A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

[Guest]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by CEW:
[qb]

Originally posted by Jedi l:
*** In response to the post above ***
This sounds very much like the post-modernist.

Which is? [/qb]

Or what is? Perhaps that could be an interesting topic for another thread.

[Fledgist]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

[QUOTE]Originally posted by accepted:
[qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Fledgist:

Originally posted by accepted:

Originally posted by Fledgist:


Fledgist:
The reality is that the legal systems of Western civilisation developed from two sources: customary law and Roman law. English Common Law, as it developed over the centuries, began with judges applying custom and setting precedents on that basis -- which means that some practices enshrined in law today date back to the legal practices of the Germanic tribes. The Roman civil code system is itself simply the codification of a legal tradition going back to the establishment of Rome, with possible roots in Etruscan legal practice. Roman influence is notable in another respect, namely that the profession of law originated in the Roman Republic.

All of this either predates Christianity, or developed independently from it.

Fledgist?
Would you have us all believe that the christian influence on the Law is less significant than the customary Germanic origins?
Kindly explain why buggery in English law is still a crime or why up untill this year it was still a criminal offense here in the U.S?.
Why is adultery still a crime under English law?

Are these examples of germanic custom?.


{Fledgist: The fact that there are Christian overlays on an existing legal system does not vitiate my main point. Buggery has not been a crime in English law since 1967. It does not, by the way, exist as a concept in US law.


BTW, you seem to have some difficulty reading: Germanic customary law was only one source I mentioned for the current American legal system. You seem to have focused on it alone and ignored the others. Perhaps this is the Christian way.}

What about the mideval habbit of putting animals on trial for murder was that based on Germanic customs or was it a careless interpretation of the biblical view of Baalam on the ***, where the *** spoke to announce an angel blocked the way?.


{Fledgist: It may have evolved from Germanic custom, or Roman law,or it may have had some other source. In any case, it is not relevant to the point at issue which is the basis of the civil law in this country. That some elements of Christian or Jewish or even Islamic origin may have entered in over the years does not make them fundamental.}

Mideval interpretation ascribed gifts of discernment to animals which "implied" spiritual awareness and by extension souls. So a donkey kicking a man to death was put on trial for murder.

Was this germanic culture?.

Fledgist, you are much too learned to deny the heavy bias towards biblical law in our criminal Justce system.


{Fledgist: Which is why stoning is a standard punishment, why it is illegal to wear clothes made of two different fibres, and why there is a legal requirement that a man must marry his brother's widow?}

Fledgist,
The only significant relationship is that Roman legal practice and the Latin language were preserved as organisational tools by the Roman Catholic Church, which, as Thomas Hobbes said, 'is but the ghost of the Roman Empire sitting crowned on the grave thereof.'

Accepted, Disengenious


{Fledgist: Ducking. How interesting.}

The Declaration of Independence (U.S constitution) does not mention God but the preamble does "embuded by their creator, with life liberty and the persuit of happiness".
Fleddgist: That is not the case. The phrase which you misquote comes from the Declaration of Independence.
I stand corrected
Will be back with the views of the framers and the bias towards God being in the national psyche.

Even Neitzhie treatsie on morals quotes Mathew in "where your heart is so are your treasures also", he admits morals begin in the metaphysical.

Fledgist: Might we have a citation please? Presuming, of course, that you are referring to the Genealogy of Morals?

Accepted will do [/qb]

I won't hold my breath.

[Fledgist]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

[QUOTE]Originally posted by accepted:
[qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Fledgist:

Originally posted by accepted:

Originally posted by Fledgist:


Fledgist:
The reality is that the legal systems of Western civilisation developed from two sources: customary law and Roman law. English Common Law, as it developed over the centuries, began with judges applying custom and setting precedents on that basis -- which means that some practices enshrined in law today date back to the legal practices of the Germanic tribes. The Roman civil code system is itself simply the codification of a legal tradition going back to the establishment of Rome, with possible roots in Etruscan legal practice. Roman influence is notable in another respect, namely that the profession of law originated in the Roman Republic.

All of this either predates Christianity, or developed independently from it.

Fledgist?
Would you have us all believe that the christian influence on the Law is less significant than the customary Germanic origins?
Kindly explain why buggery in English law is still a crime or why up untill this year it was still a criminal offense here in the U.S?.
Why is adultery still a crime under English law?

Are these examples of germanic custom?.


{Fledgist: The fact that there are Christian overlays on an existing legal system does not vitiate my main point. Buggery has not been a crime in English law since 1967. It does not, by the way, exist as a concept in US law.


BTW, you seem to have some difficulty reading: Germanic customary law was only one source I mentioned for the current American legal system. You seem to have focused on it alone and ignored the others. Perhaps this is the Christian way.}

What about the mideval habbit of putting animals on trial for murder was that based on Germanic customs or was it a careless interpretation of the biblical view of Baalam on the ***, where the *** spoke to announce an angel blocked the way?.


{Fledgist: It may have evolved from Germanic custom, or Roman law,or it may have had some other source. In any case, it is not relevant to the point at issue which is the basis of the civil law in this country. That some elements of Christian or Jewish or even Islamic origin may have entered in over the years does not make them fundamental.}

Mideval interpretation ascribed gifts of discernment to animals which "implied" spiritual awareness and by extension souls. So a donkey kicking a man to death was put on trial for murder.

Was this germanic culture?.

Fledgist, you are much too learned to deny the heavy bias towards biblical law in our criminal Justce system.


{Fledgist: Which is why stoning is a standard punishment, why it is illegal to wear clothes made of two different fibres, and why there is a legal requirement that a man must marry his brother's widow?}

Fledgist,
The only significant relationship is that Roman legal practice and the Latin language were preserved as organisational tools by the Roman Catholic Church, which, as Thomas Hobbes said, 'is but the ghost of the Roman Empire sitting crowned on the grave thereof.'

Accepted, Disengenious


{Fledgist: Ducking. How interesting.}

The Declaration of Independence (U.S constitution) does not mention God but the preamble does "embuded by their creator, with life liberty and the persuit of happiness".
Fleddgist: That is not the case. The phrase which you misquote comes from the Declaration of Independence.
I stand corrected
Will be back with the views of the framers and the bias towards God being in the national psyche.

Even Neitzhie treatsie on morals quotes Mathew in "where your heart is so are your treasures also", he admits morals begin in the metaphysical.

Fledgist: Might we have a citation please? Presuming, of course, that you are referring to the Genealogy of Morals?

Accepted will do [/qb]

I won't hold my breath.

[DC]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by Jedi l:
[qb]

Originally posted by DC:
[qb]

Originally posted by CEW:
Back to the subject of faith though. Most sincere Christians will tell you there are lots of things in and about the Bible they don't understand. Then again, I do not know of any Muslim, Buddhist, Atheist, or anyone who has all the answers to questions around their beliefs, or lack thereof. I am reminded of a Winston Churchill quote: "Most people, sometime in their lives, stumble across truth. And most jump up, brush themselves off, and hurry on about their business as if nothing had happened." Maybe we all have seen Truth - to some degree - at some point in our lives. The problem seems to lie in our interpretation of what we see. I guess like Pilate, we constantly ask ourselves: "What is truth?" I seem to recall his wife Claudia, in the movie The Passion, told him: "If you cannot feel truth, I cannot tell it to you." Could it be that Truth is not something we can logically explain? The Christian accepts that Christ is "the way, the truth, and the life." Who is to say that s/he is wrong in accepting that?

Agreed..

**and the questioning continues**
....and how do we obtain that truth? Is truth subjective or is it objective? Is truth what works? Or is truth only what can be proven by logic/reason? Is truth what we see or is truth in what we don't see? Is truth how we know or is it it what we know?...... [/qb]

This sounds very much like the post-modernist. [/qb]

What does? the questions or CEW's post?

[accepted77]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Fledgist,

Hope you didn't hold your breath. source

Introducing "With Union", The Christian History of the Constitution of the United States Of America
Volume II
Christian Self-Government with Union
Compiled by Verna M. Hall

Feature Article
By Mary-Elaine Swanson


Since the publication of The Christian History of the Constitution of the United States of America, Volume I: Christian Self-Government, compiled by Verna M. Hall, many thoughtful readers have rejoiced in rediscovering their unique American Christian heritage as revealed in its pages. What they learned often confirmed deeply held convictions about the Christian foundations of our self-governing institutions. Its scholarly documentation helped teachers and students to understand (sometimes for the first time) the profound influence of Christianity upon our early Founding Fathers and upon the Framers of the United States Constitution.
Now, since the celebrations of the Bicentennial of the Constitution (1787-1791/1987-1991), there seems to be an increased desire to learn how our American union came into being and what our Founders intended to achieve in the unique national/ federal system of government they gave us. There also appears to be a renewed desire to learn more about the character of the men who gave us our Constitution.
Finally, there is an awareness that if we are to hand down to the next generation the unique blessings of liberty, self-government and union that our forefathers bequeathed to us - and which they saw as the work of Divine Providence - we must understand the Christian origins of these blessings.
It is surely appropriate that during this Bicentennial period a Study Guide should at last appear for Volume II of the Christian History of the Constitution series - Christian Self-Government with Union, also compiled by Miss Hall, the Founder of the Foundation for American Christian Education in San Francisco. This rich collection of historical documents dealing with the development of American union extends the work she began in Volume I, which dealt primarily with the development of self-government on the North American continent.
As Felix Morley explained in his Introduction to Volume II: "Although a unit in itself, Volume I was, in a sense, a preliminary compilation. Its documentation of the development of self-government begins with the Christian idea of the nature of man and terminates with the Declaration of Independence."
When, in 1965, Rosalie J. Slater wrote her book, Teaching and Learning America's Christian History: The Principle Approach, it added a new dimension to the usefulness of Miss Hall's compilation. In Teaching and Learning, Miss Slater used the historical materials in Volume I to teach students seven fundamental principles by which our forefathers lived. Her book also gave the reader two valuable courses for adults. (See Teaching and Learning T & L, p.59 and p.303)
In 1978, Rus Walton, President of Plymouth Rock Foundation, produced Fundamentals for American Christians, a Study Manual which documented Biblically some of the principles that were presented in Miss Slater's book. Mr. Walton emphasized the direct link that exists between Biblical principles and precepts and the individual American's liberty, self-government and right to hold property; the Bible as "the political textbook" of early Americans; and the need for American Christians today to restore and rebuild the republic's eroded foundations under God's guidance.
In 1981, the Mayflower Institute published The American Covenant - the Untold Story by Marshall Foster and Mary-Elaine Swanson which traced the covenantal roots of the Constitution, utilizing the historical documentation found in Volume I. The book dealt with several of the principles outlined in Teaching and Learning - God's Principle of Individuality, the Christian Principle of Self-Government, "Conscience is the Most Sacred of all Property," and The Christian Form of OUT Government. The goal of the authors was to prepare thousands of Americans to think more deeply about how the Hand of God and the truths of God's Word contributed to our early American character and our Constitution and to offer practical suggestions on how to restore the foundations of both the American character and the Constitution to their original Biblical basis.
The circulation of the books produced by Plymouth Rock Foundation and the Mayflower Institute have increasingly opened up new avenues for the study of Volume I and its companion book, Teaching and Learning - in Christian day schools, home schools and adult study groups in churches and homes.
Now, James B. Rose, President of the American Christian History Institute, has published his Guide to American Christian Education, as the fruitage of his many years of teaching the Principle Approach to parents and children, while Headmaster of the first Principle Approach school and later through his adult seminars and institutes. His book will enable parents and teachers to take hold of this unique teaching method predicated upon America's Christian history and government and put it to work in the home and the school.
Meanwhile, however, there has remained a rich vein of historical research in Volume II that has been largely untapped, but which is equally vital for Americans to understand before the original basis of our American union can be restored. As Felix Morley explained: "Now, Volume II carries this promising undertaking a stage farther. While its predecessor concentrated on the development of the idea and practice of self-government, this book is primarily concerned with the growth of the spirit of unity among Americans. It is a unity, the reader will soon discover, that is built from the ground up in the setting of Christian fellowship." (See Introduction, p. XXI)
Over the years since Vol. II first appeared in 1962, there have been suggestions that a Study Guide be produced enabling the student to explore its riches and apply its lessons to our time. It is perhaps providential that this has not happened until now. It has taken time for Christian History, Vol. I, to leaven and permeate the thinking of American Christians on the important first lesson our Founding Fathers had to learn (one which should be no less important to us today) - the principle of Christian Self-government
Those who have studied Vol. I understand that there is no better time than now, during these Bicentennial years, to study the second important lesson our Founding Fathers learned so well: the Biblical balance between Christian self-government and union. The United States of America was founded as a union that acknowledged and protected individual liberty and self-government under law. It also protected the integrity and independence of the individual states at the same time as it enabled them to act together cooperatively for their general concerns.
The Christian spirit of unity in defense of Christian self-government, as expressed in our early history, is beautifully documented in Vol. II. In its pages we learn that this spirit of unity enabled Americans to bring forth their unique national/federal union under the Constitution.


Excerpt from the Study Guide to The Christian History of the Constitution, Vol. II; Christian Self-government with Union, by Mary Elaine Swanson. Published with permission by the American Christian History Institute.

[accepted77]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers

http://www.legallibraries.com/Christiani...0801052319.html



Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers
by Authors: John Eidsmoe
Released: July, 1995
ISBN: 0801052319
Paperback

Sales Rank: 6,339
List price: $26.99
Our price: $18.35 (You save: $8.64)




Book > Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers > Customer Reviews:


Average Customer Rating:

Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers > Customer Review #1:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Best Book Ive Read in Years!

This is the best book I have read in years. This book takes the reader up close and personal with the ideals, dreams, and thoughts of the founding fathers. The founding fathers were not perfect, but their dream for "one nation under God", a nation founded upon the principles of the Bible, was the best ever embarked upon by mankind. This book traces the development of earlier thinkers such as John Locke who outlined the basic rights of people. The book takes each part of the constitution and shows its early formation from dreams of peasants to reality in America. Ultimately, the book takes each of the more outstanding founding fathers, from Thomas Jefferson to John Jay and Patrick Henry, quoting from original sources what their true thoughts were concerning God, the Bible, and Christianity, and how they applied their beliefs to the framework of America. If you want to know more about our founding fathers and their true thoughts, read this book, fully documented, rather than depending upon modern history revisionists. I cannot over-emphasize the importance and greatness of this book!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers > Customer Review #2:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Book Should Be Read Before Reviewed...

*Christianity and the Constitution* is a sober, careful overview of the historical and intellectual foundations of the Framers of the US Constitution, particularly in regard to how the Christian worldview influenced their view of man, his nature, the role, purpose and scope of government, etc.
Eidsmoe copiously documents his work from the primary materials and related scholarly secondary materials. His case is substantive and conclusive. Were *all* the Framers devout Christians? No. Were most of them Christians? Yes. More importantly, it is documented that the intellectual and philosophical foundations of their worldview and the American culture in general was overwhelmingly Protestant Christian, and this weighed heavily in their work.

Regarding a "reviewer" asserting, and I quote, "Indeed, it was a concession by Jefferson which allowed the word God into our Constitution. Many may feel this is a wonderful book, but that does not mean that it is accurate," one cant help but sense the irony in their statement and their comment regarding accuracy.

[a] Thomas Jefferson had nothing to do with the writing or ratification of the US Constitution--he was in France at the time on a diplomatic mission, so he didnt offer "concession" pro or con regarding the inclusion of the word "God" in the Constitution;

[b] The word "God" does not appear in the US Constitution. As such, their comments regarding Jefferson taking part in the Constitutional Convention are predicated upon ignorance, as such their comment regarding Jeffersons "concession" are likewise predicated upon their ignorance of the subject, and finally their assertion that the word "God" does appear in the text of the Constitution also displays they are not only ignorant of the history of the Constitutional Convention and its participants, but also ignorant of the content of the US Constitution itself.

Their review is as such moot and worthless. Read the book for yourself, study its sources and dont permit prejudiced dislike and religious bigotry to poison the well of this informative book.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers > Customer Review #3:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A bit simplistic

John Eidsmoes book is definately relevant to any inquiry into the relation between the Church and the Civil magistrate, particularly in regard to that relation at the founding of the constitution. The naive assumption that politics operate in an epistemic vaccum is, hopefully, washed away by Eidsmoes presentation of general philosophical and religious precommitments of our nations early politicians.
I believe Eidsmoe is a bit optomistic in regard to the orthodoxy of the faith of the constitutional founders, definately underplaying the Masonic influence on their views. Whatever their particular views, Christians should hardly claim them in defense of a thoroughly anti-christian covenantal document that established the *people* as the Sovereign of the nation. Vague references to God hardly establish a Christian nature to the document, though undoubtably, as Eidsmoe states, the structure itself can obviously be attributed to the Presbyterian model of government.

With that said, the book is, in the end, worth reading. Particularly the 22nd chapter, "Into the Third Century: Where does the US go from Here?" Eidsmoe, likely unintentionally, evidences the futility of a covenantal document that establishes human autonomy as Sovereign by its thorough subjectivism. Eidsmoe demonstates this with a number of penal examples (what *exactly* is the normative referant for cruel and unusual punishment today?)

After reading this book, I would highly recommend Gary Norths "Political Polytheism" to supplement it with a little Biblical orthodoxy (keep in mind, Eidsmoe is a dispensationalist - *gag*)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers > Related Products
Original Intent: The Courts, the Constitution, and Religion
Faith of Our Founding Fathers
The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in America
Americas God and Country Encyclopedia of Quotations
The Godless Constitution: The Case Against Religious Correctness
Lives of the Signers of the Declaration of Independence
Why the Religious Right Is Wrong: About Separation of Church and State
Light and the Glory
The Myth of Christian America : What You Need to Know About the Separation of Church and State

[accepted77]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Fledgist,

On the Genealogy of Morals

PREFACE

1

We are unknown to ourselves, we men of knowledge—and with good reason. We have never sought ourselves—how could it happen that we should ever find ourselves? It has rightly been said: "Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also" [Matthew 6:21]; our treasure is where the beehives of our knowledge are. We are constantly making for them, being by nature winged creatures and honey-gatherers of the spirit; there is one thing alone we really care about from the heart—"bringing something home."
.

source

Without a doubt you are familiar with these works. My point is though he goes on to berate everything christian, buhdist, etc about morals, in the preface he admits it has been rightly said, and then quotes Mathew.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by accepted:
[qb]

Originally posted by Fledgist:
[qb]

Originally posted by Jedi l:
[qb] The United States Constitution, which is based on principles of classical republicanism drawn from Titus Livy and Polybius, inter alia; the principles of common law and equity which developed in mediæval England; civil code law, based on the Roman legal tradition.



Which is based on what? [/qb]

Reason and experience. [/qb]

Fledgist,

Isn't that a little obscure. [/qb]

Talking about baseball in the middle of pontificating about the moral dilemma of Tun-Back Christians seems more than a little obscure to me, but I wont tell... [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Tuff Gong]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by accepted:
[qb] Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of Our Founding Fathers
by Authors: John Eidsmoe
Released: July, 1995
ISBN: 0801052319
Paperback

Sales Rank: 6,339
List price: $26.99
Our price: $18.35 (You save: $8.64)
[/qb]

Our price: $18.35 (You save: $8.64)

Who saved?
Any book written after the second millennium of Christianity to explaining Christianity is not valid.

[rebelgirl]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by Jedi l:
[qb]

{ Jedi: So then it shouldn't come as any surprise to you that I find your response to be quite typical of you without going into any lengthy descriptives?}


{Jedi: And again I am not surprised that you cannot make the connection between a misdemeanor any misdemeanor and it's larger implication on all of society at large.}



{Jedi: So in your estimation there are some behaviors which are expected therefore acceptable? Humans in otherwords have little control over their depraved natures?


Jedi: Very good! Now make the connection.}



{Jedi: First tell me how it has impacted and changed yours}


Jedi: I dare say that you may want to first look at the root cause of evil before you go out campaigning to stop 'genocide, war, famines and plagues.' Each of those things originate from the same place as infidelity - the individual hearts of people } diffrent brain chemicals and parts of the brain

First of all I do not worry about what you or any one else may be doing under the sheets. But I do find it very blindsighted and a bit hypocritical to speak of the larger atrocities in society when we indulge ourselves daily in the exercise of those things which produce on a larger scale massive destruction to society, such as - anger, malice, sloth, greed, gluttony, jealousy, lust Whether you like the word 'sin' or a variation on the same theme, depravity begins within the individual person, and if even one person is harmed everyone is harmed.

I am amazed for instance that you cannot see the total destruction to the lives of children and whole families because of cheating spouses. I am amazed that you cannot make the connection between homeless and misplaced children because of broken homes. You may think that it does not affect you but the next time you pay taxes remember that part of that money goes to assist someone who might not have needed it had someone else not cheated on someone else. [/qb]

Hmmm interesting in this one post we have
Several ad hominems
Bifurcation
Hasty generalization
Circulus in demonstrando
Fallacy of presupposition
Cum hoc ergo propter hoc
Dicto simpliciter
Ignoratio elenchi
etc etc etc......


Oh you edited it I would have liked to see the original.

But twist and skew as you feel necessary dear [img]/forums/images/graemlins/704555_dwl.gif[/img] I probably won't have the time to respond anyway.

[fOrTyLeGz]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by Jedi l:

Seems to me some men sailing in boats came to this side of the world and exterminated a whole bunch of people who were going about their merry affairs worshipping their gods on totem poles and sending up smoke signals to one another.

Christian men came, with their "white man's burden." These conqueror had ZERO respect for the peoples they encountered, because they did not believe in THEIR god. "Savages."

_

[bigbooie]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by JesusDread:
[qb] Greetings! As usual this board is always full of eloquent writers and thinkers. It’s just a pity so many of you are sooo wrong regardless how intellectual you seem to be.

First let’s get the real meaning of what sin is. Sin literally means error; therefore anything that can be deemed as wrong could be classified as sin.

The debate about what is sin and what is not can be simplified by this analogy.

1. If there is no god, then there is no guilt in sin or literally no such thing as sin.

2. If you aren’t sure if there is a God then sin will be defined by your conscience.

3. If there is a God then we are all guilty of sin and need to get right with Him. Therefore just because you know God or claim to follow Him doesn’t exclude you from sin, it only assures you of the opportunity to be forgiven or redeemed.

Whichever opinion you choose will be by the liberty of your free will and any consequences attached to your decision will be your responsibility if and when there ever comes a time to pay up.

If there was no God then whatever we do or think will never matter in the long run.

Now if there is a God, and it is my opinion that there is along with the vast majority of human beings, then what you or I think does not determine what sin is or isn’t. To know what sin is would mean you have to know what God says sin is.

If you deviate from what the One and True God classifies as sin then you are standing in line to be paid its wages which is spiritual death. You can’t blame God for man’s sin because He gave us a free will to choose and our choice determines where we will end up when we depart this world for the spiritual realm.

Now my limited knowledge of God has led me to know and accept the God of Abraham and Isaac, Jacob and Moses, and His only begotten Son Jesus as being the only true authority on what sin is and how to free myself from its bondage. I am quite confident that I am right and that many boardies may take offense to this because it threatens their belief structure.

As I said, being that my beliefs are right, then it only shows that those that don’t come to know God will never be forgiven of their sins because they will never have repented of them to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ who is the only one who forgives sin and is the only way to eternal life.

So while opinions may come and go as will the debates on what is good and what isn’t, God is true and eternal and I have a heavy heart for all mockers, false worshipers and atheists. My advice is try and find a good bible teaching church and stop debating what is already set in stone, GOD IS REAL and so is SALVATION FROM SIN in JESUS!

PS If I don’t reply to any of your rebuttals it is not that I am ignoring your rants and ravings, I might just be off-line. Peace! [/qb]

A dats why mi no understand how dem yah man can come to dat deh conclusion seh no God no exsist.
Like everyting just pop up outtah now whe.
One a dem seh the world exsist and him in it and left it so. Dem no believe innah God but dem spend most a di time trying to prove there is not one. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] Why waste yu time?.And why would you care if others do. No fi dem worries..
Some ppl just need to be heard a guess.

[bigbooie]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by DC:
[qb]

Originally posted by CEW:
Back to the subject of faith though. Most sincere Christians will tell you there are lots of things in and about the Bible they don't understand. Then again, I do not know of any Muslim, Buddhist, Atheist, or anyone who has all the answers to questions around their beliefs, or lack thereof. I am reminded of a Winston Churchill quote: "Most people, sometime in their lives, stumble across truth. And most jump up, brush themselves off, and hurry on about their business as if nothing had happened." Maybe we all have seen Truth - to some degree - at some point in our lives. The problem seems to lie in our interpretation of what we see. I guess like Pilate, we constantly ask ourselves: "What is truth?" I seem to recall his wife Claudia, in the movie The Passion, told him: "If you cannot feel truth, I cannot tell it to you." Could it be that Truth is not something we can logically explain? The Christian accepts that Christ is "the way, the truth, and the life." Who is to say that s/he is wrong in accepting that?

Agreed..

**and the questioning continues**
....and how do we obtain that truth? Is truth subjective or is it objective? Is truth what works? Or is truth only what can be proven by logic/reason? Is truth what we see or is truth in what we don't see? Is truth how we know or is it it what we know?...... [/qb]

I said it before no matter how yu cut it dise it and fabricate it. The truth will remaind the same, unchange. Truth is what you see and what you feel. Period! I can'tr afford fi get caught up innah di fantasy and disalution, weddah or not one man feel it and the other man logically proven it doesn't matter. If two man take two different road to the same destination and end up at the same place Whats the problem? The only issue really is how well you live yu life while traveling that road as a rightious person.

[JesusDread]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted bu BiggahView:
Dem no believe innah God but dem spend most a di time trying to prove there is not one. Why waste yu time?.And why would you care if others do. No fi dem worries..
Some ppl just need to be heard a guess.
----------------------------------------------

A couldn’t agree wid yu more! Empty barrel mek the most noise!

[Tuff Gong]

Re: A moral dilemma for Ex-Christians???

Originally posted by BIGGAHVIEW:
[qb] Dem no believe innah God but dem spend most a di time trying to prove there is not one. Why waste yu time?.And why would you care if others do. No fi dem worries..
Some ppl just need to be heard a guess.
[/qb]

Nine times out of ten it is the other way round. It is religious ones who spend their time and effort converting or trying to prove that their is a god. I never worry about it till I am asked.