Is the USA Now Under God's Judgement?

page: 22
23
<< 19  20  21    23  24 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 10:02 AM
link   
What about us here in the UK?
Surely gods not concentrating all his power on the US of A, what about the middle east?
Or Africa?
Oh yeah I forgot that the whole world revolves around america.
What's funny is that "god" was invented before the US was even officially mapped.
Isn't there some religious site you can spew your crap on? This sites for the undecided and the open minded, people who consider other's views.
I would consider yours if they didn't seem to have such a problem with other peoples.




posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by Anundeniabletruth
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


Ever heard of a little thing called manifest destiny? I'm sorry but God NEVER loved America more than anyone else no matter how much people like you want to believe that America was God's chosen country. With that being said I have one proposal for you that I have made to every homophobic person that I have ever encountered and not a single has yet to follow up. Just answer this one question without using your religious beliefs to do so. What have the majority of homosexual people ever done to you personally? I don't want to hear an excuse that "this one time" a person who just happened to be homosexual committed some random crime because the very same sort of excuse could be used for literally anything. Go...
Homosexuality is a sin. It is no greater or lesser than any other sin. My opinion of homosexuals is irrelevant. I don't make the rules. I am not God. I am a sinner just like you.


You failed to answer his question without basing your answer on your religious views.
You my friend are a sheep. And before you say "no you're the sheep" explain to me why you are not.
edit on 20-11-2012 by Wongbeedman because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
You still think this is some fringe, radical, group of nothing schism religions, and crazy people who believe this?


Of course I do, because you're citing sources of religious propaganda from the 1500s. I presume that, when you visit the doctor, you don't request that he use leech therapy, so it seems a bit backward to similarly take your religious standards from a similar era.

Let's see what the churches of TODAY have to say.

Lutheran:


The ELCA has an ongoing dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church, and in 1999, representatives of the Lutheran World Federation and the Roman Catholic Church signed the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. This represented a historic consensus on key issues of faith and called for further dialogue and study together. (Source)


Methodist:


For more than 40 years, United Methodists and Roman Catholics in the United States have conducted dialogues on topics ranging from public education to Holy Communion.

The topic of the current dialogue, Round 7, combines the religious and the secular: “The Eucharist and Care for God’s Creation.” (Source)


Church of England:


The English Anglican-Roman Catholic Committee (English ARC) works to promote relations between the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church in England at local and national level. The Co-Chairs of English ARC are the Rt Revd Tim Thornton (Bishop of Truro; Church of England) and the Most Revd Bernard Longley (Archbishop of Birmingham; Roman Catholic Church). This Committee works closely with Anglican-Roman Catholic Committees in France and Belgium. (Source)


Presbyterian and World Council of Churches:


Among those churches which are not members of the WCC, the most notable is the Roman Catholic Church (RCC). Since 1965 a Joint Working Group (JWG), co-sponsored by the WCC and the RCC, has met regularly to discuss issues of common interest and promote cooperation. (Source)


Even the Southern Baptist Convention supports dialogue with the Catholics:


Be it RESOLVED, That the 137th annual session of the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Orlando, Florida, June 14-16, 1994, affirms the benefit of conversation with any religious group, which is willing objectively and openly to discuss their faith, and to examine it on the basis of Holy Scripture, and on such basis we encourage the Interfaith Witness Department of the Home Mission Board to pursue on-going Southern Baptist-Roman Catholic conversation while maintaining our Southern Baptist confession without compromise. (Source)


There are others, of course, but I think that this fairly demonstrates that in 2012, rather than 1520, it is only fringe types, such as yourself and Jack Chick, who believe that Catholics are not Christians and that the Pope is the antichrist.

We will all be called to task before God and will have to answer for the way that we treat others, I would suggest that you contemplate how that discussion might go, and whether accusing a billion followers of Christ of being non-Christian, based on six hundred year old propaganda is really defensible.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Christianity has a billion followers, wow I guess a billion people can be wrong.

Instead of trying to decide which branch of Christianity is the one why not do some investigations as to whether there is any evidence of a god and when you find there isn't welcome to atheism and a free mind.
edit on 20-11-2012 by GafferUK1981 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   


TextThe whole anti-gay thing is just about people who want to tell others how to live, that is all. I've personally met more young people who consider themselves to be "Christian" who believe that gay people are indeed born that way than I have young "Christians" who believe it's a personal choice.
reply to post by Anundeniabletruth
 


If one is a true Christian then that one does have to be anti Gay but be as that may be that one does not have to be insulting or aggressive. In fact if anyone is a true Christian that one will not be judgmental unless other infractions are being promoted along with their lifestyle. This is some of the root problem in this movement. Gays will flaunt their lifestyle as though to show intense distaste to the ones who are offended and while doing this will even destroy public as well as private property in rage and hatred.

If Gays were forthright and sincere in their lives and lived peaceful and quiet lives then I believe the rage would not be as it is shown today. As far as being genetically born with that disposition leads me to question whether or not the bible is true. If the bible is true and this is an abomination to the Creator then that rules out genetic flaws.
That wold leave nothing but choice which is free will. So the matter lays in the individuals belief system of whether God approves or disapproves their choice. Naturally if they have no God then that does add more fuel to the fires of hate and rage.

If I am a true Christian then I must call an exposed sin exactly a sin. I have no other alternative than to oppose homosexuality as a sin against God. If I tried to compromise the situation then I would be as bad as the sin. There is no bargaining in this simply because I am not the one who made the rules. The churches today have no right to bargain any of the bible with any one or group of people. God made the rules and his prophets and apostles gave the rule book to anyone who wants to believe it. That is called choice or free will.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
There is no such thing as a sin. The closest thing the intelligent and rational world has is a law and in my country homosexuality is not against the law.

I'm not saying I personally agree with homosexuality, I think it is unnatural but its not illegal so each to their own in my opinion.

Your imaginary god should not influence people that have nothing to do with you.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Seede
 


Actually believing something in a book because others teach you to do so as a child is not free will, it's doing as you have been taught. Free will would be choosing to do something because you desire to and not to be "raised that way," if you will. I was raised as a Southern Baptist, there was no free will there, I didn't get to decide what kind of upbringing my parents would attempt to give me. I, unlike the majority of my fellow humans, was a very tough kid to indoctrinate and did question things as a young child and when I did not get answers that "clicked" in my head I asked more questions as I grew older. Many never question what their parents teach them, most just accept and go with it for the entirety of their life and that is hardly what free will is... unless of course you mean it's their free will not to question something that has been instilled into them, something that science has "proven" most people do not do.

Free will isn't sticking to a belief because it's all you really know because that is was what your parents taught you to believe. To be fair and not insult anyone, this is exactly the way the all religious groups of people are. Very few people who grow up under any religious following make the choice to not consider themselves a part of that following, even if they don't agree with the majority of it.

If the old testament was accurate then that God is an evil ruler. I'm not trying to offend anyone with that statement but anyone who has read the book cannot be both sane and believe that the "God" of that story was a "loving" being, it just doesn't fit. I have yet to see anything that would lead any open minded, and in my opinion completely rational person, to believe that the particular book is the ultimate answer. I choose to believe that if our creator even cares, then it would be loving and not treat anyone as badly as the "God" of the old testament did. The stories in that book give a very real representation of how laws and rulers were during those times and thus logically point to something that would have been designed to keep the masses in check.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anundeniabletruth
reply to post by Seede
 


Actually believing something in a book because others teach you to do so as a child is not free will, it's doing as you have been taught. Free will would be choosing to do something because you desire to and not to be "raised that way," if you will. I was raised as a Southern Baptist, there was no free will there, I didn't get to decide what kind of upbringing my parents would attempt to give me. I, unlike the majority of my fellow humans, was a very tough kid to indoctrinate and did question things as a young child and when I did not get answers that "clicked" in my head I asked more questions as I grew older. Many never question what their parents teach them, most just accept and go with it for the entirety of their life and that is hardly what free will is... unless of course you mean it's their free will not to question something that has been instilled into them, something that science has "proven" most people do not do.

Free will isn't sticking to a belief because it's all you really know because that is was what your parents taught you to believe. To be fair and not insult anyone, this is exactly the way the all religious groups of people are. Very few people who grow up under any religious following make the choice to not consider themselves a part of that following, even if they don't agree with the majority of it.

If the old testament was accurate then that God is an evil ruler. I'm not trying to offend anyone with that statement but anyone who has read the book cannot be both sane and believe that the "God" of that story was a "loving" being, it just doesn't fit. I have yet to see anything that would lead any open minded, and in my opinion completely rational person, to believe that the particular book is the ultimate answer. I choose to believe that if our creator even cares, then it would be loving and not treat anyone as badly as the "God" of the old testament did. The stories in that book give a very real representation of how laws and rulers were during those times and thus logically point to something that would have been designed to keep the masses in check.


You are assuming every Christian had Christianity cramed down their throats as children.
Gibbs-slap!



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by 1PLA1
 


Some people aren't very bright and make ill informed decisions.

I love how people claim that they chose to believe in god as if it gives the notion more credibility. It doesn't, there's still no god.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by 1PLA1
 


"You are assuming every Christian had Christianity cramed down their throats as children."

No idea what would make you believe that I am assuming such a thing...
I'm not assuming anything. I am simply stating a fact. The "majority" of "Christians" had the religion shoved down their throat as a child. But the same can be said of any religion really...
I never once said "every" anything.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Anundeniabletruth
 


I would be another one who didn't have "Christianity shoved down my throat" as a child. I had no religious exposure until I was about 12, left the faith for about ten years, but eventually came back, through science, not religion. I am no longer the religion I was raised as, but still under the same God.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Well when I was a young child in the early 80's the first school I attended was very Christian, we had to say the lords prayer in assembly and we were frequently read bible stories.

As a child being told that there is a god I believed it, it was natural to believe what adults and especially teachers taught you, that's what they're there for.

Fortunately when I moved up to middle school the religious side was somewhat less, but still active, I remember a particular teacher reading the class bible stories and asking questions, I always had my hand up and knew all the answers. The teacher thought I attended sunday school but I didn't, I had just remembered the bible stories from first school.

As I moved into the later years of middle school and then into upper school the religious aspect of teaching was very minimal and as a bright and inquisitive child I realised that the science lessons we had contradicted the bible, I wondered how they could both be true so I actively sought the answers in the library, the net was practically non existent back then.

I read about dinosaur fossils and thought to myself the bible never mentioned dinosaurs, I read about the cosmos and how the earth was really formed over an incomprehensible time full of violent impacts and turmoil. Not as the bible says by god in a week.

The more I learned the more I realised that the bible was fiction and I realised there is no god. At first I had to accept there was no heaven but as a boy I considered death to be in the distance so that didn't bother me too much and as I've grown older I've decided that there is no heaven so whether I believe or not nobody can go to a place that doesn't exist.

I am very happy in my life and I know there is no god but I also know why some people choose to believe in god because the truth is too scary for them, I don't respect that but I accept it.

What I am getting at is that although I found the truth as a boy it doesn't mean it is too late for an adult to educate themselves. Science is not the enemy of religion by agenda, it's just natural that as man has discovered more and more the bible has become less and less credible. A person should not fear the consequences of abandoning their faith, I find it so much better knowing there is no god than living in hope that there is one. It gives this life more purpose when you realise there is not another life after this one.
edit on 21-11-2012 by GafferUK1981 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by GafferUK1981
What I am getting at is that although I found the truth as a boy it doesn't mean it is too late for an adult to educate themselves. Science is not the enemy of religion by agenda, it's just natural that as man has discovered more and more the bible has become less and less credible. A person should not fear the consequences of abandoning their faith, I find it so much better knowing there is no god than living in hope that there is one. It gives this life more purpose when you realise there is not another life after this one.


While I'm glad that you're at peace with your position, I believe that you're making a number of misstatements there, the most significant being that science disproves religion. It doesn't, because it doesn't really have the ability to speak to the basis of faith.

I'm a scientist -- I have a Master's degree in a scientific discipline, I use it every day in my work, and I study it for recreation, because I enjoy it (primarily physics and cosmology, I don't really care for biology.) The majority of anti-theists that I've met are not scientists -- quite the contrary, there seems to be a lot of ignorance of science in that community, though I'm not sure why.

Science is, by definition, Methodological Naturalism -- it deals solely with what can be observed and measured, the natural world. It has nothing to say about any supernatural phenomenon, such as God or miracles, because, by definition, it cannot. One cannot use science to disprove a miracle, for example, apart from proving that the phenomenon was simply a misunderstood natural event.

As a scientist, and as a person, I am a Methodological Naturalist, but I am not a Philosophical Naturalist, that's the difference between myself and someone like Lawrence Krauss or Daniel Dennett. I reject that position because I have seen personal evidence that the natural world is not the end-all, be-all, and that there are aspects of reality that not only are not addressed by Naturalism, but they cannot be addressed by it, by definition.

Both religion (or "spirituality", if you prefer) and science are disciplines in search of the truth, and for one who is not a Philosophical Naturalist, they are not in conflict.

So it is not a matter of "educating oneself" or "not fearing the consequences of abandoning one's faith", it is a matter of reconciling to oneself what "truth" is -- in my case, it is a power beyond that which can be discussed by science, in yours, it is the dismissal of that possibility. As I said earlier, I think both are reasonable positions, and have no interest in talking you out of yours. Only you can ever do that.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
What adjensen and defcon5 is not seeing is that both Catholics and Protestants have blood on their hands. Neither have the fruit of the Spirit and neither are Christian.
edit on 21-11-2012 by truejew because: Corrected spelling.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by truejew
 


They're both Christian. That's why they have blood on their hands. Cos your fictional book influenced them to be how they are.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by GafferUK1981
reply to post by truejew
 


They're both Christian. That's why they have blood on their hands. Cos your fictional book influenced them to be how they are.


Incorrect. Jesus, the apostles, and the early church taught peace. It is the Roman Catholics and her Protestant daughters that teach war and murder.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Sissel
 


God was very clear, that not only people but nations can be judged. Why was it so important for the founding fathers to include all the references to GOD in our forming documents The formation and success of the USA is and was because of GODS favor, our country was built and formed around GOD's value system, unlike any nation or empire previously known. Now people will suffer because we have turned away from God's law and a fulfilling the end times. So party it up, this won't last long.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by DOLCOTT
 


But Dolcott, there’s nothing related to god by the founding fathers.

Thomas Jefferson said this :

"The hocus-pocus phantasm of a God like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and thousands of martyrs." -- Letter to James Smith, December 8, 1822


and this

But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
edit on 21-11-2012 by mc4denmark because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew
Neither have the fruit of the Spirit and neither are Christian.


... says the man whose heretic religion bases its non-Christian beliefs on a medieval Jewish forgery of The Gospel of Matthew for its basis. The only thing your cult has on the Mormons is the paltry number of people that have fallen for your modified Bible.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by mc4denmark
reply to post by DOLCOTT
 


But Dolcott, there’s nothing related to god by the founding fathers.


Well, some founding fathers, most of them were various flavours of Christians, and Jefferson was a Deist, not an atheist -- he believed in God, just not the God of the Bible.



  exclusive video


top topics
 
23
<< 19  20  21    23  24 >>

log in

join