Posted on 06/13/2007 8:30:23 AM PDT by presidio9
Yes, of course thats true. Anything that has authoritative power (science, Bible, laws, the ideas/quotes of famous men, historical antecedents, astrology, etc...) will be used to justify pre-conceived ideas and agendas.
This is probably they greatest problem we have in the USA today. We are no longer a Christian nation, even though the majority will claim to be Christian.
One partiular religion of course does not want their adherents to learn the Bible for themselves. I do believe that is a factor in keeping the borders open. Catholics will never stand up against a government that becomes ever more tyrannical.
Liberty exists in the world today solely because of Protestant Christians who believed in the teachings of their Bible more than the sins of a government, and fought them.
traditional American values are Protestant Christian values, particulary the rugged independence and the desire to be free from government interference.
Those values and Christianity are under assault fromn the left, for the last 50 years, because those Americans would never support a socialist power structure.
Today so-called Christians are afraid to stand up for themselves because they do not have convictions. They fear name calling, or being labeled a "zealot" for their principled beliefs.
The degree of liberty lost in this nation is directly proportional to the degree of Christianity lost.
Exactly, I've penned it Churchanity as most seem to 'worship' the church's dogma, not Christ.
Most of the Catholics I know have read the Bible many times, and understand it quite well. I realize that this is anecdotal evidence, but that is rather a broad generalization.
Catholics will never stand up against a government that becomes ever more tyrannical.
Poland comes to mind......
yes, but they are taught that they are often wrong about their understanding and that the church will provide them the correct interpretation. They are taught to not make a move without approval of the church. They are taught to subordinate themselves to the heirarchical chain of power.
Catholicism is antithetical to rugged individualism and the development of a personal relationship with God. The church insists on being an authority over the lives of adherents.
Any bitterness I feel for catholicism is that they hid Christ from me when i was growing up in the church. They wanted me to worship the Pope, subordinate my beliefs to the priest and that the reason I was just a peon is because christ said so. They told me that Christ gave them the authority and power over my life, and that I could not have a relationship with christ directly but only through them.
I never found Christ in the Catholic church. He was held back for the priests use only.
I floundered for the next 34 years as an agnostic and skeptic. I too used to think christianity and catholicism were the same thing and thus Christianity was nothing but a system of superstitions and dogmas used to enslave the insecure masses.
I thought Baptists were some tyrannical sect who sought to tie the masses up in chains and flog them if they didn't believe in Christ. That they wanted to create a State religion that would force people to become Christians.
I really thought that. My impressions came from the schools and media.
I was 180 degrees wrong.
Most people do nto even realize that a fundamental tenet of the Baptist faith is that governments and church should not mix.
It was a Baptist lay preacher who was singularly most responsiblee for the 1st amendment, particularly the anti-establishment clause. (History textbooks prior to WWII often considered him one of the 5 most important founding fathers, John Leland.)
No Catholic nation was ever responsible for the creation of a free government.
You mention Poland. They were empowered and encouraged by the Protestant Americans. They followed the lead of the Americans. yes, the Catholic church endorsed and participated, as an exception, but were it not for the Protestants it never would have happened.
I am not singing the praises of Protestants. I am stating the importance of a personal, one-on-one, exclusive relationship withe Bible and Jesus Christ.
No man who has a personal relationship with Christ can ever be enslaved spiritually, and will always be fighting for liberty of all brothers and sisters of any faith.
“Churchanity”. good
For them church is simply a tax to be paid for absolution and a forum for public piousness.
On the plus side their children do attend youth groups which can be so good in so many ways.
I’m sorry that your experience with Catholicism was so negative. Mine has been quite to the contrary. Especially the part about “worshipping” the Pope. If you were taught that, it was an error.
Regarding Poland, what you say is true regarding American encouragement. I wasn’t referring to the participation of the Church, per se, as critical as it was, but to the fact that the overwhelmingly Catholic population of Poland achieved a revolution.
I expect that we are just going to have to agree to disagree.
Very similar to creationists who are so insecure in their faith that they spend time attacking science. Building creationist museums with fanciful displays of humans living with dinosaurs, and writing books on "intelligent design" that purport to be religion neutral, but are obvious attempts to insert faith into the realm of science.
Once an unknown thing can be explained as "the creator did it", then the very motivation for scientific inquiry is dead.
The Republican Party gets a good trashing at the polls every time one of its party "leaders" tries to embrace failed, discredited policies that the DemocRAT party has previously been associated with (racial segregation, tax-and-spend, creationism...)
What a bunch of ignorant crap. Why don't you do a little reading on Nazi Germany and the conflict between the Catholic church and Hitler. While you're at it, read about Pope John Paul II and how he contributed to the fall of Communism. Then you can think about how bigots like yourself give the left so much ammunition against the right in the battle of public opinion and make us look bad to the public at large.
Fine, I accept your assertion that there are 3 meanings for the word. Thats not the point of our discussion though. Words only have meaning when placed in the context of a sentence. Which of the three meanings are we to choose from the context of the passages? Your choice for the meaning is inconsistent with the context of the passage in question ... and you arrive at your choice NOT from the textual context ... but by the extra-Biblical evidence you deem relevant.
You're not engaged in Biblical interpretation, you're engaged in shoehorning your preunderstanding ONTO the text. You have made assertions about separating day and night which are not in 1.14.
and referred to an indeterminate block of time as corroborated by all physical evidence
You choose to filter your interpretation of the text with external evidence (which incidently is fine if you are talking about forming a Systematic Theology; but we are talking about Biblical Theology here); and in fact you have made the text say much more that it does. You assume the sun HAS to be the source of the light in 1.5 ... the text doesn't provide any detail to support that assumption. It just says there was day and night, and it says that GOD separated the day from the night; thats all it says.
especially when both interpretations are equally consistent with the plain language
You're interpretation imposes details that are not in the text and those details come from outside the text. By definition, that is moving away from the plain meaning of the text.
Do you believe the Earth is 6000 years old?
No.
Do you believe the Earth is 4.5 billion years old?
Of all the knowledge in the universe, what percentage of that total do you claim to know?
Dwelling on the details of a grand parable risks missing the point.
But there isn't anything in the text to suggest that Gen. 1 is a parable. It's clearly narrative ... and I would claim its narrative history. I agree if you dwell on the details of a parable you could miss the point; but assigning a literary genre arbitrarily will guarantee you miss it.
Is there a religious litmus test to be Republican or to be conservative? Must one be Christian to be either Republican or even American? And I do not believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis, but I am Christian. I don't believe in a limited God.
No, it's because of two reasons. First, a high school kid is as qualified to 'critique' evolution as he is to 'critique' quantum mechanics. Secondly, the twisting, warping and "lying for the Lord" with respect to other branches of science by creationists leaves highschoolers with less education than they started with.
They did allow for evolution guided by God in the questioning. See #8 in this thread for a link to the complete questions and results.
What is this? The Ayn Rand version of Christianity?
...”Once an unknown thing can be explained as “the creator did it”, then the very motivation for scientific inquiry is dead.”
You could not be more wrong and more powerfulyl proven wrong than by the sheer weight of evidence. You are uninformed.
Christians and Christian based societies have been responsible for the greatest plethora of achievements and advancements in science and technology than any other culture or religions (especially atheists) in the history of mankind.
No people have been more motivated to pursue science, than Christians. Myself included.
LOL! I have given up 2 careers, each of which were worth millions of $$ to me, in order to get my PhD in Physics and pursue pure science, (which is not a get rich scheme)
Why did I give up my businesses in international business development and real estate investments??
Why??? BECAUSE I FOUND CHRIST! It was not until i became a christian a very few years at the age of 41 did i realize my calling was to pursue science. Any of my family and friends will tell you I was motivated by my faith in God and Christ.
God gave me the calling, the passion and courage to drop everything and do it. This is the problem with you atheists (if you are atheist), you do not have a clue what you are talking about.
I was an agnostic for over 30 years and thought just as you. Now I am Christian. Now I know what an ignorant ass I was about Christianity. I was bigoted and incredibily uninformed.
I now join the ranks of some of the greatest scientists ever known, as a Christian, and as a believer with the power of God in our lives ( i do not yet join them at their level of achievement).
Proverbs 4
Wisdom Is Supreme
5 Get wisdom, get understanding;
do not forget my words or swerve from them.
6 Do not forsake wisdom, and she will protect you;
love her, and she will watch over you.
7 Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom.
Though it cost all you have, [a] get understanding.
8 Esteem her, and she will exalt you;
embrace her, and she will honor you.
Proverbs 3
13 Blessed is the man who finds wisdom,
the man who gains understanding,
14 for she is more profitable than silver
and yields better returns than gold.
15 She is more precious than rubies;
nothing you desire can compare with her.
16 Long life is in her right hand;
in her left hand are riches and honor.
17 Her ways are pleasant ways,
and all her paths are peace.
18 She is a tree of life to those who embrace her;
those who lay hold of her will be blessed.
19 By wisdom the LORD laid the earth’s foundations,
by understanding he set the heavens in place;
20 by his knowledge the deeps were divided,
and the clouds let drop the dew.
>>But there isn’t anything in the text to suggest that Gen. 1 is a parable. It’s clearly narrative ... and I would claim its narrative history. I agree if you dwell on the details of a parable you could miss the point; but assigning a literary genre arbitrarily will guarantee you miss it.<<
What suggests to me that the Genesis story is a kind of a parable is that the people of the day couldn’t possibly understand the full story. Heck, I studied modern physics for 8 years and I only understand a tiny fraction and I have 6,000 years of scholars to lean on.
God telling man about creation is not completely different from a parent telling a child where babies come from. You don’t to a four year old who asks but you don’t tell him everything and even if you did he wouldn’t understand.
Sadly, unlike the child who will become a parent, we don’t grow up to be like God and we never really can know his whole mind on a subject...
>>Christians and Christian based societies have been responsible for the greatest plethora of achievements and advancements in science and technology than any other culture or religions (especially atheists) in the history of mankind.<<
I believe that is true only since the renaissance. Scientific advancement after Rome and before the 15th century was far slower than before or after that period.
Unfortunately that represents 2/3 of Christian history. I think that is more a reflection of a fall away from Christian spirit than to Christianity itself. The church got caught up in dogma regarding everything from gravity to astronomy to medicine - and they had 700 years of inquisitions.
that’s good because there is alot more scientific evidence for creationism than evolution. It is just that people have to find it on their own as the evolutionists in many schools won’t allow an honest teaching of both theories...due to theirs being built on sand. Of course it is difficult for them to admitt to that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.