Ben Carson Republican National Convention Speech 7/19/16

a reply to: TrueBrit



Here is humanist Sargon of Akkad comparing the 7 deadly sins of Christianity with the 7 deadly sins of Islam. For the purposes of this thread, the Christian sins are featured first and don't take too long. We can skip most of the Islam portion.

Sargon relates that the Christian deadly sins are all character traits which he also links with Stoic philosophy and says they are designed to improve ones character in both disciplines by creating both emotional and self control creating a better individual. Watch long enough to see that list and think about the people today who shun Christianity and ask yourself, even if they proudly proclaim that they don't need religion to be moral, if they have shunned religion in order to become moral and control themselves or just to be more free of moral constraints? In other words, are they turning to a stoic version of philosophy or just becoming hedonistic and nihilistic?

Our Founders were aware of the problems with our system and moral degradation.

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

John Adams

[F]or avoiding the extremes of despotism or anarchy . . . the only ground of hope must be on the morals of the people ...

Governeur Morris

Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or by a power without them; either by the Word of God or by the strong arm of man; either by the Bible or by the bayonet.

Robert Winthrop, Speaker of the House

[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.

Benjamin Franklin

People who cannot or will not govern themselves need to be governed by strong men from above. We call it tyranny and it is happening in this country.

a reply to: ketsuko

So you want Trump as your Beastmaster for the collective hedonism of the irreligious?

Is that what I'm hearing? I'm really curious if that's what you meant or not. That's how it sounded.

a reply to: AboveBoard

I was replying to Brit. The context was about morals in public life and a moral people. He was chiding Carson about religion. I was asking if it's so bad to bring the concept of morals and maybe even religion in life back onto the public stage.

You seem to have completely missed the entire point.

a reply to: ketsuko

It is fallacy of the highest order, to believe that morality is unique or exclusive to those who follow a faith. Though I am Christian myself, I am aware that atheists, agnostics, humanists, and those of other faiths besides my own, are just as moral as I am, just as moral as the next Christian person in all the ways that allow humans to co-exist with one another. There is no monopoly on morality enjoyed by those of my faith, and there are countless examples of people who profess to serve the same God I do, who have shown an absolute lack of moral fortitude.

Therefore, on the purely technical front, the concerns raised by a perceived moral collapse if religious underpinning is removed from the government entirely, are utterly beneath consideration. They are nothing more than a lie. Further to that, the quotes you provided speak volumes of the problem with this manner of thinking.

Winthrop was wrong. Mankind need not be controlled by the Bible or the bayonet, as long as they retain a moral code. If all one seeks is a moral code, then there are countless ways of getting hold of such a thing without religion being involved. That is not what a relationship with Christ is for. Faith is not meant to be a tool of control, it is meant to be the method by which ones immortal soul is saved from damnation, and nothing more than that.

No Christian would advocate for tyranny for any reason, not even to save their own skin, because to those who follow the faith in truth, their flesh, although precious to God as part of His creation, is not the most important part of us. His focus is our souls, and that is why these ridiculous ideas about religion in political spheres mattering a damn, has always galled me. God simply does not care about whether a nations government is centered around the teachings of Christ. He cares whether individuals take Jesus into their hearts, and those things are nothing what so ever to do with one another.

I respect the fellows who constructed America as we know it today, those referred to as the founding fathers...but that does not mean that I believe them to be perfect, and they were simply wrong about the link between morality and religion. There are many Christians abroad in the world who are simply amoral, using their faith as a mask to hide their heretical, hateful selves from just criticism. While that remains the case, and it has ever been thus, it is ridiculous to ignore the evidence before us, that in fact morality is an issue separate from the state and final destination of ones immortal soul. They have nothing to do with one another, from a Christian perspective.

Interesting thing about Saul Alinsky, and maybe Dr. Carson is unaware, but the Tea Party was introduced to his methods by Dick Armey's Frededom Works; and Conservative activist James O'Keefe used Alynsky's tactics.
A good read.

Even Townhall got in on the act.

The Tea Party, James O'Keefe, and Townhall "acknowledge Lucifer"?

a reply to: TrueBrit

Jesus does not judge nations, He does not make blanket judgements about large groups of people, especially when those large groups include those who love Him and follow his footsteps as near as they can. He is not arbitrary, He is not an uncaring being. He is love, He is compassion, He is just, fair, kind, and wise, and to hear Carson talk you would think him a petty being.

That's really too funny. Jesus is the judge of all nations! Love is a verb and when Jesus comes back as the Lion instead of the sacrificial lamb, the judgement will be blistering.


James 5:9

Do not complain, brethren, against one another, so that you yourselves may not be judged; behold, the Judge is standing right at the door.

Acts 10:42

"And He ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead.

2 Corinthians 5:10

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

Acts 17:31

because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead."

Matthew 19:28

And Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Luke 22:30

that you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and you will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
John 5:22


"For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son,

a reply to: UnifiedSerenity

And where, in your fine collection of quotes, does it say that a person who loves Christ will be counted amongst sinners if his national government fails to pay homage?

OH! It doesn't? What a shocker. Stop preaching to the converted. You know full well that what I am saying is accurate, that Christ does not judge arbitrarily, or in blanket terms, but weighs each soul on its merits.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: AboveBoard

I was replying to Brit. The context was about morals in public life and a moral people. He was chiding Carson about religion. I was asking if it's so bad to bring the concept of morals and maybe even religion in life back onto the public stage.

You seem to have completely missed the entire point.

Thank you.

To answer your point - no, its not bad to bring morals back onto the public stage, nor moral people. Religion is a bit trickier due to the whole "separation of church and state" but even that doesn't preclude someone speaking from their heart about their own religion and its impact on their own morals.

Trump is not "moral" in any understanding or context I have for that word. That's why I'm confused. He is an adulterer, he is a liar, he has wielded his power to take land from families for his golf-courses, he has used Bankruptcy laws for his benefit while breaking small businesses in the process... I don't get where Trump = morals, or religion for that matter.

Now you may say "Ben Carson" is the one speaking and HE was speaking about morals and religion. True. But he was doing so at the Republican National Convention in support of Trump.

???

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: UnifiedSerenity

And where, in your fine collection of quotes, does it say that a person who loves Christ will be counted amongst sinners if his national government fails to pay homage?

OH! It doesn't? What a shocker. Stop preaching to the converted. You know full well that what I am saying is accurate, that Christ does not judge arbitrarily, or in blanket terms, but weighs each soul on its merits.

I don't think that Carson was saying that. I listened to the speech and took away that he was talking about the collective conscience of America. I do not think he was relating a persons individual relationship with God to an govt's position.

In essence, I believe he was saying that the election is a choice between Satanism as a identity for the country vs Christianity. Dramatic for sure, but he obviously views the current trend in US culture as being linked to satanic teachings.

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: AboveBoard

I was replying to Brit. The context was about morals in public life and a moral people. He was chiding Carson about religion. I was asking if it's so bad to bring the concept of morals and maybe even religion in life back onto the public stage.

You seem to have completely missed the entire point.

Thank you.

To answer your point - no, its not bad to bring morals back onto the public stage, nor moral people. Religion is a bit trickier due to the whole "separation of church and state" but even that doesn't preclude someone speaking from their heart about their own religion and its impact on their own morals.

Trump is not "moral" in any understanding or context I have for that word. That's why I'm confused. He is an adulterer, he is a liar, he has wielded his power to take land from families for his golf-courses, he has used Bankruptcy laws for his benefit while breaking small businesses in the process... I don't get where Trump = morals, or religion for that matter.

Now you may say "Ben Carson" is the one speaking and HE was speaking about morals and religion. True. But he was doing so at the Republican National Convention in support of Trump.

???

I think you are confused, as you say, because the question of morality cuts deeper than individual cases of lying or committing adultery. Is there any man or woman who has never lied? How many have cheated?

If you judge people in such a black and white manner so as to banish them from your moral ground then what you are in fact saying is that only a tiny fraction of people are moral. This form of moral superiority is in, in my view, toxic. Let people make mistakes in life without labelling them as immoral.

a reply to: TrueBrit

And I think you missed the reason why I posted the video put together by a humanist and specifically mentioned that he related the 7 deadlies back to stoic philosophy which has very similar aims.

Stoic philosophy, btw, has nothing to do with Christianity but also strives to get a person to control him or herself and his or her emotions and actions. In effect, it is concentrated on a morality.

Please understand what I say before you knee jerk.

I am trying to not couch this in specifically Christian terms because the need for people to understand right from wrong and realize self control starts from within and it makes them better people is what we're after and what Carson is after and is also what makes a free society operate for the betterment of all.

If you cannot control yourself, then you have to be controlled. It is a very, very simply truth.

a reply to: TrueBrit

He does judge nations

a reply to: UKTruth

I wasn't claiming any such thing for myself, nor was I claiming such "high moral ground." It's not about me. You are reading more into it than is needed.

Its very simple. If people want to hold up Trump on MORAL grounds to which they profess (ala Christian religious right values) they have to make Hillary a total monster, including showing her as having "ties to satanism." (A thin, highly dubious, calculated claim)

Why? Because Trump is far from being a paragon of moral values. Demonization of Hillary is a given in this political climate, and bringing in cries of "Devil Worshiper!!" is a strategy to make her seem like the worst of our two baggage=laden choices. It is also a deflection tactic - see look over there at that horrible person - thereby keeping people from looking at the moral lassitude of their own candidate.

These political threads are getting so extremely nasty, they are beginning to effect me negatively. The strategies, tactics, lies and general smearing of fecal matter by both parties is disgusting. It's a reflection of our culture and our "politics." Ugh.

I think I'm done for a while...

- AB

a reply to: Christosterone

I wanted him to lead.

c'mon, 90% of republicans didn't buy into the crap that Carson was selling during the primaries, and now he's the bearer of this "moral cross"?...shakes head

a reply to: Stormdancer777

Again, do you sincerely believe that Christians within nations he judges will be cast into hellfire just because of their geographical location?

If so, you have a very funny idea of what Christ is about.

its sad that Ben Carson had to go off the deep end to get a rise out of the crowd. Hate is what makes them happy. Talking about possible solutions and political issues creates silence.

and its sad that so many of my fellow ATS posters get a rise off of his belligerent demon/god speech as well.

a reply to: ketsuko

It is not truth at all. Society is not worth saving if it would fly apart absent tyranny to make it operate, and it simply is not true that it would in any case! Why? Specifically because morality does not come from law, and it does not arise from religion, but emerges as time wears on, between people, in order that they can cooperate with one another for the betterment of all, as you say. But that is not what Ben Carson is advocating here, because he made it about religion, NOT about morality. If he had made it about morality, then he would have had to have left the Republican Party (big business central, oil, banking, sleaze and scum from north to south and west to east), so full of immorality has it been over the years, and continues to be.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Stormdancer777

Again, do you sincerely believe that Christians within nations he judges will be cast into hellfire just because of their geographical location?

If so, you have a very funny idea of what Christ is about.

Come on, seriously.. that is not what Carson said.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

Carson was the only candidate to whom I donated during the primaries...

My dream was a Carson / Condi ticket but, alas, she will never seek out public office...

Or a Condi / Anybody ticket with Carson as Surgeon General or head of the department of health and services....whichever Carson prefers...

-Christosterone