Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,465 Year: 3,722/9,624 Month: 593/974 Week: 206/276 Day: 46/34 Hour: 2/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Which ten commandments do you follow?
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3949 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 31 of 53 (151066)
10-19-2004 11:18 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by jar
10-19-2004 10:44 AM


Re: Just Two...
yes i know. i was just being a pain.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by jar, posted 10-19-2004 10:44 AM jar has not replied

  
asciikerr
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 53 (151101)
10-19-2004 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by MrHambre
10-19-2004 10:14 AM


Re: Roman Rule
History tells all, Early Christians were heavily prosecuted and martrydom, they did not have the same level of protection as the Jews (Judaism). The Christain faith was still young and their followers were considered "Athiests" and were also accused of incest, cannabalism and much more. If you still aren't sure I can give you specific emperors and the forms of punishment they carried to those that didn't worship pagan gods.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by MrHambre, posted 10-19-2004 10:14 AM MrHambre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by MrHambre, posted 10-19-2004 2:01 PM asciikerr has replied

  
MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1415 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 33 of 53 (151109)
10-19-2004 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by asciikerr
10-19-2004 1:28 PM


Re: Roman Rule
asciikerr,
Don't bother. Here's a site that puts the wild claims of systematic Christian persecution by the Romans in clearer perspective. Recall that during the reign of Augustus there was unprecedented religious freedom in the occupied lands of the Empire and plenty of budding faiths fought for prominence. Christians, through their own intolerance of other faiths (including the ones from whom they stole ideas, like Mithraism), made plenty of enemies. Nero and (much later) Diocletian stigmatized the Christians as political scapegoats, not because of the Roman fear of the validity of their beliefs.
regards,
Esteban Hambre

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by asciikerr, posted 10-19-2004 1:28 PM asciikerr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by asciikerr, posted 10-19-2004 7:51 PM MrHambre has not replied

  
General Nazort
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 53 (151123)
10-19-2004 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by crashfrog
10-19-2004 12:53 AM


crashfrog says:
The conflict comes when we try to say that both the Constitution and the Commandments are from the same source; i.e. the Bible. Or when the government puts forth the Commandments in an official context, like in monuments, etc.
The Bible can't say both "Nobody should worship anybody but God" and "anybody can worship anyone they like"; the government can't say both "there is no God but God" and "Congress shall not establish a religion."
The Bible doesn't say "Nobody should worship anybody but God" and "anybody can worship anyone they like."
The government can say both "there is no God but God" and "Congress shall not establish a religion." These statements are in no way mutually exclusive. That is what jar has been trying to tell you. The first amendment is to protect people from being forced to worship in a government-mandated religion, like the English government did. It says nothing about what individual people ought to do - it only says what the government ought not to do.

If you say there no absolutes, I ask you, are you absolutely sure?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by crashfrog, posted 10-19-2004 12:53 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Loudmouth, posted 10-19-2004 3:15 PM General Nazort has replied
 Message 36 by crashfrog, posted 10-19-2004 5:01 PM General Nazort has replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 53 (151124)
10-19-2004 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by General Nazort
10-19-2004 3:04 PM


quote:
The first amendment is to protect people from being forced to worship in a government-mandated religion, like the English government did. It says nothing about what individual people ought to do - it only says what the government ought not to do.
"There is no god but God" is the establishment, by the government, of a religion. The government already has stated that it shall not infringe on freedom of religion, which includes giving certain religions endorsement through government proclaimation (eg "There is no God but God").

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by General Nazort, posted 10-19-2004 3:04 PM General Nazort has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by General Nazort, posted 10-20-2004 2:53 AM Loudmouth has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1489 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 36 of 53 (151150)
10-19-2004 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by General Nazort
10-19-2004 3:04 PM


The Bible doesn't say "Nobody should worship anybody but God"
"I am the LORD they God, thou shalt have no other gods before me." That's God's first commandment.
Seems pretty clear to me.
The government can say both "there is no God but God" and "Congress shall not establish a religion."
That's establishing a religion. When the government takes a position about which religion is right, that's establishment.
The first amendment is to protect people from being forced to worship in a government-mandated religion, like the English government did.
You can't be forced to worship or not worship, of course. No law can stop your mouth or prevent your knees from bending. You can, on the other hand, be punished or marginalized for worshipping as you choose.
The First amendment doesn't say "Congress may establish a religion but can't prevent free expression." It says that Congress may not establish a religion, or prevent free expression, period. (Well, not really a period, because there's all those other rights, too.)
It's very clear. Government is supposed to stay out of religion. And why wouldn't it? It's representative government, after all. My government should represent me, but it misrepresents me when it says "there is no God but God." The only way for it to represent everybody's religion equally is to represent no one's religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by General Nazort, posted 10-19-2004 3:04 PM General Nazort has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by General Nazort, posted 10-20-2004 2:56 AM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 41 by jar, posted 10-20-2004 10:49 AM crashfrog has replied

  
asciikerr
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 53 (151188)
10-19-2004 7:51 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by MrHambre
10-19-2004 2:01 PM


Re: Roman Rule
MrHambre,
I think opening a new thread on Christian Martyrs and all that they've endured (or didn't) under Roman Rule would be educational.
What do you think?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by MrHambre, posted 10-19-2004 2:01 PM MrHambre has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by jar, posted 10-19-2004 7:58 PM asciikerr has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 38 of 53 (151191)
10-19-2004 7:58 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by asciikerr
10-19-2004 7:51 PM


Re: Roman Rule
Just make sure that you have the straight scoop before you go there because it isn't as big a story as you might think.
It's a lot like the myths of what happened during the spread of Islam, far more hype than reality.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by asciikerr, posted 10-19-2004 7:51 PM asciikerr has not replied

  
General Nazort
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 53 (151291)
10-20-2004 2:53 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Loudmouth
10-19-2004 3:15 PM


"There is no god but God" is the establishment, by the government, of a religion. The government already has stated that it shall not infringe on freedom of religion, which includes giving certain religions endorsement through government proclaimation (eg "There is no God but God").
"There is no god but God" is just stating the opinion of the government. The government is not forcing you to do any action as a consequence of that opinion. There is no law telling you that you have to worship that God, or a law that you cannot worship another God.

If you say there no absolutes, I ask you, are you absolutely sure?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Loudmouth, posted 10-19-2004 3:15 PM Loudmouth has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Loudmouth, posted 10-20-2004 3:07 PM General Nazort has replied

  
General Nazort
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 53 (151292)
10-20-2004 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by crashfrog
10-19-2004 5:01 PM


"I am the LORD they God, thou shalt have no other gods before me." That's God's first commandment.
Seems pretty clear to me.
Yes, I agree that is clear. However, read the whole sentence I originally posted - you missed the "and" part.

If you say there no absolutes, I ask you, are you absolutely sure?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by crashfrog, posted 10-19-2004 5:01 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 41 of 53 (151333)
10-20-2004 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by crashfrog
10-19-2004 5:01 PM


kermee writes:
"I am the LORD they{sic} God, thou shalt have no other gods before me." That's God's first commandment.
Seems pretty clear to me.
While I agree that it is a very clear statement, I wonder if you have understood it.
Let's parse it if you don't mind?
When it says "I am the Lord, thy God...", do you agree that it was addressed to the Hebrews?
If so, "...thou shalt have no other gods before me." does not sound like it denies the existence of other gods but rather says that the Hebrews should not place them at a higher level, a more exalted position.
So how is that commandment saying "Nobody should worship anybody but God (meaning the Hebrew god)"?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by crashfrog, posted 10-19-2004 5:01 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by crashfrog, posted 10-21-2004 11:05 PM jar has replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 53 (151401)
10-20-2004 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by General Nazort
10-20-2004 2:53 AM


quote:
"There is no god but God" is just stating the opinion of the government.
Which is a violation of the separation of church and state. The government is not allowed to publicly endorse one religion over another.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by General Nazort, posted 10-20-2004 2:53 AM General Nazort has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by General Nazort, posted 10-21-2004 9:43 PM Loudmouth has not replied

  
General Nazort
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 53 (151803)
10-21-2004 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Loudmouth
10-20-2004 3:07 PM


Which is a violation of the separation of church and state. The government is not allowed to publicly endorse one religion over another.
The seperation of church and state means that the institutions of the church and of the state should be seperate. It does not mean that the ideas of the church cannot influence the state.
Nearly all the founding fathers liked and supported Christian morals. For example Benjamin Franklin proposed a prayer while working on making the Constitution. America was founded on Christianity, but now it is drifting away.
Anyways, this is kinda off topic.

If you say there no absolutes, I ask you, are you absolutely sure?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Loudmouth, posted 10-20-2004 3:07 PM Loudmouth has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by coffee_addict, posted 10-21-2004 9:48 PM General Nazort has not replied
 Message 46 by crashfrog, posted 10-21-2004 11:11 PM General Nazort has not replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 499 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 44 of 53 (151804)
10-21-2004 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by General Nazort
10-21-2004 9:43 PM


GN writes:
America was founded on Christianity, but now it is drifting away.
Um... uh... America was also founded on slavery. Well, I guess we drifted away from that as well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by General Nazort, posted 10-21-2004 9:43 PM General Nazort has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1489 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 45 of 53 (151819)
10-21-2004 11:05 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by jar
10-20-2004 10:49 AM


When it says "I am the Lord, thy God...", do you agree that it was addressed to the Hebrews?
No, it was addressed to everybody the Commandments were addressed to; the churches have made it very clear that that means everybody.
Nobody ever said that I didn't have to follow the commandements because I wasn't Jewish; quite the opposite, and I've been both Protestant and Catholic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by jar, posted 10-20-2004 10:49 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by jar, posted 10-21-2004 11:41 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024