(09-11-2025 01:07 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote: (09-11-2025 12:51 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote: (09-11-2025 12:42 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote: (09-11-2025 12:36 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote: (09-11-2025 12:33 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote: whats your question?
1. Why do non Christians quote the Bible to show hypocrisy when it comes to political issues, yet deny everything else? I dunno, does it take away from Christians hypocrisy when a non Christian quotes them the teachings of who they purportedly follow?
2. Why do christians have to adhere to the Bible for political purposes, when the left doesn’t at all, and prefer us all to govern as secularists (separation of church and state) why wouldnt Christian adhere to the bible for political purposes? Did Jesus say, "follow me unless the other guy doesn't then screw it go nuclear?" separation of church and state is not incongruent with the teachings of the bible, and in fact its widely considered that Jesus himself advocated for it.
Please answer these two questions. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
So to recap, you use parts of the Bible to justify your political views, yet reject the Bible and Christian ethics as a whole, and prefer Christians to rule as secularists.
Do I have this correct?
where did i say i rejected the bible? and yes, I prefer Christians to GOVERN as secularists.
I hope we don't have a ruler here.
Ah, but we do have a ruler here, only it's a "they" instead of a he or she, and "they" get corporate money to help with the selection of their curriculum, which they use to indoctrinate and miseducate our children, and "They" are called the NEA. And they are well beyond the notion of secular, in that they don't teach the mores of any religion, nor those principles found in the Constitution which were intended to be the mores of the nation which would allow both secular and religious to live in tolerance with one another. Taxpayers get the bill, but lobby money and donations supply the motive beyond what they have become as they have been coopted by those bent on social engineering rather than preparing young people to face life with the skillsets they need to succeed. IOW, they weaponized public education for an alien agenda, and the word alien here means one contrary to the safeguards contained in our Constitution.
To the Religious I would point out that between the 1980's and 2000 we had oodles of alleged new translations of the Bible. They all claimed it was to make them more readable, and they all claimed to adhere to accurate translations of Hebrew, Latin, Aramaic, and Greek and other semitic languages of the ancient Near East.
There was some justification in that. The King James Version had translated some ancient manuscripts, understand that the Dead Sea scrolls weren't found in the 1600's, and of course interpreted them with language approved by the king. Now when the Genesis story related the command to subdue the world, that was a whopper of a shift from the ancient Hebrew which if interpreted would mean something close to a concept of stewardship or management of it. I've found the Revised Standard Version of 1948 to be one of the most faithful to translation and one of the freer of social and political agenda. Those versions which came out from the 80's through the 2000's were sectarian agenda driven "alleged" translations. I think much of the fervent splintering among the religious denominations have some of the issues rooted in those. I liken those so-called translations to an evil version of the Tower of Babel story. In Babel humanity became arrogant so they were struck by some condition where they no longer spoke each other's language and so could not cooperate to arrogantly assume divine authority over nature and each other. From 1980 on Christian denominations were struck with so many alleged authoritative "translations" with each containing sectarian viewpoints and tweaks of language for modern nuance that helped to create the cultural divisions inside denominations giving each a basis to separate from the other.
No version of the text is perfect, and probably wasn't intended to be, but the message of knowing people by their acts rather than what was said about them (discernment vs judgment) and loving your neighbor as yourself, and her to the point one of you is trying to make, "Render unto Ceasar those things which are Ceasars (meaning pay your taxes as Ceasar coins the money provides some things and wants remuneration) and unto God what is God's (your heart and obedience to God's laws summed up in the Ten Commandments or in some version in most non-Christian cultures).
That command is not for separation of Church and State. It has been interpreted that way, but it is actually a command for separation for Self and Church and State. If we believe in God we are to behave ourselves in a manner that reflects obedience to the laws of God that we profess, we are to adhere to those in worship and hold worship to that standard, and we are to be productive and obedient citizens to authorities over us as long as we can discern that by their actions those authorities are providing order. You see the greatest form of evil to the ancient Hebrews was chaos. They saw God as bringing order out of chaos in the creation story. Therefore, our role in government was to maintain order and maintain it justly by personal adherence to God's laws (the code of conduct between people reflected in the Ten Commandments). We were to seek what was obedient to God (no idols, keeping Sabath traditions, and not misusing the name of God to condemn others, God alone would judge.) Then we were to honor our fathers and mothers to keep order in the family structure, and then not seek to take from our neighbors anything that was theirs to maintain social order. Then subsequent instruction was obedience to the social authorities to maintain order in our communities and regions.
Simple observation of what something does was to help us determine what was good and what was evil. If it gave us order and prevented chaos it was good. If it preserved our families instead of breaking them apart it was good. If it allowed us to worship God openly and practice faith privately it was good. What it forbids was using the open worship of religion to condemn others in God's name. That's judging and only God (in Christianity through Christ) retains the right to do that. We may determine a person's actions to be good or bad based the order and outcome, and whether or not they violate laws against harming neighbors.
What humans and their government/or rulers have always done is to assume the role of God rather than enforce the laws of God, which are pretty universally accepted in all cultures. One scripture says in the New Testament, "In vain do they worship me teaching as my precepts the doctrines of men/people." And therein resides the basis of every denomination and how simply following God's laws become following someone else's agenda. And to make it more confusing one of those other agendas is atheism which is simply following the rule of the dominant people. And that my friends is what I call HELL! And that Hell is what the NEA is teaching, which is the original sin of Gensis. "Eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and you too will be like God." Loose but accurate translation, "Set your own rules of right and wrong and you will be your own god." And to the ancient Hebrews the moral of that story is clear. Each one acting as their own god brings chaos and as I've explained, chaos to the ancient Hebrew was purest form of evil for all.
Are we not headed for chaos?
/
[NEWS] Charlie Kirk Shot In The Neck and Killed, RIP, Then Game On
