Christianity in America

[Lexicus]

If we're comparing fictional characters I think Gandalf would be a cooler one to "believe in" anyway.

 

[danjuno]

The religious right crying persecution because people don't like having their trampled rights "in God's name" is nothing new. When all you know is privilege, equality feels like oppression, or however that saying goes.

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

Is embarrassing

It is and I agree.

Lucifer has done a great job deceiving "christians" and dividing the church.

 

[r16]

it has been suggested Gandalf was based on Odin . It also has been suggested by some random Swedish guy in 1700s something that Odin follows some Central Asian thing so Swedes are Turks and as a Turk , ı really do not want you to replace any idea of a Creator with Turkish things .

 

[Valka D'Ur]

It is and I agree.

Lucifer has done a great job deceiving "christians" and dividing the church.

You don't need Lucifer for that. All you need is an opportunistic politician.

 

[Cutlass]

The problem with Christianity in America is that it can be all things to all people. There are no rules. And while you may think "Hey! No! There are rules! That's what the Bible is!" Well, you're wrong.

Back when there was a single church with a singe patriarch you could have a single set of rules. But then those damned Catholics had to start a new church in Rome, and made up a new set of rules to run it by. And one of those new rules was that the new church was The Church, and the patriarch was The Pope, and the Pope could declare a new rule any damned time he felt like it, so long as he could make up a good excuse for doing so.

Now this was fine for the next 1000 years or so, as there was just the Catholic Church making up rules for most Christians, and a number of Orthodox churches which ignored those rules, and each Patriarch made up their own. But for the Orthodox, they didn't make up new rules so wantonly.

But the Catholic Church, well they got really special about making up new rules. And, even worse, they got the kings involved in enforcing those rules. So you get this incestuous relationship Church and State that got so wacky that this one lunatic nailed a blog post onto a church door, and kicked off centuries of wars of Christians killing Christians over "The way we made up to love God is clearly The One True Way! And God Loves Us More Than He Loves You Because Of It!"

Now all of that got so ugly for so long that when the United States came along, it was an established fact among the Founding Fathers of the nation that there is no state religion. Separation of Church and State was the only choice, and even though the FFs were Christian themselves, they enshrined religious freedom as one of the core values of the nation.

Now this, of course, had unintended consequences. And the big one is, that if you do have a state church, then at least you persecute/persecute heretics. And that at least keeps you on the baseline of limiting who can make **** up and call it "What God Really Meant All Along". But we didn't have that. So instead the US got an incredible mass proliferation of "What God Really Meant All Along" that continues to this day. Depending on what sources you want to look at, there could be 35,000 Christian denominations in the US. http://hirr.hartsem.edu/research/fastfacts/fast_facts.html#denom And each and every one of them is different from the others for one, and only one, reason:

Some man made up a story about "What God Really Meant All Along".

And because there is separation of Church and State, because the US is NOT a Christian nation, there is no one who can police all these heretics, and keep them in check.

The White Christ gospel is heresy.
The Prosperity Gospel is heresy.
Christian Nationalism is heresy.
The End of Days Gospel is heresy.
The idea that abortion trumps all other issues in defining legitimate Christianity is heresy.

And these, these, are the people who want to take over the country and run it under the version of "What God Really Meant All Along" that they are still just making up on the fly.

And they own the Republican party.

And that is the greatest danger that the US has ever faced as a nation. What truly stands as a strong chance of ending the country is a bunch of people who have made up a version of "What God Really Meant All Along" that is so incompatible with what the Founding Fathers, and all of the rest of us since then, have tried to create that there really is no reconciling the sides.

 

[Core Imposter]

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?”
Thomas Jefferson

“And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe — the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God.”
John F. Kennedy

"Without God, there could be no American form of Government, nor an American way of life. Recognition of the Supreme Being is the first — the most basic — expression of Americanism. Thus the Founding Fathers saw it, and thus, with God's help, it will continue to be."
Dwight D. Eisenhower

“No greater thing could come to our land today than a revival of the spirit of religion---a revival that would sweep through the homes of the Nation and stir the hearts of men and women of all faiths to a reassertion of their belief in God and their dedication to His will for themselves and for their world.”
Franklin D. Roosevelt

“it is the duty of nations as well as of men to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God, to confess their sins and transgressions in humble sorrow, yet with assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon, and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord.”
Abraham Lincoln

 

[Cutlass]

Cherry pick all you want.

 

[GenMarshall]

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?”
Thomas Jefferson

I'm just going to leave this here:

 

[Bamspeedy]

Can you perhaps specify where in that 17 minute video he talks about that quote?

But i will just make it quick: from what i read somewhere, that quote was actually a bunch of words taken from various letters over many years and spliced together. (Yes, it is written that way on his memorial wall, but he never actually said it).

(Edit: doesnt help the guy doesnt even start the video with quote, he just assumes you already know what hes talking about)

Edit2: https://www.monticello.org/research...n-encyclopedia/quotations-jefferson-memorial/
(Northwest wall)

Those 2 sentences were actually said in same speech or letter, but not together, sometimes whole paragraphs editted out. That wall is actually 1 of 4 walls with quotes and that particular wall has quotes from 5 letters over 50 years.

 

[Rambo919]

Christian Nationalism is heresy.

There is much disagreement as to what that term actually means. The introduction of it as a propaganda slur alone has caused immense intended infighting. On the other hand it's currently being misused as a code word for "political enemy of the state" the same way radical and terrorist was... and just as happened previously the same laws will not be applied evenly to all situations. It's a much more dangerous term than people realize.

The End of Days Gospel is heresy.

You will have to properly define this, even google does not know what it means.

The idea that abortion trumps all other issues in defining legitimate Christianity is heresy.

If this is in any way a defense of legalized abortion other than as an emergency procedure then it seems as if you are minimizing abortion by a back door here. Using abortion as a key vote decider is the same as using bloodsport or "Minor Attraction" or any other comparable issue. Some people simply cannot force themselves to vote in favour of someone that stands in favour of it because that would implicitly mean they are themselves actively supporting it. So the question no one can hide from no matter how much they try to gaslight or deflect everyone around them becomes, if you support abortion by voting for people that support it's legalization how much of a Christian are you?

 

[Rambo919]

And that is the greatest danger that the US has ever faced as a nation. What truly stands as a strong chance of ending the country is a bunch of people who have made up a version of "What God Really Meant All Along" that is so incompatible with what the Founding Fathers, and all of the rest of us since then, have tried to create that there really is no reconciling the sides.

And here we have the thrust of the paranoia that started a decade ago, in response to the by then leftest takeover of the US a NeoChristian alliance of movements started working together to do exactly what the leftists did to begin with..... and now everyone is panicking and pointing fingers at the reaction so everyone can ignore the cause. It's not the NeoChristians that are the reason there is no reconciling anymore, they would never have started doing what they are doing if the leftists did not start doing what they are doing.

These are two sides to the same coin, action and reaction.... and it's only going to get worse if people are stupid enough to only focus on what the elites want them to focus on.

 

[Rambo919]

The thing is, if God is all-knowing, he doesn't need to test people, he would already know how they are in their heart. So the whole concept of "testing" is already pointless to begin with.
As an aside, if he's all-powerful, he would also create perfect beings that wouldn't fail to act goodly and wouldn't need enforced guidance.

So either God is a jackass that enjoy setting people up to fail so he can punish them for something he's responsible, or it's just a fairy tale to comfort people against the randomness of the world by telling them there is someone watching over them (who is a jackass if you dig a bit, but well).

This is the thing people don't understand about testing.... it's not an experiment given that God already knows the outcome.

The purpose of this kind of test is for the subject to gain insight into him or herself.

 

[PPQ_Purple]

Thank you for all your replies. Honestly, most of them leave me even more confused than I was before. But the nature of my confusion has changed, if that makes any sense. As in, and I might be wrong here, the feeling I have now is that this is not something I can understand just by reading your book but something that I must "get" and I just don't "get it". If that makes any sense. I don't know the english words for this unfortunately. But thanks anyway.

 

[Rambo919]

Coming in at the tail end I did not see your post so perhaps this will help, I think the problem here is perspective on one hand and the fact that the Book is the most complicated body of work ever written by hand. It deals with the deepest things as well as the simplest. Anyone can understand what they need to on their own intellectual level but the only way to do so is to read the whole thing by themselves first and then to start seeking answers to questions they still have from others.

From my understanding Christianity teaches that basically there are two possible afterlives, these being heaven and hell. One is a place of reward and the other a place of punishment. And our life on earth is basically a big testing ground to see where you end up after death. So basically you are born, you go through life being tested and when you die God tallies up the score and decides where to send you. These tests are called temptations and the objective is to pass them by not giving in. And if you fail the test that's called a sin.

My guess is that you are approaching this from an "Eastern Religion" perspective which relies on works for salvation. Christianity in contrast relies on a relationship to the Creator in order to be able to inhabit the same realm, Hell is where those get sent that are incompatible with Heaven, Earth is where people get the chance to improve their compatibility with Heaven by improving their relationship to the Creator. Think of it in terms of a family, if the sons and daughters cannot live with the father because they hate him they cannot live in his home and must leave it.

And this is where we get to my question. Why do Christians, and indeed adherents of other abrahamic religions seek to create societies where sinning is illegal? I mean, from my perspective if you see life as a series of tests and your objective is to meet a high score to impress god so as to earn a reward in the afterlife than surely you should do the exact opposite. You should immerse your self in places and cultures with as much temptation as possible so as to maximize the amount of tests you receive. Because the more times you are tempted the more chances you have to pass, demonstrate your devotion to gods rules and thus earn those points. And also, wouldn't God be much more impressed if you succeeded on a test that is hard like being a good Christian in a very antichristian society than a test that was easy like being one in a society where everyone is like that anyway?

This happens because of multiple reasons:
Concern for the spiritual state of others
Concern for the general wellbeing of others
Concern for your own sake so that you will not be tempted so much you forsake the faith
Simple narcissism
Simple power hunger where people seek to dominate others

Think of it in terms of relationships and general human behaviour not in terms of gain or loss as a computer would.

Ironically it has been plainly demonstrated in the Scripture itself that Legalism is pointless as a total solution because humans always eventually subvert whatever laws are placed over them. The whole point of the Law is not to save humanity but to convince it that it needs to be saved by pointing out what it does wrong and how powerless it is to save itself. Many people simply don't understand this and attempt to force salvation unto others but in so doing end up worshiping themselves as the "holy enforcers of the Law" rather than the "humble enforcers of the Law".

Also it must be pointed out that no human is actually capable of not transgressing the Law, which is also the point of the Law. It is a teaching tool not a salvation one.

If you just go through life living in a society where there is no temptation because anything that could tempt you has been made illegal won't you just reach the finish line to find god looking at a blank score sheet? And if you deliberately seek out to create and maintain such a society is that not the religious equivalent of rigging the test? I mean, won't God get angry that you basically cheated?

EDIT: I just saw there is also a bible talk thread. Maybe this should be moved there.

To repeat what I said elsewhere, the purpose of a test is not to see what happens but for the subject to gain greater understanding of him or herself and from that to grow. This means that it is not helpful to heap tests unto anyone simply for the sake of testing, that only makes sense in a works based religion like Buddhism where your actions give you elevation or declination. You cannot save yourself with actions because your actions themselves are irrelevant, what is relevant is the state of your spirit from which your actions flow.

 

[Akka]

This is the thing people don't understand about testing.... it's not an experiment given that God already knows the outcome.

The purpose of this kind of test is for the subject to gain insight into him or herself.

Considering the end of the testing is getting rewarded/punished by God, your affirmation is flatly wrong.

 

[Rambo919]

Considering the end of the testing is getting rewarded/punished by God, your affirmation is flatly wrong.

How so? All it does is accelerate where you were already going anyway.

 

[Akka]

How so? All it does is accelerate where you were already going anyway.

If the point of a test is to give someone insight about himself, you don't punish/reward him about the test. Because if you punish/reward him about the result of the test, then the point of the test is not about insight but about results. That's "water is wet" level of obvious logic.

And anyway you're just sidetracking. The fact is, your worldview is about a jackass god who creates beings able to fail a test that he punishes them to fail.

 

[Rambo919]

If the point of a test is to give someone insight about himself, you don't punish/reward him about the test. Because if you punish/reward him about the result of the test, then the point of the test is not about insight but about results. That's "water is wet" level of obvious logic.

And anyway you're just sidetracking. The fact is, your worldview is about a jackass god who creates beings able to fail a test that he punishes them to fail.

Actually no, if you are going to end up somewhere the punishment or reward would be exactly the same if you took the long route or the short route.

You don't get punished worse for doing something because you were forced to choose early.

The only exception is your reward might be larger to make up for forcing the choice early.

It's all cause and effect with mitigating circumstances.

 

[Angst]

leftest takeover of the US

what

the Book is the most complicated body of work ever written by hand

i like it a lot, but... no