Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
That's what I keep asking myself?I just don't know what is wrong with him? Why on earth does he keep putting two different matters together?
JFK - We accept he is Christians and has beliefs - IRRELEVANT.
Chinese philosophy dictates that one must always see good in a bad situation...
So, on the good side of it, at least he values what a Democrat thinks. 😄
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Constitution Man... fighting evil the only way he can... with the power of the Constitution!
which was apparently written by European religious fanatics that were chased out of England and founded their own righteous, chrit-based country on this side of the pond.
Originally posted by Robtard
JIA, you also need to realize that presidents are politicians first and foremost; so they have and they will continue to drop the 'God' word in their speeches to appease the masses and that has nothing to do with the level of their personal faith. It's really that simple.
What I have been trying to convey for the last umpteen posts is that I know this. I simply stated that JFK and Thomas Jefferson mentioned Creator and/or God in their expressions. Now, whether they believed in God literally or not is immaterial--the fact that they said it is what is inescapable and important. In addition, they stated God in a way that attributed to Him certain significant actions relative to humanity. My point: that this cannot be disputed or refuted. I am glad that xyz at least admitted that this nation was founded on Christianity. If JFK said that our rights come from Buddha I would not dispute, argue, or downplay this, I would just accept it. What my boy I.S. seems to do is try (almost desperately) to extenuate the fact the JFK and Thomas Jefferson mentioned God in their expressions by making comments that attempt to negate what they said. All of these documental examples where God (i.e. Jesus Christ) is mentioned are proof-positive that what I said at the outset of this thread are still true. I mean document after document supports what I have said and buttress my original postulate, which is this thread. I.S. seems to decry the fact that they said God. It is just something that I.S. has to deal with.
Machiavelli states that for a ruler to stay in power he needs to appaear to be religious, but he actually cannot be at all.
Now all the founding fathers were well versed in this, along with Locke, which differenciates the difference between religion and politics.
So what did they ACTUALLY believe? I dunno...
Originally posted by Tptmanno1
Machiavelli states that for a ruler to stay in power he needs to appaear to be religious, but he actually cannot be at all.
Now all the founding fathers were well versed in this, along with Locke, which differenciates the difference between religion and politics.
So what did they ACTUALLY believe? I dunno...
Exactly, like I said above "...presidents are politicians first and foremost; so they have and they will continue to drop the 'God' word in their speeches to appease the masses..." it's really that simple.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
[COLOR=darkblue]What I have been trying to convey for the last umpteen posts is that I know this. I simply stated that JFK and Thomas Jefferson mentioned Creator and/or God in their expressions.
And just as I have pointed out in just as many posts - that doesn't prove anything other then they believed in God. An actor thanks God when they win an oscar, a scientists thanks the forefathers of science when he wins a Nobel - simple and pure - it is their personal view of the world.
Why you imply that when a person makes a claim it automatically translates over to all documents ever I don't know.
And you claim "If JFK had mentioned Buddha I would not of questioned it" is laughable - you have made it clear you view anyone who doesn't believe the bible is at least misguided.
Now, whether they believed in God literally or not is immaterial--the fact that they said it is what is inescapable and important.[/b][/quote]
HOW? A person who believes in God will say as much. It isn't important - it is their belief.
In addition, they stated God in a way that attributed to Him certain significant actions relative to humanity.
So? They believe in God - it is what people who believe do. Atheist philosophers and politicians attribute them to mankind and society - does that make it significant? Since JFK is not the authority on where morals come from it is simply his opinion. You can't make it something more then that.
My point: that this cannot be disputed or refuted. I am glad that xyz at least admitted that this nation was founded on Christianity.
Um - the fact people came to the American colonies for religious reasons is different then founding a nation. A colony isn't a nation.
If JFK said that our rights come from Buddha I would not dispute, argue, or downplay this, I would just accept it.
*Laughs uproariously* - Since you debate and demean the claims of others religions and use things like Chick tracts I suspect you most certainly would dispute, argue or downplay it.
What my boy I.S. seems to do is try (almost desperately) to extenuate the fact the JFK and Thomas Jefferson mentioned God in their expressions by making comments that attempt to negate what they said.
I don't want to have to comment on your intelligence, but it is hard not to. If you had read what I had said at all you would notice that not once did claim the fact they mentioned God was in anyway untrue. In fact I said that is exactly what they said so again and again. Still having trouble understanding JIA? No body debates the fact JFK was a Christian and that he spoke about God and believed in God.
All of these documental examples where God (i.e. Jesus Christ) is mentioned are proof-positive that what I said at the outset of this thread are still true. I mean document after document supports what I have said and buttress my original postulate, which is this thread. I.S. seems to decry the fact that they said God. It is just something that I.S. has to deal with.
Actually that is not the case, and it shows you have no idea about validating textual evidence, the different types or anything else.
A speech is different from a legal document. A legal document is different from a diary. A diary is different from a newspaper.
The fact JFK mentions God in his speech in no way means that the mention of "in the year of our lord" in the original document means anything at all. All it means is JFK believed. As many have pointed out - AD does not denote religious belief.
Unless you are willing to accept the names of days and months denote pagan belief. But as we all know - they don't. They are merely left over expressions that came into common use due to being official in a powerful political/cultural empire.
Really I advise you to get that through your head. You imply I am trying to distract when that is not the case. You however are doing your best impression of a blind, death bulldozer. Refuse to listen all you want, but the only person being deluded is you.
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
The problem with the whole "parent/child" analogy is that, simply put, it doesn't work.If it was true God would be be considered negligent by the law.
Oh wait, I forgot God doesn't obey the law. God is a parent? When he drowned the world and killed all those "evil people" - was that something a parent usually does, kill their children? And the Egyptian children. And I know few parents who would see their children suffer terribly - even the ones who actually have done something wrong let alone the ones who simply "believed the wrong thing." Yet God will let the Atheist burn, and the Hindus and Buddhists and Muslims and Catholics and everyone else who found more truth in teachings other then he, or those who believed in him but believed wrong.
So much for a proud father, proud of our free will, doing what out hearts and minds tell us is right. I mean it might be understandable if it was just really bad people. But the people who society doesn't classify as bad? Like some father sending his son or daughter to hell because she wanted to be a doctor instead of a lawyer. "I know I said you should use your free will and do what you think is right... but by that I meant follow me complelty. Sorry, off to hell with you my child. But remember while you suffer I will still love you."
And parents are meant to educate and answer questions... ooops, looks like God forgot that one. He just left a book and nothing else, and that book is far from perfect.
And parents who leave poisons in reach of children are bad parents. Whats this... God left the tree that would lead to sin within reach of the children! Bad Parent! Bad God!
And parents are meant to protect their children from harm and bad people... lets see, open up the paper... and whats this? There are children dying somewhere. A house fire... faulty wiring. Flames to hot for it to be rescued. Well, thank heavens its parent God was looking out for it. Its horrible fiery death is understandable when one has God as a parent.
And whats this? The ultimate bad man Satan... yes, God certainly protects us from him, doesn't he? Just let Satan whisper in our ears and then gives him our eternal souls if we don't live up to God's expectations.
Etc etc etc.
Why do you sound so cynical and bitter? God is righteous, holy, and just. It is abundantly indicative in your tone that you don't know God personally, which is perhaps why I perceive that you sound so hurt or frustrated with God. You seem to want to know and understand God but your anger (which is cause by your lack of knowledge about God's ways) is an impediment for you. God can and will get rid of your anger if you allow Him to love you. Maybe your earthly father failed you in some way and perhaps this is the root of your rancor towards God. But God is not your problem, I assure you of this. God has never done anything to you but good. Your enemies are satan, demons, and other people who are not fully submitted to God.
God and His ways are so past finding out (i.e. they are so profoundly mysterious except where God wills and chooses to make His ways known) that one illustration is not sufficient to adequately describe His multi-faceted ways (remember God is infinite). I used the parent-child analogy to describe the guiltlessness of God in terms of His children's behavior. But I have only dealt with one aspect of God's dealings with His creation. But you see God wears more than one hat as it were. God is not just our true Father, but He is our Judge as well. Hence, God must judge sinners for their sins. God is righteous and just. He does not take bribes and cannot be persuaded to adjudicate corruptly. That is why Adam and Eve died because they were separated from God (i.e. the Source of all life). God will not violate your free will. As much as God wants you to be saved and spend eternity at His feet learning from Him all of His mysteries, He will not override your free will. Did your parents not give you options as you grew up in their home? They gave you certain parameters (if they were good parents). They didn't just say, "Alright son, you are two years old now, you are on your own. We will let you do your own thing because we don't want to force you to do something that you don't want to do. We don't want to hinder or repress you in any way. We want you to prosper and flourish, so express yourself as you see fit." I am sure that is what your parents told you. No, that is not what they told you. I am positive that your parents laid down some ground rules to guide you and keep you headed in the right direction. So I said all that to say this: God has set boundaries for His creation but there is still ample room within the scope of God's will for us to express ourself and be full of joy unspeakable and full of glory. Furthermore, God has to allow every single person to exercise their free will. As a result, there are times when in the process of folks exercising their free will, that what they do encroaches on our lives personally. For example, has someone ever cut you off in traffic? Has someone ever spread malicious rumors about you behind your back? Have you ever been in a physical altercation? Have you ever had something stolen from you? Has someone ever verbally abused you? These are all examples of other people exercising their free will even to your detriment. But here is the good news: God will protect you from certain things that people attempt to do against you. Now, why some people are protected and others are not, is all in the wisdom, purpose, plan, and counsel of Almighty God. Some people believe that if they just have enough faith that they will not go through certain things. This is partly true. But friend, there are just some things that not even faith will override because it may just be the will of God for you to experience that. For instance, we all have an appointment with death. So when that time comes there is nothing we can do to escape it. Am I going off on a tangent here?