MrDarwin

Radorth, are you speaking in tongues? Or are you simply babbling?

[ December 13, 2002: Message edited by: MrDarwin ]</p>

Yellum Notnef

More biblical basis for freedom of speech from Radorth:
Lets look at a big chunk from Corinthians starting before and after Rads little quote and see if this has anything to do with free speech.....
"11:14
Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
11:15
But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
11:16
But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
11:17
Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse.
11:18
For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
11:19
For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
11:20
When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.
11:21
For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken.
11:22
What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.
11:23
For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread"

WHERE does this say anything about freedom of speech????

Criminy.

Jamie_L

You know, there's <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=59&t=000886" target="_blank">a whole other thread</a> for dealing with Constitution vs. Bible?

Here, people can't seem to decide if they're arguing about the religions of the founders, the importance of the religions of the founders, or the relationship between the Constitution and the Bible.

On a side note - one thing the I've picked up between the lines (perhaps incorrectly) from Radorth's arguement is that there are "Christian principles" that aren't "Biblical principles". Have I misinterpreted that? If not, where do these other principles come from?

(I mean, this thread is already so far off track, what harm can I really do. ).

Jamie

Butters

Posted by Rad,
O.K. Rad, I apologize for calling you out on that one, you obviously haven't read Barton, or knew anything about him at the time of this thread.

<a href="http://forum.cygnus-study.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3488&perpage=20&highlig ht=Barton&pagenumber=3" target="_blank">web page</a>

You do make this quote,

I remembered the "The myth of separation" but not Federer's.
And from the conversation following, you learned alot about Mr. Barton. And I must say you were provoked into defending the quotes you made, I couldn't have let it go either.

{fix URL}

[ December 13, 2002: Message edited by: Toto ]</p>

Butters

Posted by Rad,

Uh.. I think you may have misread me. I did not demand that anything be removed. I asked what you want. Actually, it's probably off topic, but I'm wondering what you want our government to do that is "more Christian". Although we all understand that most of the founding fathers were Christians (although you are loath to admit to more than one or two NOT being Christian). I do believe that your opening post makes a case that because Christianity is made up of splintered sects that are so rabid to force everyone to believe as they do, that the Founders realized the only way to keep Christians from killing each other and everyone else, was to create a secular government.
But I don't see that it was a result of "Christian principles", which you have failed to point out.

But you do support school prayer, don't you?

But I must give you credit for these statements,
although a majority of your fellow Christians would not agree with you.

Yellum Notnef

Nevermind.

I was a bit dizzy from laughing at the last two pages and shouldn`t have let my busy fingers type out what I was thinking.

[ December 13, 2002: Message edited by: Fenton Mulley ]

[ December 13, 2002: Message edited by: Fenton Mulley ]</p>

Radorth

Sorry about that one. I had thought Jesus used it, but I can't find it.

But really, how did Jesus hinder free speech? He set a prime example of saying what he thought. You must give him that.

One of the key points ignored here is that, while you cannot find the examples you are looking for in the Bible, you can't give an example of one Christian complining about it insertion in the Constitution either. So while you win the argument on a technicality, in practice nobody then saw it as somehow opposed to the Bible. You falsely claimed the Bible opposes the Constitution, and other human rights, but nobody ran around quoting your verses, did they? And in fact some here have tried to make little of the opening lines of the DoI "endowed by their creator" because they know it supports my case. Right?

Rad

[ December 13, 2002: Message edited by: Radorth ]</p>

Radorth

Er, excuse me but when Paul encourages constructive divisions, what is he talking about except free speech? Using sign language to indicate disagreement?

Rad

Cthulhu

I really want to thank you, Radorth. You see, I get it now...what I should have seen all along.

You did it, I'll give you that: you really pulled the wool over my eyes. You had me absolutely convinced you were a Christian sincerely arguing (however poorly and unsuccessfully) in support of his faith. Now, after reading this thread, I finally understand.

So, have you always been an atheist or were you deconverted at some point?

And how did you conceive of this remarkable plan to undermine Christianity from the inside?

Brilliant, I'm telling you! Bloody brilliant!

<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

Radorth

"If a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We've been assured in the sacred writing that, 'Except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.'"

Benjamin Franklin, at the Constitutional convention. Oops I guess at least one of two open deists thought "the Lord" had to make the Constitution or they would "labor in vain."

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis - a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that His justice cannot sleep forever."

Thomas Jefferson

A gift of God? Jefferson said that? I don't believe it.

"Sir, I am not at all concerned about that, for I know that the Lord is always on the side of the right. But it is my constant anxiety and prayer
that I and this nation should be on the Lord's side."

Abraham Lincoln, (ex-atheist).

Oops

Rad

[ December 13, 2002: Message edited by: Radorth ]</p>