing of Jesus Christ.

Paul never went to Rome with an Army, only his reasoning and understanding based in Knowledge of God.
This is all he had.
He had no riches nor any influence among the Romans.
He was just one man.

What Jesus taught Paul is the only thing Paul took to Rome under chains of a prisoner.

Rome was the World Super Power of Paul's day.
And also the power of world government Jesus Christ Himself was born into, the Son of God

The Principle of the Separation of Church and State comes from the Wisdom and Teaching of none other than Jesus Christ.

Mark 12:17 -
And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.
And they marvelled at him.

A marvelous answer and is the TRUE Faith Jefferson was talking about where the Christina Religion had been corrupted in the European States.
By both Catholics and Protestants, and outlawed here.

The separation of Church and State.

Christian Principle that comes from the Founder of Christianity, Jesus Christ.
Not Greek philosophy.

From this one man, the Apostle Paul who was armed with nothing but his reasoning ability, he converted the ENTIRE known world of his day.

Which Reasonableness, is written about by none other than John Locke.

After all, he is the author of this very Subject
Named "The Reasonableness of Christianity"

http://www.piney.com/Lockereasonableness.html
The Reasonableness of Christianity - John Locke
John Locke said that "
God reveald His Word through Jesus Christ, and that this revelation is reasonable to the common mind"

http://www.piney.com/Lockereasonableness.html

The US Constitution is reasonable, written by Christians using their reason, after much prayer.

Talent's Misreading
me "First Christian to merge Christianity with Greek philosophy. Just a little history."

Talent: "No He was already educated in Greek philosophy, and had rejected all of it that was wrong for Christian Principles, using sound reason."

In _Apologia_ he calls Socrates and Heraclitus Christian. He identifies the Stoic doctrine of the "seminal word" with the Word, Logos. This is a merging of two philosophical systems.

"Greek Philosophy did not over take Christianity"

Did say it did, said only that Martyr merged the two. You're arguing a straw man. You can't seem to read Jefferson right, can't read Adams right, not surprising you can't read me right. It's all just simple English.

"but Christianity over took Greek Philosophy"

Hardly, what all these argued was natural law--the Laws of Nature--next we see it in Aquinas, who borrowed from Cicero and the Philosopher (Aristotle), and following him the Scholastics, and Grotius whom I just cited, from there Locke, and then the Declaration's "Laws of Nature and Nature's God" which you would like to rewrite as God's laws.

As Rothbard argues, _The Ethics of Liberty_, the two are compatible, one and the same. Yet you wish to erase the one in your misread revisionist history.






Greek Philosophy did not over take Christianity, but Christianity over took Greek Philosophy.

More Principles of Christianity
Concerns the family.
Hand and Glove fit with the Laws of Nature and Natures God.
Seeing that Gos is the Author of Nature and the Christian Faith.
There is no conflict in Natural Law and Spiritual Law.
We learn Spiritual Law by both Revelation and Reason.

I do not need s spiritual revelation to discover basic Natural Law, but I do need Revelation of Spiritual Law that is found in the Very Creation of Nature.
One man and one woman is one such Natural Law, ignored for sure, by lots of nations.
Yet is still the best of all situations for happiness and family life.

This law of nature is also taught in Christianity.


Matthew 19:3-12
3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?

4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Just because many today professing to be of the Christian faith divorce for any cause outside the one Jesus gave us, does not change this Natural Law as the best of all for happiness in Marriage.

But is also a Founding Principle of Christianity, as taught by the Founder Himself.

Everything said after this is just commentary.

Men can deny it, they can lie against it, they can do anything they please with it, as God Himself has given every man this Liberty to decide for himself.
Free Will itself is a Law of Nature and Natures God.
Jesus did not use force on any man, He just used REASON.

The most Reasonable man who ever lived is Jesus Christ.
Who is also the Son of God

Instead of finding reason
From this guy who follows me around denying, accusing and using non sequiturs of unreasonable and false arguments, he is not worthy of the time it would take to address each of his unreasonable arguments.

You just go in circles if you try.

I mention this to explain why I now ignore his offerings of false conclusions dreamed up out of imaginations.

Talking to him is like talking to a child, lost in an imaginary world, and trying to bring him back into the real world.
And the child refuses to return, preferring his imaginary world of game playing.

Christianity spread all across the world from Jerusalem to Philadelphia, and America is the last best hope for the Liberty of men.

The enemies of the Gospel of Liberty the Founders believed and gave the United States is under attack by lies, propaganda and the evil of very wicked men.

This is the reason they show up on thread slike this, driven by a fanatical hate for Jesus Christ, and deny that all the while make it obvious to all who can discern a snake from a man.


URGENT! Boycott CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC,OPRAH
URGENT! Boycott CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC,OPRAH
ESPECIALLY CNN!

Boycott these integral organizations to the Obama campaign.
STOP OBAMA!

WATCH SHORT FILM FOR MORE INFO ABOUT THIS BOYCOTT:

http://www.atlah.org/broadcast/ndnr07-28-08.html

If you’re a responsible America-loving person, why let these so-called “news” stations assault your soul with lies?

SPREAD THE WORD! COPY AND PASTE THIS TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS!

Instead watch FOX or better yet watch sports, comedies, nature programs, religious shows, movies, or national geographic shows—ANYTHING but CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and OPRAH, especially CNN.

It may be hard at first but after the first few days you’ll see just how easy it is and how much better for your mind and soul once you get away from watching these “PROGRAMS…”

Boycott Who?
MoniQue -

I tried watching Fox News once, but it made me nauseous. I have never seen a bigger group of misfits on one channel. They don't gather information they voice their preconceived ideas. That is why I moved to the internet to get my information. There is still a lot of baloney here but also brilliant minds speaking the truth. If all you do is watch Fox News, your IQ will drop 50 points. Save yourself and read what is on the internet.

talent scout
---Morons never shut up, nor can be reasoned with.---

You've been evidence of this, time and again.

You continue to try and spread your little fairy tale despite all evidence that it is nothing more than another compilation of tales from the middle east.

Bill of Rights, all Christian Principles
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievance


Christian Principle

Luke 20:25 -
And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.


Faith in God is Religion
Speech is God given
Press is an extension of God given speech
Peaceful Assembly is what Church's are about
The Right to petition if God given and is a basic teaching of scripture, prayer is petition.

These Rights from God are unlimited in applications for all men.
All men's speech, up to them what they choose to say.
The application of every single one of the Rights of the people mentioned in the 1st Amendment are applicable to believer and non believer, and is how truth works for us all.

This is the Liberty of the Creator, His Truth can be applied in hundreds and thousands of ways.

1st Amendment, based in Christian Principles.

Not Greek or Roman philosophy.

No more than any of the other Amendments are, all based in Christian Teaching and Principle


lonestarblues 1
If you don’t mind I’m not going to address everything you brought up. I just thought I would pick a few things you said to respond to . . .

LSB: most of that comes from examples from Jesus as man, not as God.

Jen: To a Christian, your statement makes no sense. Jesus is true God and True man. There always and only exists one being. Something can’t come from Jesus that does not come from God as well or vice versa. Remember, God is eternal. “Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end “


LSB: Why would God create laws only to violate them? Seems most unreasonable

Jen: God doesn’t violate the natural order . . .

From the internet encycopedia of philosophy:

The force of this line of reasoning to deny that natural laws must describe the actual course of events. Natural laws do not describe absolutely the limits of what can and cannot happen in nature. They only describe nature to the extent that it operates according to laws. To put the matter differently, we might say that natural laws only describe what can happen as a result of natural causes; they do not tell us what can happen when a supernatural cause is present. As Michael Levine (1989:67) has put the point:

lonestarblues 2
Suppose the laws of nature are regarded as nonuniversal or incomplete in the sense that while they cover natural events, they do not cover, and are not intended to cover, non-natural events such as supernaturally caused events if there are or could be any. A physically impossible occurrence would not violate a law of nature because it would not be covered by (i.e. would not fall within the scope of) such a law.



Jen: Don’t you see? Your reaction to this topic is very similar to the gay community demanding we call their unions “marriage.” Even when we say, they will be permitted their civil unions that guarantee equal insurance and benefit rights, they aren’t happy. Why is that? Why do they insist we call it marriage? Because they know marriage is different than a civil union. They know as well as we do that it has an elevated status. There is something more meaningful and unique about marriage. They recognize that marriage is the real deal. What they don’t realize is that the reason it is the real deal is precisely because it embodies truth and the way things are supposed to be. And marriage only remains true when it is between a man and a woman and the original definition is kept

lonestarblues 3
You fight for some admission that equates secular morality with Christian morality. IMO, it’s b/c you realize Christianity is the real deal. You seek the dignity it represents. And although, as I have already admitted countless times morality can be achieved outside of Christianity, it will NEVER be equal. It is not the same. You are searching for an acceptance and an approval, similar to the gay community, which will never happen. Morality performed outside of doing so for God is equivalent to a civil union and will never be the same, no matter what you tell yourself.


There was another thing you mentioned in an earlier post that I wanted to comment on. It isn’t a huge thing, but I found it very interesting.

LSB: On another forum someone asked where in the Bible you find “God helps those who help themselves" and a number of Christians cited passages like 2 Thessalonians 3 and such. Fact is it's not in the Bible, it's an aphorism from Franklin's “Poor Richard's Almanac”. If it doesn't appear in the Bible, then where did Franklin come up with the idea? What does this say about the 18th century Christian view of God?

No need to answer, but it is an interesting question, even for a nonbeliever like myself, considering the influence of Christianity.

Jen: You are quite right; “God helps those who help themselves” is not in the Bible. It has been my experience that the only time that phrase is actually used is in a condescending manner. I often hear it come up when a group of women are engaged in some kind of gossip that they like to tell themselves they are passing off as not gossip, but “prayer concern”.


2nd A, Christian Principle
Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Luke 22:36 -
Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Matthew 24:43 -
But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.


A good man will not stand aside and suffer his house to be broken up by a thief and a robber, let alone a rapist or a murderer.

The right to keep and bear arms is recognized in the Bill of Rights as one of the God Given Rights Jefferson spoke of in the Declaration of Independence.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

The right to defend ones life is recognized law all over America in every State.
Being slowly chipped at, but is still the Law.
Law based in Judeo/Christian Principles.

Exodus 22:2 -
If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him.

Jesus Christ taught from the Old Testament, so of course its Christian beliefs.

Christianity is built on the Prophets and the Law of Moses.
Ephesians 2:20 -
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

lonestarblues 4
It usually goes something like, “Did you hear so and so’s husband just lost his job? Yeah, they don’t seem too concerned about it. I just noticed she’s wearing a new dress and he doesn’t seem to be looking too hard for a job. They seem to think God will just take care of everything. Don’t they know, God helps those who help themselves?”

This phrase is typically used to make the person saying it appear as a better “Christian” and that their own good fortune must somehow be credited to their own hard work. As if they want to take some of the credit owed God for themselves. The reason this phrase is not in the Bible is b/c Jesus would not make such a trite, generic, comment. It’s like people reduce good, solid principles that one would find in Christianity to some meaningless platitude. For example, you would never find in the Bible, “Why can’t we all just get along”. Such a silly comment really that for some reason someone would take to be a Christian principle.

Here’s what Jesus really said:

Passage Luke 12:51-53:
51 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. 52 From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law."

You argue that Christianity has stolen from others, but I argue if a Christian steals some principle from something other than Christianity it tends to be not such a great principle in the first place. I’d stick to what Jesus really and fully said and not some watered down version you often find in other philosophies.


Talent Lies
"I mention this to explain why I now ignore his offerings of false conclusions dreamed up out of imaginations."

But you don't. You keep responding to what I say. So that's a lie.

Lie!

Lies?

Yes, the fallowing is another example of your lying:

"This is the reason they show up on thread slike this, driven by a fanatical hate for Jesus Christ, and deny that all the while make it obvious to all who can discern a snake from a man."

I love Jesus the same way Jefferson did. So please don't lie.

And your God said thou shalt not lie.

Jen
"If you don’t mind I’m not going to address everything you brought up."

That's cool. We should stick to one or two points per exchange.

LSB: "most of that comes from examples from Jesus as man, not as God."

Jen: "To a Christian, your statement makes no sense. Jesus is true God and True man."

Sense has to do with meaning and that is a matter of reason. That someone is both God and man makes no sense. It's generally called a mystery because it cannot be explained. It's a matter of faith.

LSB: "Why would God create laws only to violate them? Seems most unreasonable"

Jen: "God doesn’t violate the natural order . . ."

Hume, _Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding_: "Though the Being to whom the miracle is ascribed, be Almighty, it [the miracle] does not, upon that account, become a whit more probable, since it is impossible for us to know the attributes or actions of such a Being, otherwise than from the experience of his productions, in the usual course of nature. This still reduces us to past observations, and obliges us to compare the instances of the violation of truth in the testimony of men, with those of the violations of the laws of nature by miracles, in order to judge which of them is most likely and probable."

Jen
Jen "Suppose the laws of nature are regarded as nonuniversal or incomplete in the sense that while they cover natural events, they do not cover, and are not intended to cover, non-natural events such as supernaturally caused events if there are or could be any. A physically impossible occurrence would not violate a law of nature because it would not be covered by (i.e. would not fall within the scope of) such a law."

Your conclusion doesn't really follow from your premise. The point is that physical event, heretofor undiscovered and undiscribed, will then have been discovered and eventually described, even if it meant refining the laws of nature, as Einstein did Newton's laws. And the real point here is supernatural events, and how they might cause natural effects, neither of which can be discovered or described or even known. Thus the point Hume raises about which is more likely and probable, the miracle or the belief in them.

Jen "Don’t you see? Your reaction to this topic is very similar to the gay community demanding we call their unions 'marriage.'"

But don't you see, you're the one arguing for recognition of miracles, not me.

Jen "You fight for some admission that equates secular morality with Christian morality. IMO, it’s b/c you realize Christianity is the real deal. You seek the dignity it represents."

Again, quite the opposite. What I argue is natural law, a tradition older than any religion. I think this goes back to who is seeking truth, the one who questions, or the one who has answers. I ask questions because I seek truth. You believe you already know the answers. But if it make you feel to to believe that, go ahead, you will never know.

Jen
Jen "Morality performed outside of doing so for God is equivalent to a civil union and will never be the same, no matter what you tell yourself."

I don't see how you reconcile the belief morals have something to do with your relationship with God and your knowledge morals have only to do with man choosing between good and evil in his interaction with others. Your belief and knowledge contradict each other. You know one thing is true, yet you want to believe it's not.

Jen "You are quite right; “God helps those who help themselves” is not in the Bible. It has been my experience that the only time that phrase is actually used is in a condescending manner. I often hear it come up when a group of women are engaged in some kind of gossip that they like to tell themselves they are passing off as not gossip, but 'prayer concern'."

That's interesting. So what Talent is telling everyone about God want liberty for man is nonsense. What God want is not liberty but submission, obedience, worship.

Jen
Jen "You argue that Christianity has stolen from others, but I argue if a Christian steals some principle from something other than Christianity it tends to be not such a great principle in the first place."

Why do you twist what I said? That's insulting. I did not say Christianity steals, I said it borrows, it adopts and adapts. You know this to be true, you know, for instance, how heavily Aquinas borrowed from Aristotle and Cicero for his arguments on natural law. That is not stealing. It is building on the wisdom of those who came before you and passing it on to those who follow.

Not such a great principle. Do you say that about the Golden Rule that Jesus preached, that you have repeated here? It has existed in one form or another in many civilizations, religions and philosophies prior. Just look at the Old Testament for one source. I can supply others.

Listen, if you really think I seek your or anyone's acceptance here, that I think we have talked enough, you have misunderstood me.

talent scout
Amendment I…
…And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.---

Since when does freedom of religion parallel to taxation?

Here are some that directly relate to freedom of religion.

Exodus 23:24 Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images.

Deut 5:7 Thou shalt have none other gods before me.


The 1st amendment contradicts Christian doctrine. There are no statements in the bible that stress freedom of conscience.

lonestarblues 1
LSB: "Why would God create laws only to violate them? Seems most unreasonable"

Jen: "God doesn’t violate the natural order . . ."

Hume, _Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding_: "Though the Being to whom the miracle is ascribed, be Almighty, it [the miracle] does not, upon that account, become a whit more probable, since it is impossible for us to know the attributes or actions of such a Being, otherwise than from the experience of his productions, in the usual course of nature. This still reduces us to past observations, and obliges us to compare the instances of the violation of truth in the testimony of men, with those of the violations of the laws of nature by miracles, in order to judge which of them is most likely and probable."

Jen: more excerpts from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy . . .


“:There is something clearly right about Hume's argument. The principle he cites surely resembles the one that we properly use when we discredit reports in tabloid newspapers about alien visitors to the White House or tiny mermaids being found in sardine cans. Nevertheless the argument has prompted a great many criticisms.

lonestarblues 2
Some of this discussion makes use of Bayesian probabilistic analysis; John Earman, for example, argues that when the principles of Hume's arguments "are made explicit and examined under the lens of Bayesianism, they are found to be either vapid, specious, or at variance with actual scientific practice" (Earman 2000). The Bayesian literature will not be discussed here, though Earman's discussion of the power of multiple witnessing deserves mention. Earman argues that even if the prior probability of a miracle occurring is very low, if there are enough independent witnesses, and each is sufficiently reliable, its occurrence may be established as probable. Thus if Hume's concern is to show that we cannot in principle ever have good reason to believe testimony to a miracle, he would appear to be wrong about this (Earman 2000: See particularly Ch. 18 and following). Of course the number of witnesses required might be very large, and it may be that none of the miracles reported in any scripture will qualify. It is true that some of the miracles of the Bible are reported to have occurred in the presence of a good number of witnesses; the miracle of the loaves and fishes is a good example, which according to Mark (Mark 6:30-44) was witnessed by 5,000 people. But have already noticed that the testimony of one person, or even of four, that some event was witnessed by a multitude is not nearly the same as having the testimony of the multitude itself.

lonestarblues 3
Another objection against Hume's argument is that it makes use of a method that is unreliable; that is, it may have us reject reports that are true or accept those that are false. Consider the fact that a particular combination of lottery numbers will generally be chosen against very great odds. If the odds of the particular combination chosen in the California Lottery last week were 40 million to 1, the probability of that combination being chosen is very low. Assuming that the likelihood of any given event being misreported in the Los Angeles Times is greater than that, we would not be able to trust the Times to determine which ticket is the winner.
The unreliability objection, made out in this particular way, seems to have a fairly easy response. There is no skeptical challenge to our being justified in believing the report of a lottery drawing; that is, reports of lottery drawings are reports of ordinary events, like reports of rainstorms and presidential press conferences. They do not require particularly strong testimony to be credible, and in fact we may be justified in believing the report of a lottery drawing even if it came from an otherwise unreliable source, such as a tabloid newspaper. This is surely because we know in advance that when the lottery is drawn, whatever particular combination of numbers may be chosen will be chosen against very great odds, so that we are guaranteed to get one highly improbable combination or another. Despite the fact that the odds against any particular combination are very great, all of the other particular outcomes are equally unlikely, so we have no prejudice against any particular combination. We know that people are going to win the lottery from time to time; we have no comparable assurance that anyone will ever be raised from the dead.

lonestarblues 4
Nevertheless if we are to be able to make progress in science, we must be prepared to revise our understanding of natural law, and there ought to be circumstances in which testimony to an unprecedented event would be credible. For example, human beings collectively have seen countless squid, few of which have ever exceeded a length of two feet. For this reason reports of giant squid have, in the past, been sometimes dismissed as fanciful; the method employed by Hume in his Balance of Probabilities Argument would seem to rule out the possibility of our coming to the conclusion, on the basis of testimony, that such creatures exist- yet they may be found in the deep water near Antarctica. Similarly, someone living beyond the reach of modern technology might well reject reports of electric lighting and airplanes. Surely we should be skeptical when encountering a report of something so novel. But science depends for its progress on an ability to revise even its most confident assertions about the natural world.”
Jen: There is much more I didn’t include and also a section that goes on to discuss if Hume’s argument begs the question.



LSB: I think this goes back to who is seeking truth, the one who questions, or the one who has answers. I ask questions because I seek truth. You believe you already know the answers

Jen: I am continually seeking truth. At this point in my journey, I believe the way to find truth is to seek the face of God. You may seek truth from yourself or your fellow man, but I don’t think you can claim that as any better of a search than mine.

“It is madness to trust in God . . .! And is it not greater madness to trust in oneself, or in other men?” – St. Josemaria Escriva


lonestarblues 5
LSB: That's interesting. So what Talent is telling everyone about God want liberty for man is nonsense. What God want is not liberty but submission, obedience, worship

Jen: I haven’t been reading Talent’s posts, so I have no idea what he’s said. But it does not take away my freedom to simply realize that everything I have comes from God. Am I less free to enjoy nature and life simply b/c I don’t own it? Or haven’t created it?


LSB: Why do you twist what I said? That's insulting. I did not say Christianity steals, I said it borrows, it adopts and adapts. You know this to be true, you know, for instance, how heavily Aquinas borrowed from Aristotle and Cicero for his arguments on natural law. That is not stealing. It is building on the wisdom of those who came before you and passing it on to those who follow.

Jen: Sorry, I guess steal was a poor choice of words. I guess I took your borrow comments to be insulting and I must have in my mind heard “steal”. I suppose you don’t mean it as an insult, but I’m sorry I am unable to believe that Jesus had to borrow anything. If some of the things Jesus mentioned resemble things from other religions or philosophies, I see it as simply that the others actually got something right even before Jesus came along. So what? (even a blind pig finds an acorn every now and then) Or if others before Christ happened to get something right (which as I have always admitted is possible) it still could be incomplete.

lonestarblues 6
LSB: Not such a great principle. Do you say that about the Golden Rule that Jesus preached, that you have repeated here? It has existed in one form or another in many civilizations, religions and philosophies prior. Just look at the Old Testament for one source. I can supply others.

Jen: What was Jesus’s first command? “Love thy Lord they God with they whole heart and soul” Without this first command, the golden rule is incomplete.

Besides, never more than today has the golden rule been reduced to a trite nicety. And unfortunately one that has been morphed into some kind of “tolerance” to all attitude, which Jesus did not espouse. The golden rule in the way Jesus intended has been misunderstood. When a principle like that exists, it can be misinterpreted or a little vague to have any practical value to people without more guidance on how we are called to Love thy neighbor and what exactly that means.

LSB: Listen, if you really think I seek your or anyone's acceptance here, that I think we have talked enough, you have misunderstood me.

Jen: I don’t think it’s something you are probably aware of. I do think though on some level perhaps you are trying to avoid seeing the uniqueness of Christianity. I apologize if I have misunderstood you, but on that note, I think perhaps I should stick to continuing my prayers for you, but discontinuing are discussions.

Continue to seek the face of truth, lonestar . . . .

Jen
Jen citing some encyclopedia "Some of this discussion makes use of Bayesian probabilistic analysis"

"Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: 'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.'"
--Mark Twain

Jen citing still an encyclopedia "The unreliability objection"

But that objection can be applied to itself in an endless, absurd regression. It can also be applied to the believer in miracles. Hume wasn't arguing abstractions, but practical decisions about incredibility.

Jen "There is much more I didn’t include and also a section that goes on to discuss if Hume’s argument begs the question."

I'm not much interested in endless encyclopedia cut'n'paste I doubt you understand, a short paragraph, fine, otherwise put it in your own words, please.

Jen: "I am continually seeking truth."

But you don't indicate than in your ready-made answers. In general your answer to most every question is God. But you have not answer, what is God. Thus your answers generally explain with inexplicable unknowns. And you are extremely adamant about those answers being correct. But a reasoinable person knows you cannot argue from unkowns.

Jen "You may seek truth from yourself or your fellow man, but I don’t think you can claim that as any better of a search than mine."

What's the difference? You are searching from yourself, and by your many citations, your fellow man.

Here's the difference I see. I am searching for truth, whatever that may be. You are seeking confirmation of a preconceived truth.

Jen
St. Josemaria Escriva: "And is it not greater madness to trust in oneself, or in other men?”

OK, another of your misunderstandings, you see the difference between us as you trust God and I trust myself. Gong, wrong, you haven't been listening, but rather assuming a common if not trivial response to a nonbeliever. Keep guessing.

Jen "it does not take away my freedom to simply realize that everything I have comes from God."

But that wasn't the question. The question was how do you find freedom in submission?

Jen "I am unable to believe that Jesus had to borrow anything"

Man borrows from his fellow man. Are you now saying Jesus was not a man?

Jen "I see it as simply that the others actually got something right even before Jesus came along. So what?"

Then it's not unique. Remember, you came into this discussion trying to answer my question, what about Christianity, besides personal relationship with God, is unique.

Jen "Or if others before Christ happened to get something right (which as I have always admitted is possible) it still could be incomplete."

And if Christ was a man then his would be as incomplete.

Jen "What was Jesus’s first command?"

The discussion is about morality.

Jen "Besides, never more than today has the golden rule been reduced to a trite nicety."

Going back to previous thread's discussion, you again admit, Chistianity has had little effect on man.

Jen " I do think though on some level perhaps you are trying to avoid seeing the uniqueness of Christianity."

Explain how that could be when I'm the one asking the question what is unique about Christianity?

Jen "I apologize if I have misunderstood you, but on that note, I think perhaps I should stick to continuing my prayers for you, but discontinuing are discussions."

Accepted. Our discussions should discontinue until we can talk as equals. Luke 22:26-27.

lonestarblues
> You say "Chhristianity is distinguished by the extent to which its adherents are required to believe literally things that are absurd."
You mean things you don't believe? To say they are absurd is to say they are unreasonable, but they can't be proven one way or another. <
________________________________________________
Whether I believe it or not is irrelevant. It is objectively absurd to claim that a man had only one human biological parent, or walked on the surface of water or walked again after his own execution. These are fundamental tenets of christianity, they are indeed unreasonable and if empirical science has any meaning at is completely fair to say these events did not happen. I could claim that the fairies in my garden make the plants grow and you wouldn’t be able to disprove that either. Science can’t disprove a negative. All the same, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and christianity provides none for these dogmas, just to list three. Christianity characteristically expects absurd literal beliefs, way ahead of any other system.

Stuart

Jen,
What does the bible matter if it is not true?

It is just another book of thoughts and ideas that one can glean lessons. It is not the only book or even the best. In fact, some lessons of the bible are quite unethical, in my opinion.

There are many examples that disprove the bible as a literal historical fact. The easiest to disprove are the worldwide flood story and the creation story because they stand on evidence of absence and do not have to rely on philosophical arguments or absence of evidence.

Conservative obsession
Throughout this site there is a recurring obsession with the writings, utterings and breakfast choices of the 'founding fathers'. If we leave to one side the question of brutality to the prior inhabitants, the founders were enterprising people who were breaking new ground and seeking a better way all the time. Would they not now laugh with contempt at the current idolisation of what they wrote? Surely they would expect us to continue their tradition of exploring still better ways. The assumtion that because the founders saw christianty as a basis for ethics (if they really did) that we still should do so must be something that they would mock as backward thinking.

Stuart

The bible
The lessons are deep, your understanding of them leaves much to be desired, posters #1, and #2.

Somehow your opinion of the dreator is supposed to mean anything of substance because you uttered it. Fool.

The bible is an owners manual for humans. It tells you what and what not to do. It offers no punishments like we have in law, here on earth . Human experiences over the milleniums have shown the bible to be correct.

Get over yourself and learn something posters #1, and #2.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.