Posted on 01/26/2005 9:46:21 AM PST by 7thson
When I pulled into the parking lot this morning, I saw a car covered with sacrilegious bumper stickers. It seemed obvious to me that the owner was craving attention. I’m sure he was also seeking to elicit anger from people of faith. The anger helps the atheist to justify his atheism. And, all too often, the atheist gets exactly what he is looking for.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Not hardly the same. One is a marriage, one is resume padding. But, not sure what this has to do with atheism. I think the man marrying for his career is an amoral ass whether he belives in God or not. Likewise, the marriage for love, is a marriage whether or not the couple has a belief in god.
What about vanity plates? States have denied Choose Life vanities.
By all means, if you have nothing to celebrate, don't. Like I said, a monument to atheism is absence of a monument. If, on the other hand you wish to share your celebrations with the theists, do come in.
You didn't! You're welcome.
The young man who spoke to Jesus was convinced he was "good". His adherence to the commandments was the definition of "good" in human eyes. Jesus is saying "No one this side of Heaven is good".
...and, if He was denying His own goodness, He was contradicting what He said as quoted in John 8:46.
(In other words, "Right on.")
Dan
I take it, then, that you are in favor of blasphemy laws?
> I had no idea that people worshipped Darwin.
And they don't.
Do you worship a fish?
The word moral cannot be applied to what you do or don't do, at least by you. For you, whether you have been brainwashed by your parents or not, it's only a matter of actions and consequences.
God defines morality, not people, not societies, not traditions. You delude yourself in the one thing that you value above all else, your disbelief.
Don't misconstrue my attitude. I do not condemn you, I have no power to do that. And I don't dislike you or your beliefs.
It's not your fault. A man cannot force himself to believe what he does not believe.
Ah, you were serious. It would be a funny monument though.
Then you're changing your argument. Before, you were trying to argue that an act is intrinsically moral, irrespective of motivation. But here, you're arguing that the same act can be moral or immoral, depending on motivation.
The Christian has no such tension. Motivation matters. And as I've developed at some length, the greatest and all-overriding moral imperative is love for God. It trumps everything else, or taints it by its absence.
Dan
Of course.
Precisely. An athiest who doesn't want to say the words UNDER GOD can either avoid saying those words or not say the Pledge at all. The point is (again) NOBODY is REQUIRING anyone to PLEDGE allegience to anything (God, country, etc.)
Newdow is an idiot.
Upon that we can agree. He's also a trouble maker who wants to make the 90%+ people who WANT to say the Pledge AS IS suffer so he doesn't have to hear the words "UNDER GOD".
"Do you think some people are unable to believe in God? Like they are just born that way?
"
Of course I think that. I've said plainly that I'm unable to believe in any sort of deity. Was I born that way? Not at all.
It's a bad philosophy; that's why Communists are godless. They try to create their own universal law. Can't be done.
Spoken like someone who thinks religious beliefs are flights of fancy.
How would you react if you thought your beliefs about G-d were true, as true as your beliefs about gravity?
Shalom.
Both Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox believe that works are part of the requirement for salvation.
But that still wasn't "good". "Good" is a worldy measurement which means nothing in Heaven. The "good" people will burn in Hell just as the "bad" people will walk the streets of gold. The rich young ruler was "good" in the eyes of the world. If we saw the ruler today, we would call him a "good Godly man".
Peter is a classic example. Peter was a screwup but Jesus looked past that. Peter needed Jesus because he was "bad". The ruler was "good" therefore he didn't need Jesus.
There is no good and bad in Christianity. There is obedience and disobedience.
IMO, if a state is going to allow 'vanity' plates, then they need to have an objective, unbiased process for identifying which varieties will be made available. Perhaps after X number of requests, or by petition or something. I can understand a state not wanting to have a thousand different varieties of plates. But there should be equal access to all viewpoints.
Joh 8:46 Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do you not believe Me?
I don't get the correlation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.