Posted on 05/05/2002 8:20:03 AM PDT by sarcasm
Edited on 05/07/2004 9:20:00 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
When members of the Metro Council express the necessity of ''putting God back into this country'' as a justification to post the Ten Commandments in government buildings, they are using code words of the Christian right. They send chills up my spine because what they really mean is: Let's return America to the days of illegal abortions, forced prayer in public schools, second-class citizenship for non-Christians, and gays and lesbians in the closet.
(Excerpt) Read more at tennessean.com ...
And you seem still blissfully unaware that you changed the subject.
If you look casually at the top of this thread, "The Ten Commandments" is clearly the subject.
My ability to read and to remain on topic is just fine, thank you.
I'll take that as a retraction of your claim that I "made stuff up."
As for the topic, it is NOT the Ten Commandments, it is the "hate-mongers behind Ten Commandments movement" of which my comments are right on target.
He'd never lie, nor distort information, nor use "his" hatred to attack the Church, would he?
Nah .... He's a liberal atheist ... We know "they're" all pure and innocent. Holey, perhaps, but pure and innocent.
< sarcasm off >
From what I have seen....there is a pretty large "Hater" clique of Freepers who would agree with the Article.
I stand corrected.
I unconsciously stumbled into a pervert homosexual site.
Sorry for the intrusion; I usually am able to see the false premise immediately, and I apologize for having failed to do so.
A fully arbitrary and capricious distinction.
Are you really saying that this quote is commonly held opinion of Christians? If you think so, then I feel sorry for you.
From your FR homepage. You don't want "religous socialism" jammed down your throat. Yet you see no problem mis-using what other people regard as scripture to justify your own opinion. You outright ignore that Jesus and his apostles all said that the Jewish ritual laws do not apply to those who believe in the Christ.
A fully arbitrary and capricious distinction, you say, yet one that was made by no less an authority than Jesus himself.
The Apostle Paul wrote, in Romans 3:21-22: "But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe."
And I am not a Christian. I'm an atheist.
I am an atheist who is not the least bothered by the public display of religious literature - - I call this freedom of speech.
I am an atheist who is not in the least bothered by the teaching of the Bible in the public schools - - it is a masterful work of literature.
I am not an atheist who has become just an anti-Christian like so many others that are so wrapped up in their own polemics, that they are willing to destroy this country just for the sake of opposing Christians. I agree with Christians and conservatives for entirely different reasons than what they express.
I also see the opposition to the Ten Commandments posted in public as intolerance and hatred for the Jews - - from whom it originated.
Doesn't matter to me. I am an atheist.
-
The Second Commandment (conveniently not enumerated in Catholic epitomes of the "Decalogue") prohibits the making of "any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth."
I must defer to Thomas Hobbes Leviathan...
Part III. Of a Christian Commonwealth. Chap. xxxviii. Of Eternal Life, Hell, Salvation, and Redemption.
[12] And first, for the tormentors, we have their nature and properties exactly and properly delivered by the names of the Enemy (or Satan), the Accuser (or Diabolus), the Destroyer (or Abaddon). Which significant names (Satan, Devil, Abaddon) set not forth to us any individual person, as proper names do, but only an office or quality, and are therefore appellatives, which ought not to have been left untranslated (as they are in the Latin and modern Bibles), because thereby they seem to be the proper names of demons, and men are the more easily seduced to believe the doctrine of devils, which at that time was the religion of the Gentiles, and contrary to that of Moses, and of Christ.
[13] And because by the Enemy, the Accuser, and Destroyer, is meant the enemy of them that shall be in the kingdom of God, therefore if the kingdom of God after the resurrection be upon the earth (as in the former Chapter I have shewn by Scripture it seems to be), the Enemy and his kingdom must be on earth also. For so also was it in the time before the Jews had deposed God. For God's kingdom was in Palestine, and the nations round about were the kingdoms of the Enemy; and consequently, by Satan is meant any earthly enemy of the Church.
Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness. Chap. xlvii. Of the Benefit that proceedeth from such Darkness.
[21] For from the time that the Bishop of Rome had gotten to be acknowledged for bishop universal, by pretense of successsion to St. Peter, their whole hiearchy (or kingdom of darkness) may be compared to the kingdom of fairies (that is, to the old wives' fables in England, concerning ghosts and spirits and the feats they play in the night). And if a man consider the original of this great ecclesiastical dominion, he will easily percieve that the Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof. For so did the Papacy start up on a sudden out of the ruins of that heathen empire.
[23] The fairies, in what nation soever they converse, have but one universal king, which some poets of ours call King Oberon; but the Scripture calls Beelzebub, prince of demons. The ecclesiastics likewise, in whose dominions soever they be found, acknowledge but one universal king, the Pope.
Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness. Chap. xlv. Of Demonology and other Relics of the Religion of the Gentiles
[16] And whereas a man can fancy shapes he never saw, making up a figure out of the parts of divers creatures, as the poets make their centaurs, chimeras and other monsters never seen, so can he also give matter to those shapes, and make them in wood, clay or metal. And these are also called images, not for the resemblance of any corporeal thing, but for the resemblance of some phantastical inhabitants of the brain of the maker. But in these idols, as they are originally in the brain, and as they are painted, carved moulded or molten in matter, there is a similitude of one to the other, for which the material body made by art may be said to be the image of the fantastical idol made by nature.
Forgive me, I'm not a Christian and have read your Bible only once in my life.
-
The ritual laws are no longer followed by Christians (fulfilled by Jesus) but the moral law, of which the Ten Commandments are part, are still in force. You are expected to try to follow them, ...
I'm an atheist. But thanks anyway for your thoughtful response and the link.
I am surprised by many of the so-called atheists. Anyone who tells me I am immoral is nothing different than any preacher or rabbi telling me I'm a "sinner."
Today, "morals" are defined by a quasi-religious philosophy based on esoteric hobgoblins.
"Morals" are nothing more than a deceptive replacement for the "avoidance of sin."
A greater number of "atheists" and "pagans" adopt the same tenets of the Judaic-Christian ideal. They subscribe to the Judaic fetishism of "sin." Most are so wrapped up in their own polemics that they have become nothing more than anti-Christians.
"Morals" are man-made construct. If you are a religiously inclined individual you would reject human "morality" in favor of spiritual guidance from the Holy Spirit. Correct?
My questions for you are: What constitutes idolatry ? Can one serve both God and Mammon? Does man live by bread alone or from every word that comes from the mouth of God?
Food for thought...
From Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan:
Part III. Of a Christian Commonwealth.Chap. xxxviii. Of Eternal Life, Hell, Salvation, and Redemption.
[12] And first, for the tormentors, we have their nature and properties exactly and properly delivered by the names of the Enemy (or Satan), the Accuser (or Diabolus), the Destroyer (or Abaddon). Which significant names (Satan, Devil, Abaddon) set not forth to us any individual person, as proper names do, but only an office or quality, and are therefore appellatives, which ought not to have been left untranslated (as they are in the Latin and modern Bibles), because thereby they seem to be the proper names of demons, and men are the more easily seduced to believe the doctrine of devils, which at that time was the religion of the Gentiles, and contrary to that of Moses, and of Christ.
[13] And because by the Enemy, the Accuser, and Destroyer, is meant the enemy of them that shall be in the kingdom of God, therefore if the kingdom of God after the resurrection be upon the earth (as in the former Chapter I have shewn by Scripture it seems to be), the Enemy and his kingdom must be on earth also. For so also was it in the time before the Jews had deposed God. For God's kingdom was in Palestine, and the nations round about were the kingdoms of the Enemy; and consequently, by Satan is meant any earthly enemy of the Church.
Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness.
Chap. xlvii. Of the Benefit that proceedeth from such Darkness.
[21] For from the time that the Bishop of Rome had gotten to be acknowledged for bishop universal, by pretense of successsion to St. Peter, their whole hiearchy (or kingdom of darkness) may be compared to the kingdom of fairies (that is, to the old wives' fables in England, concerning ghosts and spirits and the feats they play in the night). And if a man consider the original of this great ecclesiastical dominion, he will easily percieve that the Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof. For so did the Papacy start up on a sudden out of the ruins of that heathen empire.
[23] The fairies, in what nation soever they converse, have but one universal king, which some poets of ours call King Oberon; but the Scripture calls Beelzebub, prince of demons. The ecclesiastics likewise, in whose dominions soever they be found, acknowledge but one universal king, the Pope.
Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness.
Chap. xlv. Of Demonology and other Relics of the Religion of the Gentiles.
[16] And whereas a man can fancy shapes he never saw, making up a figure out of the parts of divers creatures, as the poets make their centaurs, chimeras and other monsters never seen, so can he also give matter to those shapes, and make them in wood, clay or metal. And these are also called images, not for the resemblance of any corporeal thing, but for the resemblance of some phantastical inhabitants of the brain of the maker. But in these idols, as they are originally in the brain, and as they are painted, carved moulded or molten in matter, there is a similitude of one to the other, for which the material body made by art may be said to be the image of the fantastical idol made by nature.
Sure they're not Christians -- says you. They say they are. They say you aren't.
And I am not a Christian. I'm an atheist.
I am an atheist who is not the least bothered by the public display of religious literature - - I call this freedom of speech.
I am an atheist who is not in the least bothered by the teaching of the Bible in the public schools - - it is a masterful work of literature.
I am not an atheist who has become just an anti-Christian like so many others that are so wrapped up in their own polemics, that they are willing to destroy this country just for the sake of opposing Christians. I agree with Christians and conservatives for entirely different reasons than what they express.
I also see the opposition to the Ten Commandments posted in public as intolerance and hatred for the Jews - - from whom it originated.
In a word, bull.
To think the notion of Leprechauns silly is not to be anti-Irish.
However, since I am a real atheist and not merely pretending to be one, I can point to ALL religions and point out their silly bits.
To do so would seem to be encouraging or accepting lawlessness. If they want to repeal the laws, then they should do so, but they should not act as if the laws do not exist.
So we take the average of Christians to find out what is right?
Do Christians follow the New Testament? What does this verse mean?
Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
Maybe you should read the Bible:
Matthew 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
Matthew 5:28 but I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
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.