Posted on 11/28/2002 7:06:02 PM PST by TLBSHOW
Judaism is a fundamental basis to Christianity.
All others are grouped generically as heathen or those guided by lusts and immorality. Pagan and unbelievers are understood to comprise a group not guided to respect morality.
The Separation of Church and State assumes this as premise. It then recognizes tht moral men will seek to obey both the laws of man and the laws of God. Recognizing immoral men will week to obey neither, the principal of Separation of Church and State is irrelevant to the governance of immoral men. Laws on criminality are their domain. Instead the Separation was simply focused on how moral men might reasonably govern themselves.
Moses had appointed lessor judges to assist him in adjudicating the law. There were laws of God provided in Scripture, but also other methods of governance man-made, which assisted God-fearing men in bearing their burden.
From the Inquisition onwards, political thought recognized the impact of the Church as a political force, yet also recognized the rights of the individual. Again the focus was on the moral man. Not the immoral, simply because no amount of legal ethic will suffice for the immoral man because he is rebellious to ethic regardless.
It was only in the last 30-40 years in American jurisprudence that the Separation of Church and State has been demphasized and freedom of religion differently identified to ANY spiritual pursuit.
I have never said or written that I believe America to be an abomination. I do not in fact believe America to be an abomination. I am an American, and I love this country.
The United States is manifestly not a Christian nation. It is a product of the Enlightenment, as were its founders.
Please do not misrepresent my beliefs on this forum.
B-chan
The answer may have as much to do with semantics as with theology, but semantics are important.
In essence, the religion of Islam began in 610 A.D. when a man named Mohammed became convinced that the polytheism practiced by the Arabian tribes was wrong, and that only one god should be worshiped. Mohammed believed the angel Gabriel revealed this to him, and preached the message widely, teaching his followers the "revelations" from Gabriel that were collected and preserved as the Qur'an.
"Allah" is a poetic form of the Arabic al illah, meaning "the god." Mohammed took an incipient belief in a supreme god and promoted Allah as the only god.
Mohammed and his followers identified Allah as the god of the Old Testament, consider Abraham to be their spiritual ancestor, and revere the biblical prophets.
Muslims also consider Jesus to be a miracle-working prophet who was born of a virgin. They consider it heresy, however, to claim that Jesus is the Son of God, and reject all notions of the Trinity.
Islamic arguments against Christianity typically assert that Christians worship three gods and thus show infidelity to the one god.
The core of Islamic faith is expressed in the shahadah, sometimes translated as "There is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet." Some English-speaking Muslims translate "There is no god but God."
Jews and Christians have more commonality in belief, and clearly refer to the same deity when we say "God." Christians believe, however, that God's self-revelation does not stop with the Old Testament but is fulfilled in the New Testament.
Whether one prefers to say that Muslims, Jews and Christians believe in different gods, as opposed to differing views of the same god, is largely a matter of semantics. From a Christian perspective, anyone who does not accept the full revelation of God through the saving work of Christ and the sustaining presence of the Holy Spirit has only a partial understanding of God.
Thus, Christians might argue that Muslims or Jews worship "a different god" because we believe their concept of God is incomplete. It is perhaps more appropriate, however, to think of Muslims and Jews as worshiping the same god, though not in His fullness.
Why does it matter? Our terminology can impact the effectiveness of our witness to any who do not accept Christ. It is essential that we keep channels of communication open by showing respect for people of other faiths, even if we believe their view of God is inadequate. Explaining Christ as the saving fulfillment and ultimate revelation of the same god is a natural and effective means of sharing our faith with Muslims and Jews. Insisting that they worship a different god altogether is bound to be counter-productive.
It is possible to be tactful in our speech without compromising our witness.
Jesus also said, "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:44); and he said, "every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:40).
Jesus also said, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me" (St. John 12:32). But there is no contradiction, because he also said, "he that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:9).
He also said, "as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up" (John 3:14); and he said, "him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out" (John 6:37).
I read that to mean, "all come to him and he casts none out". Or, as in the words of Paul, "every knee shall bow to (the Lord), and every tongue shall confess to God" (Romans 14:11), and, "with the mouth confession is made unto salvation" (Romans 10:10).
As I mentioned several months ago on FR, if I was given the task by the Lord to determine the names of those to be saved in the Book of Life, I would have to include everyone. Otherwise I break the Law (the Law of the Lord as stated in Matthew 7:12). It is also written, "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9). Therefore, my previous interpretation of "all come to him and he casts none out" is possible. Of course, "with God all things are possible" (Matthew 19:26).
I do not believe that man has either the right or the ability to govern himself justly. The idea of popular government constitutes a rejection of authority -- a Luciferic, humanistic, anti-Christian Enlightenment idea that has led to disaster in every instance of its practice. Christianity is a relgion of hmility, not pride; submission, not self-rule; and is based upon the idea of a humble Man submitting himself to the will of a Divine Father and King . The Faustian fantasy of men-as-gods, knowing for themselves Good and Evil, is a lie straight from the lips of the Serpent of Eden.
You believe in a divinely ordained head of government?
I believe that all government is instituted by God, and that those forms of government that most closely mirror the Divine Order of the Universe -- the Kingship of Christt-- are by nature better and more holy than others.
I furthermore recognize the fraudulent ideals of the Revolution -- liberté, egalité, et fraternité as the damnable lies they are. The only true liberty is that created by submission of the individual will to the Spi rit of the Lord; the only equality that exists is the equality of all sinful human beings next to the perfection of Our Lord; and the only fraternity that can ever be is the brotherhood of believers under Christ. Liberty in the Enlightement sense is a pagan goddess; Equality is an obvious fraud, since some people are by nature manfestly more qualified to lead and judge other men; and Fraternity is a satanic lie that dissolves outside of the love of Christ.
In short: I believe that hierarchy is the natural way to organize a society, and that some people are gifted by God with the ability to rule other men.
You basically believe the same thing as Muslims?
No. I believe that there is no God but God; I deny that Mohammed was His prophet.
Perhaps, Restorer, you could read about cults on this site; it explains your cult misunderstanding and over-generalization much better than I can or care to. Identifying a Cult
SECULAR DEFINITION
CULT - From the Latin "cultis" which denotes all that is involved in worship, ritual, emotion, liturgy and attitude. This definition actually denotes what we call denominations and sects and would make all religious movements a cult.
CHRISTIAN DEFINITION
CULT - Any group which deviates from Biblical, orthodox, historical Christianity. e.i. They deny the Deity of Christ; His physical resurrection; His personal and physical return to earth and salvation by FAITH alone.
This definition only covers those groups which are cults within the Christian religion. It does not cover cults within other world religions such as Islam and Hinduism. Nor does it cover Psychological, Commercial or Educational cults which do not recognize the Bible as a source of reality.
UNIVERSAL DEFINITION
CULT - Any group which has a pyramid type authoritarian leadership structure with all teaching and guidance coming from the person/persons at the top. The group will claim to be the only way to God; Nirvana; Paradise; Ultimate Reality; Full Potential, Way to Happiness etc, and will use thought reform or mind control techniques to gain control and keep their members. This definition covers cults within all majopr world religions, along with those cults which have no OBVIOUS religious base such as commercial, educational and psychological cults. Others may define these a little differently, but this is the simplest to work from. THE 'ORTHODOX BIBLE-BASED CULT'
A group is called a cult because of their behaviour - not their doctrines. . . .
I assume that by saying that man hasn't "the right" you meant that God did not grant us that right, and that when you called our form of government "Luciferic" and "anti-Christian", you meant that government of the people, by the peple, and for the people was, like Lucifer, an abomination.
Then there's this:
"I furthermore recognize the fraudulent ideals of the Revolution -- liberté, egalité, et fraternité as the damnable lies they are."
Therefore, your attempt to sully my character and patriotism has failed. I suppose asking for a public apology would be futile, but nevertheless: please apologize for lying about me in a public forum.
Thank You, B-chan
Neither Jesus nor the Apostle John seems to think that unbelieving Jews are with the Father:
"I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins. . . . I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father. . . . If God were your Father, you would love me. . . . You are of your father the devil. . . . It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, 'He is our God.' But you have not known him." (Jesus, in John 8:24, 38, 42, 44, 54-55)
"Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? . . . No one who denies the Son has the Father. . . . every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. . . . Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life." (1 John 2:22, 23; 4:3; 5:12)
Because it is politically unfeasable to wage a War on Islam at the moment (and counter-productive).
Keep in mind that no matter how reprehensible Islamic doctrine may be, and no matter how morally repugnant the histrionics of its most rabid adherents, MOST people are politically apathetic, including most Moslems. That means that we only need to deal with the fanatical element in Islam, not the whole dang culture/religion.
The foregoing is simply a statement of practical fact, not an excuse or endorsement of Islam, nor an outright condemnation of it. I recall reading, back in a college anthropology class, about indigenous 'religions' that were even more repugnant to me than what this article conveys about Islam. But these indigenous tribespeople were not trying to blow up the Pentagon and thus represent no real problem for Western civilization.
By calling Isalm a 'religion of peace', our President is marginalizing the fanatics (terrorists), and imo that is SMART, not stupid. Does anyone here really believe GW is a fan of Islam, Mohammed or the Koran?
Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord," will enter the kindgom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles? And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you, depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness."
Not everyone who claims to be of God is of God. Matthew 7:21-23
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.