Freethought & Rationalism Archive

gregor4 · 06-20-2004, 03:26 PM

I visit a few christian boards from time to time and
one simple statement I wrote evoked this reply.

Quote:

"are you saying that because there have been abuses based on some interpretations of the Creation account, one should not read that account literally?"

Quote:

"This great Nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For that reason alone, people of other faiths have been afforded freedom of worship here" -Patrick Henry

My reply:

I'm taking it "my arguements against creation by it's harms" prompted
your question. In my opinion, one has only that literal body to begin
from, yet it is the meanings one makes/sees in that literal body's
message that are it's values. Is one to presuppose all that is written
in some message is true?

Whilst I recognize the very orignal foundation of the christian
followship is their will to believe that the messages in the body of
the Bible (New Testament and Old testament) are the very words
of God, and as God is therein described to be perfect, that Bible will
then also be perfect and perfectly true, the honest mind will
invariably discover various statements within that Bible which
meaningfully contradict other statements in the Bible.

Genesis chapters 2&3, the biblical basis for the claim of Creation's
justification. A logical discovery which implies our original life was
not on earth, but otherwise.

If by Genesis, before Eve and Adam chose to know evil, they MUST
have been without any sin (perfectly lawful) and MUST have known
perfect life without death, even as Jesus decares the way to
eternal life is by perfect lawfulness and death is by sin. 'Eden'
could NOT have been a bodily life on earth. (in the material realm)
Genesis is false, relative to moral innocence/perfection and matter's
natural limit.

(disputing the limit's of matter is a reckless and dishonest abandon
of obvious and self-evident fact)

The Gospel's obvious message is:

The christ declares himself a messenger from the very person of
God and God appointed him teacher of that will of God, and christ
claims to himself perfectly obey and serve God's will. Christ claims
it is God's will we renounce this earthly life and pursue our union
with God in Heaven, and the cross of christ is that renunication.
Christ teaches Heaven, spirit, sacrifice, lawfulness, and belief in
himsef, and christ demonstrates extra-ordinary powers soto
validate his authority, and soto compel ones belief in him and ones
joining the purposes of earthly renunciation, the pursuit of union
with God, and the leading of all others to do likewise. They who
don't join his purpose and take-up his cross and lead others to do
likewise or who argue against him are warned they will know the
most terrible and unbearable eternal suffering.

Although it is true the followship, in great most number, claim
their salvation from the responsibilites of their own trespasses
of God's will by the forgiveness of those trespasses by Jesus
when they believe in Jesus, the literal statements of Jesus
himself establish both contradictions in the Bible itself and in
that claim of the followship.

St.Matthew 5:48 "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father
which (whom) is in Heaven is perfect"

St.Matthew 19:21 "...if thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou
hast, and give to the poor, ....and follow me"
St.Luke 18:22 "Yet lackest thou one thing. Sell all thou hast and
distribute among the poor,..."

St.Luke 14:33 "...whosoever he (they) be of you that forsaketh not
all that he (they) hath, he (they) cannot be my disciple"
St.Luke 14:27 "And whosoever doth not bear his (their) cross, and
come after me, cannot be my disciple"
St.Metthew 10;38 "And he (they) that taketh not his (their) cross,
and followeth (join me) after me, is not worthy of me"
St.Luke 11:23 "He (they) that is not with me is against me, and he
(they) that (whom) gathereth not with me scattereth"

St.Matthew 7:21 "Not everyone that saith to me, Lord, Lord, (I did
believe in you), shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he
(they) that doeth the will of my father (is lawful/righteous) which
(whom) is in heaven"
St.Matthew 5:20 "For I say unto you (all), that except your
righteousness (lawfulness) shall exceed the righteousness
(lawfulness) of the scribes and Pharisees ye shall in no case enter
into the kingdom of heaven"

VERSUS

Romans 4:5 "But to him (they) who does not work (take-up cross
and serve God's law) but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly
(sinful), his (their) faith is accounted for righteousness, (lawfulness)"

Now it is recognized:

Nearly all christians refuse that message is earthly renunciation.
Nearly all christians refuse their need to serve God's will for
lawfulness.
(be perfectly lawful)
Nearly all christians refuse to take-up the cross.

It is further recognized:

The statement/proposition the Bible is the Self Attesting Word
of God begins a logic system of absolutes which both violates
obvious facts and meanings as well as stresses ones grip on the
real facts of this reality in which one need live and cope.

From that very first belief in the Bible as the very Word of God
follows the logic that as God is therein descibed to be perfect,
the Bible itself will also be perfect and perfectly true. This begins
the tyranny of absolutes, and the believer is left hopelessly
unable to respect both the facts and meanings of this life
which either conflict with Bible passages or which are not
included in Bible passages.

Furthermore, when the believer happens upon passages that
are obviously contradictory or meaningfully unacceptable,
their only option is to change the meanings of words and
statements soto escape those. In so doing, they create an
environment of volatile and arbitrary meanings in their own mind,
and their own grip on reality itself is stressed. This erosion of the
authentic meanings of reality will compound itself, and in time a
general state of psychosis will develop. The stubborn and
closed-minded irrationality and dishonesty of the believer are
symptoms of a mind over stressed by it's own will to believe
and the logic-tyranny of false absolutes and it's own trespasses
of truth.

I am and everyother altogether to abandon truth and honesty
in the name and will of God? Are we to be driven away from our
own earthly life and marriages and families and possessions, and
by the constant threatenings of the Bible, and from the claimed
authority by extra-ordinary powers, if we do not join the christ
and take-up renunciation and/or argue against him?

btw: America was not founded on the Gospel of Jesus Christ, but
on dislike for the dictates and injustices of British aristocracy.
Democracy is NOT an american discovery/invention, but a GREEK
theory for a greater social good from the whole of a mutually
deciding and consenting population. Democracy can make NO
claim to justice nor righteousness, only popular desire.
And, the majority can be WRONG!

America is recognized to be the most greedy and arrogant and
offending society on earth, and the fact it's majority claim
christian faith is a testimony to a faith that fails to hold much
if any true moral/social value.

Roland98 · 06-20-2004, 04:04 PM

Wow, that's quite a response.

(And this doesn't exactly belong in the E/C forum, but I believe this quote:

Quote:

"This great Nation was founded not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For that reason alone, people of other faiths have been afforded freedom of worship here" -Patrick Henry

is one of David Barton's unsubstantiated (*cough* made-up *cough*) ones. If you search in the CSS forum, you can find all kinds of info on Barton and his writings.)

anthrosciguy · 06-20-2004, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roland98

Wow, that's quite a response.

(And this doesn't exactly belong in the E/C forum, but I believe this quote:

is one of David Barton's unsubstantiated (*cough* made-up *cough*) ones. If you search in the CSS forum, you can find all kinds of info on Barton and his writings.)

They're making up quotes now?!? When did this behavior start?

faust · 06-20-2004, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roland98

Wow, that's quite a response.

(And this doesn't exactly belong in the E/C forum, but I believe this quote:

*quote*

is one of David Barton's unsubstantiated (*cough* made-up *cough*) ones. If you search in the CSS forum, you can find all kinds of info on Barton and his writings.)

Well I love these misuses of history so i looked it up. Indeed Patrick Henry *did* say that. Of course, he said it before "this great Nation" was officially a nation. He was opposed to CSS, he was opposed to Article 6 of the Constitution, he wanted only christians to be able to hold office. He lost the battle for theocracy and bitched about it for years.

Here is an EXCELLENT link going over a bunch of quotes both real, fake, and meaningless, including some of Barton's, it contains the following critique of that P. Henry quote.

Quote:

Of course Patrick Henry was a Christian. No one has ever denied that. But do his words really do anything to support the claim that America was intended to be an officially Christian nation? No, for the following reasons. First, notice that he made this declaration about what this nation was "founded upon" before the nation was actually founded. In 1776, we were still British colonies in revolt against King George. There was no "United States" - there was no nation. There was a group of colonies hoping to become a nation. The United States was not founded until at least a year later, when the Articles of Confederation were written, and was not truly established with a coherent political and legal system until 1791, when the bill of rights was ratified and our enduring constitutional system was completed. Secondly, remember that when the time came to frame the Constitution, Patrick Henry was opposed to the passage of the first amendment establishment clause. He was also opposed to the ban on religious tests for office found in Article 6 of the Constitution, believing that only Christians should be allowed to hold office in the US. In fact, he refused to be a delegate to the constitutional convention in 1787 because he knew that the tide had turned against him and his theocratic views. When the constitution was passed, Patrick Henry opposed it specifically because it was a "godless document" and he preached long and hard that because the constitution did not establish the US as an officially Christian nation, it would bring down the wrath of God upon us all. In other words, he was on the losing end of history on this issue and his views on church and state were completely rejected by the founders as a group, both in Virginia and in the Constitutional Convention . Patrick Henry wanted no separation of church and state at all, he wanted an explicitly and officially Christian nation, and he lost the fight for that idea. So in point of fact, citing his views on church and state proves the opposite of what the author intends - it shows that those who pushed for theocracy were in the minority.

Doubting Didymus · 06-20-2004, 08:21 PM

Moved from E/C

Shake · 06-21-2004, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregor4

St.Matthew 19:21 "...if thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou
hast, and give to the poor, ....and follow me"
St.Luke 18:22 "Yet lackest thou one thing. Sell all thou hast and
distribute among the poor,..."

These verses always give me the idea to make an offer to would-be good Xians to relieve them of their worldly possessions so that they might achieve their goal. I'm a helpful guy, after all.

Reading this latest thread containing this message gave me the idea to register on some of these boards, quote the above verses and then go ahead and make my offer. I have poor friends and family, and am myself undergoing a bankruptcy. So, do I not qualify as poor? I wonder how long before I'd be reprimanded if not altogether banned from some Xian boards after a post like that. Having read some stuff at some of those boards, I wonder if I'd get any offers.

Doubting Didymus · 06-22-2004, 04:26 PM

Moved to BC&H at gregors request.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-20-2004, 08:21 PM	#5
Doubting Didymus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: East Coast. Australia. Posts: 5,455	Moved from E/C

06-22-2004, 04:26 PM	#7
Doubting Didymus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: East Coast. Australia. Posts: 5,455	Moved to BC&H at gregors request.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.