If We Erase The Christian Basis Of Governance, Then What Do We Unleash?

[EriktheRed]

What's uniquely Christian about representative democracy, voter's rights, elections?

Look back through history. Which non-European society has implemented those features without intervention from European Christendom? Did the Maya have them, how about Australia's aborigines, how about African tribal cultures, how about India, how about China, how about Polynesian cultures, etc.

How about the Greeks? How about the Roman Republic?

And btw, what was so democratic about Csarist Russia?

Greece and Rome are in Europe, moron. What part of the question "Which non-European society has implemented . . ." confused you?

You mentioned "Christendom" as being part of this.

 

[EriktheRed]

Miley Cyrus, Madonna,Jay-Z, Beyonce have replaced Christendom as avenues of finding "meaning" and "fulfillment"....pathways of "transcendence" and a "revelatory" sense of "personal identity".

You are sick fucking people.

When did any of those people

Burn a Witch
Torture a Heretic
Start a religious war
Molest an altar boy

You know, stuff "Christianity" has been doing for centuries.


the worst thing these folks did was create music I don't care for. And the Radio has an off switch.

Who burned witches?

Sure as hell weren't the people listed by Antares.

 

[Rikurzhen]

What's uniquely Christian about representative democracy, voter's rights, elections?

Look back through history. Which non-European society has implemented those features without intervention from European Christendom? Did the Maya have them, how about Australia's aborigines, how about African tribal cultures, how about India, how about China, how about Polynesian cultures, etc.

How about the Greeks? How about the Roman Republic?

And btw, what was so democratic about Csarist Russia?

Greece and Rome are in Europe, moron. What part of the question "Which non-European society has implemented . . ." confused you?

You mentioned "Christendom" as being part of this.

You believe Chistendom is divorced from Rome and Greece?

 

[EriktheRed]

What's uniquely Christian about representative democracy, voter's rights, elections?

Look back through history. Which non-European society has implemented those features without intervention from European Christendom? Did the Maya have them, how about Australia's aborigines, how about African tribal cultures, how about India, how about China, how about Polynesian cultures, etc.

How about the Greeks? How about the Roman Republic?

And btw, what was so democratic about Csarist Russia?

Greece and Rome are in Europe, moron. What part of the question "Which non-European society has implemented . . ." confused you?

You mentioned "Christendom" as being part of this.

You believe Chistendom is divorced from Rome and Greece?

Ancient Greeks were democratic and pagan, as were the ancient Romans.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's uniquely Christian about representative democracy, voter's rights, elections?

Look back through history. Which non-European society has implemented those features without intervention from European Christendom? Did the Maya have them, how about Australia's aborigines, how about African tribal cultures, how about India, how about China, how about Polynesian cultures, etc.

How about the Greeks? How about the Roman Republic?

And btw, what was so democratic about Csarist Russia?

Greece and Rome are in Europe, moron. What part of the question "Which non-European society has implemented . . ." confused you?

When you get the goalposts where you want them, could you inform us?

England was officially Christian in the era of the divine right of kings, as were many other European nations.

Deal with that.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's uniquely Christian about representative democracy, voter's rights, elections?

Look back through history. Which non-European society has implemented those features without intervention from European Christendom? Did the Maya have them, how about Australia's aborigines, how about African tribal cultures, how about India, how about China, how about Polynesian cultures, etc.

How about the Greeks? How about the Roman Republic?

And btw, what was so democratic about Csarist Russia?

Greece and Rome are in Europe, moron. What part of the question "Which non-European society has implemented . . ." confused you?

Israel.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Look back through history. Which non-European society has implemented those features without intervention from European Christendom? Did the Maya have them, how about Australia's aborigines, how about African tribal cultures, how about India, how about China, how about Polynesian cultures, etc.

How about the Greeks? How about the Roman Republic?

And btw, what was so democratic about Csarist Russia?

Greece and Rome are in Europe, moron. What part of the question "Which non-European society has implemented . . ." confused you?

You mentioned "Christendom" as being part of this.

You believe Chistendom is divorced from Rome and Greece?

Ancient Greeks were democratic and pagan, as were the ancient Romans.

Did I say otherwise?

 

[EriktheRed]

How about the Greeks? How about the Roman Republic?

And btw, what was so democratic about Csarist Russia?

Greece and Rome are in Europe, moron. What part of the question "Which non-European society has implemented . . ." confused you?

You mentioned "Christendom" as being part of this.

You believe Chistendom is divorced from Rome and Greece?

Ancient Greeks were democratic and pagan, as were the ancient Romans.

Did I say otherwise?

How do you define "Christendom"?

 

[Rikurzhen]

Greece and Rome are in Europe, moron. What part of the question "Which non-European society has implemented . . ." confused you?

You mentioned "Christendom" as being part of this.

You believe Chistendom is divorced from Rome and Greece?

Ancient Greeks were democratic and pagan, as were the ancient Romans.

Did I say otherwise?

How do you define "Christendom"?

The lands in which Christianity developed and evolved. The Catholic Church became institutionalized in Rome. It developed in a Roman context and also drew from Ancient Greek culture. It didn't draw from Zulu culture nor from Buddhist teachings.

 

[Ravi]

I'm hoping that this is a fun topic. A century ago G.K. Chesterton observed:

“The Declaration of Independence dogmatically bases all rights on the fact that God created all men equal; and it is right; for if they were not created equal, they were certainly evolved unequal. There is no basis for democracy except in a dogma about the divine origin of man.” ​

Christians have this quaint belief that God created Adam and Eve and that all of mankind is equal in the eyes of God. A King and a Pauper shall be judged equally by God once in Heaven. This God inspired notion has informed our governing philosophy ever since we began as a nation.

The evidence of reality however is abundantly clear that we are not all made equal, so what higher principle can we turn to to guide us and prevent us from a utilitarian reform of our laws and customs which recognizes and enshrines what the real world is SCREAMING at us - we are not all equal?

We have past experiments where legislatures have tried to impose the will of man over reality, such as when the Indiana Legislature came close to passing a bill legislating a method to derive pi to a value of 3.2. Any engineer will tell you that if forced to use an imagined value for pi while building a bridge or an airplane, the product will be unstable. Man's will can't override reality. Disaster follows.

So we have a society where the great majority of people believe in God and the belief that God created us all equally. Once that belief is crushed into dust, why on Earth would we close our eyes to what nature is telling us about human inequality? Some will try to argue that appealing to the nature as a model for how society should be constructed is fallacious thinking but what then in its stead? We see the negative ramifications today of a world where we treat all people as equal when they in fact are not, but when God's command is being honored, who are mere men to know better and so we suffer through.

Once the foundational beliefs which created the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are shown to be false, how shall we proceed to reform society? The problem with merely appealing to the Religion of Liberalism is that it's unmoored from independently derived higher principles - it is actually formed by appealing to Christian foundational beliefs. How do we justify the notion of one man, one vote when some men are better and wiser than other men? The rational course is to acknowledge this reality and construct a society reflective of what nature has created. We no longer have to fear God's displeasure because we no longer cling to silly superstitions like "we are all created equal."

They didn't say God they said Creator because they weren't convinced God existed. If they had said God then the lack of belief in God would have meant that the constitution was invalid.

So they did a good thing there. No ones religious beliefs can either validate or invalidate the constitution.

But you go right ahead and keep on trying.

 

[Derideo_Te]

You mentioned "Christendom" as being part of this.

You believe Chistendom is divorced from Rome and Greece?

Ancient Greeks were democratic and pagan, as were the ancient Romans.

Did I say otherwise?

How do you define "Christendom"?

The lands in which Christianity developed and evolved. The Catholic Church became institutionalized in Rome. It developed in a Roman context and also drew from Ancient Greek culture. It didn't draw from Zulu culture nor from Buddhist teachings.

the lands in which Christianity developed and evolved. The Catholic Church became institutionalized in Rome. It developed in a Roman context and also drew from Ancient Greek culture.

Yet another canard exposed about Pastor Rikurzhen who claimed to have studied religions. Had he actually done so he would be awaew that Greece played a major role in the origins of Christianity. The Greek church was so influential that the original bishops of Rome all spoke Greek which was the "official language" of Christianity prior to being "institutionalized in Rome" at a later date.

The sheer ignorance of Pastor Rikurzhen never fails to surface in his posts.

 

[norwegen]

I'm hoping that this is a fun topic. A century ago G.K. Chesterton observed:

“The Declaration of Independence dogmatically bases all rights on the fact that God created all men equal; and it is right; for if they were not created equal, they were certainly evolved unequal. There is no basis for democracy except in a dogma about the divine origin of man.” ​

Christians have this quaint belief that God created Adam and Eve and that all of mankind is equal in the eyes of God. A King and a Pauper shall be judged equally by God once in Heaven. This God inspired notion has informed our governing philosophy ever since we began as a nation.

The evidence of reality however is abundantly clear that we are not all made equal, so what higher principle can we turn to to guide us and prevent us from a utilitarian reform of our laws and customs which recognizes and enshrines what the real world is SCREAMING at us - we are not all equal?

We have past experiments where legislatures have tried to impose the will of man over reality, such as when the Indiana Legislature came close to passing a bill legislating a method to derive pi to a value of 3.2. Any engineer will tell you that if forced to use an imagined value for pi while building a bridge or an airplane, the product will be unstable. Man's will can't override reality. Disaster follows.

So we have a society where the great majority of people believe in God and the belief that God created us all equally. Once that belief is crushed into dust, why on Earth would we close our eyes to what nature is telling us about human inequality? Some will try to argue that appealing to the nature as a model for how society should be constructed is fallacious thinking but what then in its stead? We see the negative ramifications today of a world where we treat all people as equal when they in fact are not, but when God's command is being honored, who are mere men to know better and so we suffer through.

Once the foundational beliefs which created the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are shown to be false, how shall we proceed to reform society? The problem with merely appealing to the Religion of Liberalism is that it's unmoored from independently derived higher principles - it is actually formed by appealing to Christian foundational beliefs. How do we justify the notion of one man, one vote when some men are better and wiser than other men? The rational course is to acknowledge this reality and construct a society reflective of what nature has created. We no longer have to fear God's displeasure because we no longer cling to silly superstitions like "we are all created equal."

They didn't say God they said Creator because they weren't convinced God existed. If they had said God then the lack of belief in God would have meant that the constitution was invalid.

So they did a good thing there. No ones religious beliefs can either validate or invalidate the constitution.

But you go right ahead and keep on trying.

Divine Providence and Supreme Judge are names for God.

 

[Ravi]

I'm hoping that this is a fun topic. A century ago G.K. Chesterton observed:

“The Declaration of Independence dogmatically bases all rights on the fact that God created all men equal; and it is right; for if they were not created equal, they were certainly evolved unequal. There is no basis for democracy except in a dogma about the divine origin of man.” ​

Christians have this quaint belief that God created Adam and Eve and that all of mankind is equal in the eyes of God. A King and a Pauper shall be judged equally by God once in Heaven. This God inspired notion has informed our governing philosophy ever since we began as a nation.

The evidence of reality however is abundantly clear that we are not all made equal, so what higher principle can we turn to to guide us and prevent us from a utilitarian reform of our laws and customs which recognizes and enshrines what the real world is SCREAMING at us - we are not all equal?

We have past experiments where legislatures have tried to impose the will of man over reality, such as when the Indiana Legislature came close to passing a bill legislating a method to derive pi to a value of 3.2. Any engineer will tell you that if forced to use an imagined value for pi while building a bridge or an airplane, the product will be unstable. Man's will can't override reality. Disaster follows.

So we have a society where the great majority of people believe in God and the belief that God created us all equally. Once that belief is crushed into dust, why on Earth would we close our eyes to what nature is telling us about human inequality? Some will try to argue that appealing to the nature as a model for how society should be constructed is fallacious thinking but what then in its stead? We see the negative ramifications today of a world where we treat all people as equal when they in fact are not, but when God's command is being honored, who are mere men to know better and so we suffer through.

Once the foundational beliefs which created the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are shown to be false, how shall we proceed to reform society? The problem with merely appealing to the Religion of Liberalism is that it's unmoored from independently derived higher principles - it is actually formed by appealing to Christian foundational beliefs. How do we justify the notion of one man, one vote when some men are better and wiser than other men? The rational course is to acknowledge this reality and construct a society reflective of what nature has created. We no longer have to fear God's displeasure because we no longer cling to silly superstitions like "we are all created equal."

They didn't say God they said Creator because they weren't convinced God existed. If they had said God then the lack of belief in God would have meant that the constitution was invalid.

So they did a good thing there. No ones religious beliefs can either validate or invalidate the constitution.

But you go right ahead and keep on trying.

Divine Providence and Supreme Judge are names for God.

And yet they didn't put God in the constitution.

 

[Care4all]

What was the basic Christian governance, in our Constitution? I don;t understand what that precisely means???

 

[Rikurzhen]

I'm hoping that this is a fun topic. A century ago G.K. Chesterton observed:

“The Declaration of Independence dogmatically bases all rights on the fact that God created all men equal; and it is right; for if they were not created equal, they were certainly evolved unequal. There is no basis for democracy except in a dogma about the divine origin of man.” ​

Christians have this quaint belief that God created Adam and Eve and that all of mankind is equal in the eyes of God. A King and a Pauper shall be judged equally by God once in Heaven. This God inspired notion has informed our governing philosophy ever since we began as a nation.

The evidence of reality however is abundantly clear that we are not all made equal, so what higher principle can we turn to to guide us and prevent us from a utilitarian reform of our laws and customs which recognizes and enshrines what the real world is SCREAMING at us - we are not all equal?

We have past experiments where legislatures have tried to impose the will of man over reality, such as when the Indiana Legislature came close to passing a bill legislating a method to derive pi to a value of 3.2. Any engineer will tell you that if forced to use an imagined value for pi while building a bridge or an airplane, the product will be unstable. Man's will can't override reality. Disaster follows.

So we have a society where the great majority of people believe in God and the belief that God created us all equally. Once that belief is crushed into dust, why on Earth would we close our eyes to what nature is telling us about human inequality? Some will try to argue that appealing to the nature as a model for how society should be constructed is fallacious thinking but what then in its stead? We see the negative ramifications today of a world where we treat all people as equal when they in fact are not, but when God's command is being honored, who are mere men to know better and so we suffer through.

Once the foundational beliefs which created the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are shown to be false, how shall we proceed to reform society? The problem with merely appealing to the Religion of Liberalism is that it's unmoored from independently derived higher principles - it is actually formed by appealing to Christian foundational beliefs. How do we justify the notion of one man, one vote when some men are better and wiser than other men? The rational course is to acknowledge this reality and construct a society reflective of what nature has created. We no longer have to fear God's displeasure because we no longer cling to silly superstitions like "we are all created equal."

They didn't say God they said Creator because they weren't convinced God existed. If they had said God then the lack of belief in God would have meant that the constitution was invalid.

So they did a good thing there. No ones religious beliefs can either validate or invalidate the constitution.

But you go right ahead and keep on trying.

Divine Providence and Supreme Judge are names for God.

I believe that Ravi was hinting that the Founders where referring to Glabatrus, Overlord of the Thosiry Sector and Starlord-Emperor as the Creator.

 

[norwegen]

I'm hoping that this is a fun topic. A century ago G.K. Chesterton observed:

“The Declaration of Independence dogmatically bases all rights on the fact that God created all men equal; and it is right; for if they were not created equal, they were certainly evolved unequal. There is no basis for democracy except in a dogma about the divine origin of man.” ​

Christians have this quaint belief that God created Adam and Eve and that all of mankind is equal in the eyes of God. A King and a Pauper shall be judged equally by God once in Heaven. This God inspired notion has informed our governing philosophy ever since we began as a nation.

The evidence of reality however is abundantly clear that we are not all made equal, so what higher principle can we turn to to guide us and prevent us from a utilitarian reform of our laws and customs which recognizes and enshrines what the real world is SCREAMING at us - we are not all equal?

We have past experiments where legislatures have tried to impose the will of man over reality, such as when the Indiana Legislature came close to passing a bill legislating a method to derive pi to a value of 3.2. Any engineer will tell you that if forced to use an imagined value for pi while building a bridge or an airplane, the product will be unstable. Man's will can't override reality. Disaster follows.

So we have a society where the great majority of people believe in God and the belief that God created us all equally. Once that belief is crushed into dust, why on Earth would we close our eyes to what nature is telling us about human inequality? Some will try to argue that appealing to the nature as a model for how society should be constructed is fallacious thinking but what then in its stead? We see the negative ramifications today of a world where we treat all people as equal when they in fact are not, but when God's command is being honored, who are mere men to know better and so we suffer through.

Once the foundational beliefs which created the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are shown to be false, how shall we proceed to reform society? The problem with merely appealing to the Religion of Liberalism is that it's unmoored from independently derived higher principles - it is actually formed by appealing to Christian foundational beliefs. How do we justify the notion of one man, one vote when some men are better and wiser than other men? The rational course is to acknowledge this reality and construct a society reflective of what nature has created. We no longer have to fear God's displeasure because we no longer cling to silly superstitions like "we are all created equal."

They didn't say God they said Creator because they weren't convinced God existed. If they had said God then the lack of belief in God would have meant that the constitution was invalid.

So they did a good thing there. No ones religious beliefs can either validate or invalidate the constitution.

But you go right ahead and keep on trying.

Divine Providence and Supreme Judge are names for God.

And yet they didn't put God in the constitution.

Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven​

Article VII

 

[Antares]

Miley Cyrus, Madonna,Jay-Z, Beyonce have replaced Christendom as avenues of finding "meaning" and "fulfillment"....pathways of "transcendence" and a "revelatory" sense of "personal identity".

You are sick fucking people.

When did any of those people

Burn a Witch
Torture a Heretic
Start a religious war
Molest an altar boy

You know, stuff "Christianity" has been doing for centuries.


the worst thing these folks did was create music I don't care for. And the Radio has an off switch.

If those people reveal the meaning of your life you are a very sick individual,Joe we already KNOW you are sick.

What "those people" do you mean? If you mean the people you listed in the post he responded to, he clearly said, "the worst thing these folks did was create music I don't care for". That would be my response, too.

And like he also said, "the radio has an on/off switch".

If your kids get their

Miley Cyrus, Madonna,Jay-Z, Beyonce have replaced Christendom as avenues of finding "meaning" and "fulfillment"....pathways of "transcendence" and a "revelatory" sense of "personal identity".

You are sick fucking people.

When did any of those people

Burn a Witch
Torture a Heretic
Start a religious war
Molest an altar boy

You know, stuff "Christianity" has been doing for centuries.


the worst thing these folks did was create music I don't care for. And the Radio has an off switch.

Who burned witches?

Sure as hell weren't the people listed by Antares.

"Miley Cyrus, Madonna,Jay-Z, Beyonce have replaced Christendom as avenues of finding "meaning" and "fulfillment"....pathways of "transcendence" and a "revelatory" sense of "personal identity".

You folks are suffering a contextual problem.
IF YOU or YOUR kids are deriving your "meaning" , or your "fulfillment"...your "pathways of transendence" and a "revelatory sense of your personal identities" As stated in the OP's Source you are quite fucked up.

His point is that pop culture has replaced Christendom as the place where people like you go to find these things...and that is sick.

 

[norwegen]

I'm hoping that this is a fun topic. A century ago G.K. Chesterton observed:

“The Declaration of Independence dogmatically bases all rights on the fact that God created all men equal; and it is right; for if they were not created equal, they were certainly evolved unequal. There is no basis for democracy except in a dogma about the divine origin of man.” ​

Christians have this quaint belief that God created Adam and Eve and that all of mankind is equal in the eyes of God. A King and a Pauper shall be judged equally by God once in Heaven. This God inspired notion has informed our governing philosophy ever since we began as a nation.

The evidence of reality however is abundantly clear that we are not all made equal, so what higher principle can we turn to to guide us and prevent us from a utilitarian reform of our laws and customs which recognizes and enshrines what the real world is SCREAMING at us - we are not all equal?

We have past experiments where legislatures have tried to impose the will of man over reality, such as when the Indiana Legislature came close to passing a bill legislating a method to derive pi to a value of 3.2. Any engineer will tell you that if forced to use an imagined value for pi while building a bridge or an airplane, the product will be unstable. Man's will can't override reality. Disaster follows.

So we have a society where the great majority of people believe in God and the belief that God created us all equally. Once that belief is crushed into dust, why on Earth would we close our eyes to what nature is telling us about human inequality? Some will try to argue that appealing to the nature as a model for how society should be constructed is fallacious thinking but what then in its stead? We see the negative ramifications today of a world where we treat all people as equal when they in fact are not, but when God's command is being honored, who are mere men to know better and so we suffer through.

Once the foundational beliefs which created the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are shown to be false, how shall we proceed to reform society? The problem with merely appealing to the Religion of Liberalism is that it's unmoored from independently derived higher principles - it is actually formed by appealing to Christian foundational beliefs. How do we justify the notion of one man, one vote when some men are better and wiser than other men? The rational course is to acknowledge this reality and construct a society reflective of what nature has created. We no longer have to fear God's displeasure because we no longer cling to silly superstitions like "we are all created equal."

They didn't say God they said Creator because they weren't convinced God existed. If they had said God then the lack of belief in God would have meant that the constitution was invalid.

So they did a good thing there. No ones religious beliefs can either validate or invalidate the constitution.

But you go right ahead and keep on trying.

Divine Providence and Supreme Judge are names for God.

I believe that Ravi was hinting that the Founders where referring to Glabatrus, Overlord of the Thosiry Sector and Starlord-Emperor as the Creator.

That God, by whatever name, is referenced in our founding document can make for some very entertaining arguments by our leftist brethren.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If We Erase The Christian Basis Of Governance, Then What Do We Unleash? We leash the SBC governance in politics for one thing: good start.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I'm hoping that this is a fun topic. A century ago G.K. Chesterton observed:

“The Declaration of Independence dogmatically bases all rights on the fact that God created all men equal; and it is right; for if they were not created equal, they were certainly evolved unequal. There is no basis for democracy except in a dogma about the divine origin of man.” ​

Christians have this quaint belief that God created Adam and Eve and that all of mankind is equal in the eyes of God. A King and a Pauper shall be judged equally by God once in Heaven. This God inspired notion has informed our governing philosophy ever since we began as a nation.

The evidence of reality however is abundantly clear that we are not all made equal, so what higher principle can we turn to to guide us and prevent us from a utilitarian reform of our laws and customs which recognizes and enshrines what the real world is SCREAMING at us - we are not all equal?

We have past experiments where legislatures have tried to impose the will of man over reality, such as when the Indiana Legislature came close to passing a bill legislating a method to derive pi to a value of 3.2. Any engineer will tell you that if forced to use an imagined value for pi while building a bridge or an airplane, the product will be unstable. Man's will can't override reality. Disaster follows.

So we have a society where the great majority of people believe in God and the belief that God created us all equally. Once that belief is crushed into dust, why on Earth would we close our eyes to what nature is telling us about human inequality? Some will try to argue that appealing to the nature as a model for how society should be constructed is fallacious thinking but what then in its stead? We see the negative ramifications today of a world where we treat all people as equal when they in fact are not, but when God's command is being honored, who are mere men to know better and so we suffer through.

Once the foundational beliefs which created the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are shown to be false, how shall we proceed to reform society? The problem with merely appealing to the Religion of Liberalism is that it's unmoored from independently derived higher principles - it is actually formed by appealing to Christian foundational beliefs. How do we justify the notion of one man, one vote when some men are better and wiser than other men? The rational course is to acknowledge this reality and construct a society reflective of what nature has created. We no longer have to fear God's displeasure because we no longer cling to silly superstitions like "we are all created equal."

They didn't say God they said Creator because they weren't convinced God existed. If they had said God then the lack of belief in God would have meant that the constitution was invalid.

So they did a good thing there. No ones religious beliefs can either validate or invalidate the constitution.

But you go right ahead and keep on trying.

Divine Providence and Supreme Judge are names for God.

I believe that Ravi was hinting that the Founders where referring to Glabatrus, Overlord of the Thosiry Sector and Starlord-Emperor as the Creator.

That God, by whatever name, is referenced in our founding document can make for some very entertaining arguments by our leftist brethren.

In the DoI, yes; in the USC, no in the document, yes in the legal attestation.