Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Joe Rogan Fan boys

I do not see Jesus as political...

In my opinion... he is neither a Democrat... nor a Republican.

He was bringing people to an understanding...

I am an architect... I bring people to an understanding of the reality they seek... and fail miserably at it more often than I care to mention.

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

I am pleased for you that you have Faith.

I am pleased for you that you know God.

Honestly, it is none of my business.

Each man walks in his own shoes... on his own path in life.

It is not my place to ever tell another how to walk... or where to walk... or what Kingdom to seek... or not seek.

... I refuse.

Same with Caeser's vax... I refuse.

Many other things as well... I refuse.

EFW... I have no further comment.

I completely agree with what you say I just think we have different definitions of politics.

I appreciate the back and forth sir.

Ps- I agree with you on the vax and probably a whole lot of other things…

If you guys keep posting, especially about religious stuff, JackOffMountain may scold you.

The notion of a Creator is not unique Christanity.

That’s a fair point for sure.

Do you think that the FFs could imagine a country such as ours is today when they spoke of freedom of religion?

It seems to me that ours is a product of technology and ideas that they didn’t likely have within their frame of reference.

I mean to them “equality” was only applicable to white landholders… that alone suggests a much different understanding than what we have when we come to ideas like these.

Ps- just to be clear my points above should not be construed as suggesting I don’t believe that everyone should be able to practice their religion (or not practice any) as they see fit. Only to ask if the FFs imagined things ending up the way they have when they wrote the Constitution

Are you suggesting that the FF's intended that being Christian be a prerequisite to full participation in our Republic?

No not at all.

I am just saying that they were swimming in a thoroughly Christianized context. Even non Christians back then (hell… as late as the 1950s) had a Christian understanding of morals and ethics.

In spite of his insinuations to the contrary I’m with Antlers when he says there is no forcing Christian conversion through the power of the state.

I do, however, wonder whether a religiously diverse society is even possible if there are religions represented that stand in opposition to the Christian ideals of individual liberty?

I suppose that in that sense the enlightenment had within itself the seeds of its own destruction. The individual freedom it espoused meant that there would come a time when that very freedom would be exercised to limit the freedom of others and being down the whole system.

Does that help clarify the direction from which I’m coming?

Honestly kinda thinking as I type… I am open to challenge/correction…

Many liberal physicists are starting to believe the math proof that being in a simulation is more likely than evolution.

That means a creator.......................God is making a comeback.

"Christian ideals of individual liberty"

Is individual liberty really a Christian ideal?

What do the Hindu physicists believe?

That a slut with a murderous cult following abetted by a giant elephant man will burn all the widows, and out of the smoke see the future?

Just a guess

Are there any chicken bones involved in this or is that just voodoo schit?

23 pages? I was just trying to get a rise out of the fanboys, maybe even draw flave out of hiding. Jeebus….. I was thinking 2 pages tops.

Well, it's about a fourth of the way down page 10 right now. There's no way this thing ever gets the 13 more pages needed to hit 23. That is, unless we start debating foods, beers or women's hair colors.

My quotes per page is set at 20 (that's probably default but I can't remember if I ever changed it) and I have 23 pages. You can change that in your settings.

22 pages and counting by the default settings.

🤓

No.

I have zero problems with someone disagreeing with me. The part of my response that you mention above was due to the accusation that you have since apologized for. And it stems from the fact that a great many men here, over time…both churched and unchurched…have mentioned, unfortunately, how some/many Christians are quarrelsome and hostile and disputatious. We’ve seen accusations and attacks and name-calling on this very thread by people who claim to be Christians.

If we can start a good argument about the proper number of posts per page, then I think we can break 30.

Ya fookin dooshbag!

The notion that Christians are "quarrelsome and hostile and disputatious" is certainly not something the Narragansett, or the Zulu, or the Mayans would dispute.