God and mass genocide

[hobelim]

You are right. In the long run, if you violate either you will pay a price down the road, but in the short term they are ignored.

You are wrong though if you think that the Constitution is not often ignored.

I didn't say that the constitution is not often ignored, I said that, unlike the Bible, the constitution is easily understood.

If you take a group of amoral convicts to run a government and society, they will destroy that society and themselves, even if you give them the most perfect form of government.

Conversely, if you take a moral group of people and give them a terrible form of government, they will fix it.

Looks like we are already well along the way on that road to that destruction, thanks to a group of amoral people pretending to be religious moral authorities running the government..

Looks like that moral group, wherever they are, have their work cut out for them....


I'm not convinced they even exist. I mean WTF. How can everyone sit at a poker table and continue playing the game as if everything was hunky dory when everyone knows some jerk is cheating?

The reason the Constitution was formed and successful for so long, is because of two things. It was the moral fiber of the Founding Fathers and the society that produced them. One cannot come without the other.

But you are correct. Those in government sit on their perches pretending to be the moral authority on everything. That's what makes them so terrifying. They think they know everything. That is why limited government is essential.

C. S. Lewis saw this problem coming when he wrote, “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

So how do collectivists in government try to appear as the moral elite? Here is a quote of my own.

"In ancient times, collectivist first wanted us to believe that they were a god, but when that no longer worked, they tried to convince us that they spoke for God, but when that no longer worked, they tried to convince us that there is no God, thus making themselves the ultimate authority once again."

Looks like we are stuck at the part in your quote where they, whoever they are, are still trying to convince us that they speak for God...

What made the constitution so successful up until now was the exclusion of religion from government.

 

[Votto]

You are right. In the long run, if you violate either you will pay a price down the road, but in the short term they are ignored.

You are wrong though if you think that the Constitution is not often ignored.

I didn't say that the constitution is not often ignored, I said that, unlike the Bible, the constitution is easily understood.

.

Really? The Constitution is easily understood? Well tell that to SCOTUS who passed the Dred Scott Decision.

Or tell that to a Lefty who wants to redefine the 2nd amendment.

I think you will find that people are able to argue pretty much any position based upon their own desired outcomes.

As I have said, when people are for an agenda verses the truth you can twist words any way you wish. Next thing you know, what you said is not what you said. Instead, what you said becomes a living breathing entity capable of evolving at any moment.

lol....

you are right!


Words, even words from God, once uttered seem to take on a life of their own, depending on where the hearer is at, that are often unrelated to the speakers intent.

It all boils down to the heart of man. When they hear words of God or the Constitution, they have two options. They can either ignore or twist what was said to fit their own agenda, or they can take them to heart and form a new agenda.

I think most choose #1.

And you see this with the Catholic church today. The official position of the Catholic church is that abortion is murder. However, do they ever give speeches about such a wide and vast genocide? Nope. They are as silent as they were during the Holocaust when Jews where murdered by the millions, all in an attempt at self preservation.

Today, the Left rules and reigns, so they stay silent about abortion in a similar attempt at self preservation. It's all about agenda, and not the truth.

Those that are more interested in the truth than agenda wind up like Socrates who once said that if there ever was a man dedicated to the truth and who was righteous, he would be murdered. Not only was he eventually murdered, Christ was also murdered hundreds of years later as the prophets that preceded him.

Yes, the truth hurts, or at least, it should.

 

[hobelim]

You are right. In the long run, if you violate either you will pay a price down the road, but in the short term they are ignored.

You are wrong though if you think that the Constitution is not often ignored.

I didn't say that the constitution is not often ignored, I said that, unlike the Bible, the constitution is easily understood.

.

Really? The Constitution is easily understood? Well tell that to SCOTUS who passed the Dred Scott Decision.

Or tell that to a Lefty who wants to redefine the 2nd amendment.

I think you will find that people are able to argue pretty much any position based upon their own desired outcomes.

As I have said, when people are for an agenda verses the truth you can twist words any way you wish. Next thing you know, what you said is not what you said. Instead, what you said becomes a living breathing entity capable of evolving at any moment.

lol....

you are right!


Words, even words from God, once uttered seem to take on a life of their own, depending on where the hearer is at, that are often unrelated to the speakers intent.

It all boils down to the heart of man. When they hear words of God or the Constitution, they have two options. They can either ignore or twist what was said to fit their own agenda, or they can take them to heart and form a new agenda.

I think most choose #1.

And you see this with the Catholic church today. The official position of the Catholic church is that abortion is murder. However, do they ever give speeches about such a wide and vast genocide? Nope. They are as silent as they were during the Holocaust when Jews where murdered by the millions, all in an attempt at self preservation.

Today, the Left rules and reigns, so they stay silent about abortion in a similar attempt at self preservation. It's all about agenda, and not the truth.

Those that are more interested in the truth than agenda wind up like Socrates who once said that if there ever was a man dedicated to the truth and who was righteous, he would be murdered. Not only was he eventually murdered, Christ was also murdered hundreds of years later as the prophets that preceded him.

Yes, the truth hurts, or at least, it should.

The left rules and reigns? lol...

horse hooey.

Last time I checked right wing religiously addled nut jobs have usurped authority in government and committed treason so they could install an idiot to lead them...

read a newspaper.

 

[Votto]

You are right. In the long run, if you violate either you will pay a price down the road, but in the short term they are ignored.

You are wrong though if you think that the Constitution is not often ignored.

I didn't say that the constitution is not often ignored, I said that, unlike the Bible, the constitution is easily understood.

If you take a group of amoral convicts to run a government and society, they will destroy that society and themselves, even if you give them the most perfect form of government.

Conversely, if you take a moral group of people and give them a terrible form of government, they will fix it.

Looks like we are already well along the way on that road to that destruction, thanks to a group of amoral people pretending to be religious moral authorities running the government..

Looks like that moral group, wherever they are, have their work cut out for them....


I'm not convinced they even exist. I mean WTF. How can everyone sit at a poker table and continue playing the game as if everything was hunky dory when everyone knows some jerk is cheating?

The reason the Constitution was formed and successful for so long, is because of two things. It was the moral fiber of the Founding Fathers and the society that produced them. One cannot come without the other.

But you are correct. Those in government sit on their perches pretending to be the moral authority on everything. That's what makes them so terrifying. They think they know everything. That is why limited government is essential.

C. S. Lewis saw this problem coming when he wrote, “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

So how do collectivists in government try to appear as the moral elite? Here is a quote of my own.

"In ancient times, collectivist first wanted us to believe that they were a god, but when that no longer worked, they tried to convince us that they spoke for God, but when that no longer worked, they tried to convince us that there is no God, thus making themselves the ultimate authority once again."

Looks like we are stuck at the part in your quote where they, whoever they are, are still trying to convince us that they speak for God...

What made the constitution so successful up until now was the removal of religion from government.

There is an element of truth with that when it comes to the religious right, but there is also the religious left that wants to convince us that either God does not exist, or if he does, he wants government to save the poor folk.

Christ said that his kingdom was not of this world, nor can be. That is not to say, however, that Christians cannot or should not participate in politics.

I think Christians learned this hard lesson after Constantine. However, Islam has not. In fact, Islam demands that the government and religion be one. Sharia law is not an option in Islam, it should be the law of the land.

 

[Votto]

You are right. In the long run, if you violate either you will pay a price down the road, but in the short term they are ignored.

You are wrong though if you think that the Constitution is not often ignored.

I didn't say that the constitution is not often ignored, I said that, unlike the Bible, the constitution is easily understood.

.

Really? The Constitution is easily understood? Well tell that to SCOTUS who passed the Dred Scott Decision.

Or tell that to a Lefty who wants to redefine the 2nd amendment.

I think you will find that people are able to argue pretty much any position based upon their own desired outcomes.

As I have said, when people are for an agenda verses the truth you can twist words any way you wish. Next thing you know, what you said is not what you said. Instead, what you said becomes a living breathing entity capable of evolving at any moment.

lol....

you are right!


Words, even words from God, once uttered seem to take on a life of their own, depending on where the hearer is at, that are often unrelated to the speakers intent.

It all boils down to the heart of man. When they hear words of God or the Constitution, they have two options. They can either ignore or twist what was said to fit their own agenda, or they can take them to heart and form a new agenda.

I think most choose #1.

And you see this with the Catholic church today. The official position of the Catholic church is that abortion is murder. However, do they ever give speeches about such a wide and vast genocide? Nope. They are as silent as they were during the Holocaust when Jews where murdered by the millions, all in an attempt at self preservation.

Today, the Left rules and reigns, so they stay silent about abortion in a similar attempt at self preservation. It's all about agenda, and not the truth.

Those that are more interested in the truth than agenda wind up like Socrates who once said that if there ever was a man dedicated to the truth and who was righteous, he would be murdered. Not only was he eventually murdered, Christ was also murdered hundreds of years later as the prophets that preceded him.

Yes, the truth hurts, or at least, it should.

The left rules and reigns? lol...

horse hooey.

Last time I checked right wing religiously addled nut jobs have usurped authority in government and committed treason to install an idiot to lead them...

read a newspaper.

And last I checked this supposed religious right in power now just passed an omnibus bill that spent trillions of dollars in deficit spending, which went to fully fund Planned Parenthood.

You really should stop looking at the "R"'s and "D"s and pay more attention to what they are doing.

 

[hobelim]

You are right. In the long run, if you violate either you will pay a price down the road, but in the short term they are ignored.

You are wrong though if you think that the Constitution is not often ignored.

I didn't say that the constitution is not often ignored, I said that, unlike the Bible, the constitution is easily understood.

If you take a group of amoral convicts to run a government and society, they will destroy that society and themselves, even if you give them the most perfect form of government.

Conversely, if you take a moral group of people and give them a terrible form of government, they will fix it.

Looks like we are already well along the way on that road to that destruction, thanks to a group of amoral people pretending to be religious moral authorities running the government..

Looks like that moral group, wherever they are, have their work cut out for them....


I'm not convinced they even exist. I mean WTF. How can everyone sit at a poker table and continue playing the game as if everything was hunky dory when everyone knows some jerk is cheating?

The reason the Constitution was formed and successful for so long, is because of two things. It was the moral fiber of the Founding Fathers and the society that produced them. One cannot come without the other.

But you are correct. Those in government sit on their perches pretending to be the moral authority on everything. That's what makes them so terrifying. They think they know everything. That is why limited government is essential.

C. S. Lewis saw this problem coming when he wrote, “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

So how do collectivists in government try to appear as the moral elite? Here is a quote of my own.

"In ancient times, collectivist first wanted us to believe that they were a god, but when that no longer worked, they tried to convince us that they spoke for God, but when that no longer worked, they tried to convince us that there is no God, thus making themselves the ultimate authority once again."

Looks like we are stuck at the part in your quote where they, whoever they are, are still trying to convince us that they speak for God...

What made the constitution so successful up until now was the removal of religion from government.

There is an element of truth with that when it comes to the religious right, but there is also the religious left that wants to convince us that either God does not exist, or if he does, he wants government to save the poor folk.

Christ said that his kingdom was not of this world, nor can be. That is not to say, however, that Christians cannot or should not participate in politics.

I think Christians learned this hard lesson after Constantine. However, Islam has not. In fact, Islam demands that the government and religion be one. Sharia law is not an option in Islam, it should be the law of the land.

Christians learned something after constantine? lol...Are you mad?

Thats when the roman empire assimilated and perverted christianity created a false edible triune mangod for people to worship and made the ritual celebration of the torture and death of Jesus compulsory under penalty of torture and death you moron.

 

[Indeependent]

'm reading a book written by Dennis Prager on Exodus.

We could have probably stopped the discussion right there.

Okay, here's the thing. There is no evidence the Hebrews ever lived in Egypt. None. And we've dug up Egypt pretty thoroughly.

But on to the ravings of Lunatic Prager...

If you really want to blame Pharoah for what the Egyptians did to Hebrews who never lived there, then why does Yahweh murder all the children?

I want to emphasize this again... God's go to plan is to kill every first born child in Egypt to terrorize the Egyptians into letting the Hebrews go.

Why not just have Pharoah drop dead. If the next guy doesn't fix the problem, he drops dead... Eventually, you'd get to a guy who'd figure it out.

The funniest reality is that you could pick any topic, stand on a podium face to face with Dennis Prager, and he would crush you into total humiliation within 2 minutes by quoting entire sections of Torah, or any other subject, by heart, in context, as opposed to your ignoramous rants.
But you’d never have to balls to do that without hiding behind an avatar.

 

[alang1216]

The Bible is nothing like the Constitution. The constitution spells things out and is easily understood, the bible is arcane, its wisdom concealed and redacted over thousands of years by unknown editors for security reasons.

If the constitution was so simple we wouldn't need amendments or a SCOTUS. Just look at the debate over the 2nd, gun rights, the placement of a comma was critical to the proper interpretation. How many commas can dance on the head of a pin?

 

[hobelim]

The Bible is nothing like the Constitution. The constitution spells things out and is easily understood, the bible is arcane, its wisdom concealed and redacted over thousands of years by unknown editors for security reasons.

If the constitution was so simple we wouldn't need amendments or a SCOTUS. Just look at the debate over the 2nd, gun rights, the placement of a comma was critical to the proper interpretation. How many commas can dance on the head of a pin?

Ok, fair enough.

Let me clarify. In the constitution the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used. This still requires debate..some serious, some silly.

When people debate the constitution they are debating the details of what both sides agree that it is about. The right to bear arms, free press, etc.

On the other hand in the bible the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is not directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

For the most part when people debate the bible they do not understand the subjects and are not even debating what the document is about, whatever side they take.

 

[Indeependent]

The Bible is nothing like the Constitution. The constitution spells things out and is easily understood, the bible is arcane, its wisdom concealed and redacted over thousands of years by unknown editors for security reasons.

If the constitution was so simple we wouldn't need amendments or a SCOTUS. Just look at the debate over the 2nd, gun rights, the placement of a comma was critical to the proper interpretation. How many commas can dance on the head of a pin?

Ok, fair enough.

Let me clarify. In the constitution the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used. This still requires debate..some serious, some silly.

When people debate the constitution they are debating the details of what both sides agree that it is about.

On the other hand in the bible the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is not directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

For the most part when people debate the bible they do not understand the subjects and are not even debating what it is about, whatever side they take.

Do we have an example?

 

[hobelim]

The Bible is nothing like the Constitution. The constitution spells things out and is easily understood, the bible is arcane, its wisdom concealed and redacted over thousands of years by unknown editors for security reasons.

If the constitution was so simple we wouldn't need amendments or a SCOTUS. Just look at the debate over the 2nd, gun rights, the placement of a comma was critical to the proper interpretation. How many commas can dance on the head of a pin?

Ok, fair enough.

Let me clarify. In the constitution the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used. This still requires debate..some serious, some silly.

When people debate the constitution they are debating the details of what both sides agree that it is about.

On the other hand in the bible the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is not directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

For the most part when people debate the bible they do not understand the subjects and are not even debating what it is about, whatever side they take.

Do we have an example?

Yes,

Some otherwise intelligent people, even in this day and age, believe that by eating or abstaining from certain food a person can become holy as God is holy even though the subject of kosher law is not and never was about diet.

Food is not what defiles and contaminates. Food cannot make a person holy.

So, being diverted by superstitious archaic lore, they argue over cheeseburgers and meals, straining at a gnat but swallowing a camel, never grasping meaning of the words, subject of the law, or wisdom and intent of the author.

Its a very very sad story...

 

[Indeependent]

The Bible is nothing like the Constitution. The constitution spells things out and is easily understood, the bible is arcane, its wisdom concealed and redacted over thousands of years by unknown editors for security reasons.

If the constitution was so simple we wouldn't need amendments or a SCOTUS. Just look at the debate over the 2nd, gun rights, the placement of a comma was critical to the proper interpretation. How many commas can dance on the head of a pin?

Ok, fair enough.

Let me clarify. In the constitution the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used. This still requires debate..some serious, some silly.

When people debate the constitution they are debating the details of what both sides agree that it is about.

On the other hand in the bible the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is not directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

For the most part when people debate the bible they do not understand the subjects and are not even debating what it is about, whatever side they take.

Do we have an example?

Yes,

Some otherwise intelligent people, even in this day and age, believe that by eating or abstaining from certain food a person can become holy as God is holy even though the subject of kosher law is not and never was about diet.

Food is not what defiles and contaminates.

So, being diverted, they argue over cheeseburgers and meals, straining at a gnat but swallowing a camel, never grasping meaning of the words, subject of the law, or wisdom and intent of the author

Its a very sad story...

Same old bullshit.
You are stating that you believe in Scripture whilst insulting God.
You are inconsistent.
Now go eat your pig.

 

[hobelim]

The Bible is nothing like the Constitution. The constitution spells things out and is easily understood, the bible is arcane, its wisdom concealed and redacted over thousands of years by unknown editors for security reasons.

If the constitution was so simple we wouldn't need amendments or a SCOTUS. Just look at the debate over the 2nd, gun rights, the placement of a comma was critical to the proper interpretation. How many commas can dance on the head of a pin?

Ok, fair enough.

Let me clarify. In the constitution the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used. This still requires debate..some serious, some silly.

When people debate the constitution they are debating the details of what both sides agree that it is about.

On the other hand in the bible the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is not directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

For the most part when people debate the bible they do not understand the subjects and are not even debating what it is about, whatever side they take.

Do we have an example?

Yes,

Some otherwise intelligent people, even in this day and age, believe that by eating or abstaining from certain food a person can become holy as God is holy even though the subject of kosher law is not and never was about diet.

Food is not what defiles and contaminates.

So, being diverted, they argue over cheeseburgers and meals, straining at a gnat but swallowing a camel, never grasping meaning of the words, subject of the law, or wisdom and intent of the author

Its a very sad story...

Same old bullshit.
You are stating that you believe in Scripture whilst insulting God.
You are inconsistent.
Now go eat your pig.

God gave the law. How could I be insulting God by revealing the wisdom in it?

Sounds like you were insulted? lol...

Was it something that I said?

 

[Indeependent]

If the constitution was so simple we wouldn't need amendments or a SCOTUS. Just look at the debate over the 2nd, gun rights, the placement of a comma was critical to the proper interpretation. How many commas can dance on the head of a pin?

Ok, fair enough.

Let me clarify. In the constitution the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used. This still requires debate..some serious, some silly.

When people debate the constitution they are debating the details of what both sides agree that it is about.

On the other hand in the bible the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is not directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

For the most part when people debate the bible they do not understand the subjects and are not even debating what it is about, whatever side they take.

Do we have an example?

Yes,

Some otherwise intelligent people, even in this day and age, believe that by eating or abstaining from certain food a person can become holy as God is holy even though the subject of kosher law is not and never was about diet.

Food is not what defiles and contaminates.

So, being diverted, they argue over cheeseburgers and meals, straining at a gnat but swallowing a camel, never grasping meaning of the words, subject of the law, or wisdom and intent of the author

Its a very sad story...

Same old bullshit.
You are stating that you believe in Scripture whilst insulting God.
You are inconsistent.
Now go eat your pig.

God gave the law. How could I be insulting God by revealing the wisdom in it?

Sounds like you were insulted? lol...

Was it something that I said?

You just ridiculed one of God’s laws.
Are you inebriated?

 

[hobelim]

Ok, fair enough.

Let me clarify. In the constitution the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used. This still requires debate..some serious, some silly.

When people debate the constitution they are debating the details of what both sides agree that it is about.

On the other hand in the bible the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is not directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

For the most part when people debate the bible they do not understand the subjects and are not even debating what it is about, whatever side they take.

Do we have an example?

Yes,

Some otherwise intelligent people, even in this day and age, believe that by eating or abstaining from certain food a person can become holy as God is holy even though the subject of kosher law is not and never was about diet.

Food is not what defiles and contaminates.

So, being diverted, they argue over cheeseburgers and meals, straining at a gnat but swallowing a camel, never grasping meaning of the words, subject of the law, or wisdom and intent of the author

Its a very sad story...

Same old bullshit.
You are stating that you believe in Scripture whilst insulting God.
You are inconsistent.
Now go eat your pig.

God gave the law. How could I be insulting God by revealing the wisdom in it?

Sounds like you were insulted? lol...

Was it something that I said?

You just ridiculed one of God’s laws.
Are you inebriated?

No.. Listen up...Pay attention.

I RIDICULED YOUR IGNORANT INTERPRETATION OF GODS LAW..

Seriously. You make God out to be a capricious petty tyrant . How is that not profane?

 

[Votto]

You are right. In the long run, if you violate either you will pay a price down the road, but in the short term they are ignored.

You are wrong though if you think that the Constitution is not often ignored.

I didn't say that the constitution is not often ignored, I said that, unlike the Bible, the constitution is easily understood.

If you take a group of amoral convicts to run a government and society, they will destroy that society and themselves, even if you give them the most perfect form of government.

Conversely, if you take a moral group of people and give them a terrible form of government, they will fix it.

Looks like we are already well along the way on that road to that destruction, thanks to a group of amoral people pretending to be religious moral authorities running the government..

Looks like that moral group, wherever they are, have their work cut out for them....


I'm not convinced they even exist. I mean WTF. How can everyone sit at a poker table and continue playing the game as if everything was hunky dory when everyone knows some jerk is cheating?

The reason the Constitution was formed and successful for so long, is because of two things. It was the moral fiber of the Founding Fathers and the society that produced them. One cannot come without the other.

But you are correct. Those in government sit on their perches pretending to be the moral authority on everything. That's what makes them so terrifying. They think they know everything. That is why limited government is essential.

C. S. Lewis saw this problem coming when he wrote, “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

So how do collectivists in government try to appear as the moral elite? Here is a quote of my own.

"In ancient times, collectivist first wanted us to believe that they were a god, but when that no longer worked, they tried to convince us that they spoke for God, but when that no longer worked, they tried to convince us that there is no God, thus making themselves the ultimate authority once again."

Looks like we are stuck at the part in your quote where they, whoever they are, are still trying to convince us that they speak for God...

What made the constitution so successful up until now was the removal of religion from government.

There is an element of truth with that when it comes to the religious right, but there is also the religious left that wants to convince us that either God does not exist, or if he does, he wants government to save the poor folk.

Christ said that his kingdom was not of this world, nor can be. That is not to say, however, that Christians cannot or should not participate in politics.

I think Christians learned this hard lesson after Constantine. However, Islam has not. In fact, Islam demands that the government and religion be one. Sharia law is not an option in Islam, it should be the law of the land.

Christians learned something after constantine? lol...Are you mad?

Thats when the roman empire assimilated and perverted christianity created a false edible triune mangod for people to worship and made the ritual celebration of the torture and death of Jesus compulsory under penalty of torture and death you moron.

At that time, most could not read, and those that could, did not have the Bible.

The thing that transformed Christianity was the Gutenberg press and the subsequent rise of Martin Luther that helped shed light on what the Bible really says compared with what the Catholic church wanted them to know.

 

[Indeependent]

Do we have an example?

Yes,

Some otherwise intelligent people, even in this day and age, believe that by eating or abstaining from certain food a person can become holy as God is holy even though the subject of kosher law is not and never was about diet.

Food is not what defiles and contaminates.

So, being diverted, they argue over cheeseburgers and meals, straining at a gnat but swallowing a camel, never grasping meaning of the words, subject of the law, or wisdom and intent of the author

Its a very sad story...

Same old bullshit.
You are stating that you believe in Scripture whilst insulting God.
You are inconsistent.
Now go eat your pig.

God gave the law. How could I be insulting God by revealing the wisdom in it?

Sounds like you were insulted? lol...

Was it something that I said?

You just ridiculed one of God’s laws.
Are you inebriated?

No.. Listen up...Pay attention.

I RIDICULED YOUR IGNORANT INTERPRETATION OF GODS LAW..

We have been here before.
You were probably hoping I wouldn’t be here today.
The metaphor of God’s laws do not nullify His laws.
We see how well that’s worked out, haven’t we?

 

[Indeependent]

I didn't say that the constitution is not often ignored, I said that, unlike the Bible, the constitution is easily understood.

Looks like we are already well along the way on that road to that destruction, thanks to a group of amoral people pretending to be religious moral authorities running the government..

Looks like that moral group, wherever they are, have their work cut out for them....


I'm not convinced they even exist. I mean WTF. How can everyone sit at a poker table and continue playing the game as if everything was hunky dory when everyone knows some jerk is cheating?

The reason the Constitution was formed and successful for so long, is because of two things. It was the moral fiber of the Founding Fathers and the society that produced them. One cannot come without the other.

But you are correct. Those in government sit on their perches pretending to be the moral authority on everything. That's what makes them so terrifying. They think they know everything. That is why limited government is essential.

C. S. Lewis saw this problem coming when he wrote, “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

So how do collectivists in government try to appear as the moral elite? Here is a quote of my own.

"In ancient times, collectivist first wanted us to believe that they were a god, but when that no longer worked, they tried to convince us that they spoke for God, but when that no longer worked, they tried to convince us that there is no God, thus making themselves the ultimate authority once again."

Looks like we are stuck at the part in your quote where they, whoever they are, are still trying to convince us that they speak for God...

What made the constitution so successful up until now was the removal of religion from government.

There is an element of truth with that when it comes to the religious right, but there is also the religious left that wants to convince us that either God does not exist, or if he does, he wants government to save the poor folk.

Christ said that his kingdom was not of this world, nor can be. That is not to say, however, that Christians cannot or should not participate in politics.

I think Christians learned this hard lesson after Constantine. However, Islam has not. In fact, Islam demands that the government and religion be one. Sharia law is not an option in Islam, it should be the law of the land.

Christians learned something after constantine? lol...Are you mad?

Thats when the roman empire assimilated and perverted christianity created a false edible triune mangod for people to worship and made the ritual celebration of the torture and death of Jesus compulsory under penalty of torture and death you moron.

At that time, most could not read, and those that could, did not have the Bible.

The thing that transformed Christianity was the Gutenberg press and the subsequent rise of Martin Luther that helped shed light on what the Bible really says compared with what the Catholic church wanted them to know.

Luther was a vicious Jew hater.

 

[Votto]

The Bible is nothing like the Constitution. The constitution spells things out and is easily understood, the bible is arcane, its wisdom concealed and redacted over thousands of years by unknown editors for security reasons.

If the constitution was so simple we wouldn't need amendments or a SCOTUS. Just look at the debate over the 2nd, gun rights, the placement of a comma was critical to the proper interpretation. How many commas can dance on the head of a pin?

Ok, fair enough.

Let me clarify. In the constitution the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used. This still requires debate..some serious, some silly.

When people debate the constitution they are debating the details of what both sides agree that it is about. The right to bear arms, free press, etc.

On the other hand in the bible the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is not directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

For the most part when people debate the bible they do not understand the subjects and are not even debating what the document is about, whatever side they take.

But we have commentary from James Madison himself on the Constitution, which is important because he was the main author of the Constitution.

Just hear what he says about the General Welfare clause

"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare,
and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare,
they may take the care of religion into their own hands;
they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish
and pay them out of their public treasury;
they may take into their own hands the education of children,
establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union;
they may assume the provision of the poor;
they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads;
in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation
down to the most minute object of police,
would be thrown under the power of Congress.... Were the power
of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for,
it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature
of the limited Government established by the people of America."

Yet, the Left ignores all this and has subverted a limited government all based upon the General Welfare clause.

 

[Indeependent]

The Bible is nothing like the Constitution. The constitution spells things out and is easily understood, the bible is arcane, its wisdom concealed and redacted over thousands of years by unknown editors for security reasons.

If the constitution was so simple we wouldn't need amendments or a SCOTUS. Just look at the debate over the 2nd, gun rights, the placement of a comma was critical to the proper interpretation. How many commas can dance on the head of a pin?

Ok, fair enough.

Let me clarify. In the constitution the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used. This still requires debate..some serious, some silly.

When people debate the constitution they are debating the details of what both sides agree that it is about. The right to bear arms, free press, etc.

On the other hand in the bible the meaning of the words, the subjects and the intent of the authors is not directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

For the most part when people debate the bible they do not understand the subjects and are not even debating what the document is about, whatever side they take.

But we have commentary from James Madison himself on the Constitution, which is important because he was the main author of the Constitution.

Just hear what he says about the General Welfare clause

"If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare,
and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare,
they may take the care of religion into their own hands;
they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish
and pay them out of their public treasury;
they may take into their own hands the education of children,
establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union;
they may assume the provision of the poor;
they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads;
in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation
down to the most minute object of police,
would be thrown under the power of Congress.... Were the power
of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for,
it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature
of the limited Government established by the people of America."

Yet, the Left ignores all this and has subverted a limited government all based upon the General Welfare clause.

Madison was bit of a snot.
That doesn’t mean he was completely incorrect.