Mike Huckabee: Newtown Shooting No Surprise, We've 'Systematically Removed God' From

Honestly, I don't think Jesus would go after gun owners. I think he'd just tell people to follow him and ignore the political stuff.
Of course he wouldn't "go after" gun owners; unlike yourself, he was a pacifist who rejected the entire paradigm of the state, and would have acted as such.
 
Of course he wouldn't "go after" gun owners; unlike yourself, he was a pacifist who rejected the entire paradigm of the state, and would have acted as such.
He didn't reject the state...
"render unto Caesar"...

He realized the state is a reality, but he let people know there are more important things than the state, something communists don't realize.
 
He didn't reject the state...
"render unto Caesar"...

He realized the state is a reality, but he let people know there are more important things than the state,
Of course he recognised that the state was a reality, but that doesn't mean he was happy with it. He preached non-violence and total dedication to God and the work of God, and it's not readily apparent how that could be reconciled with the violence and divided loyalties that participation necessarily entails.

Invoking a specifically Lutheran interpretation of a single passage doesn't just magic that problem away.
 
Jesus preached non-violence because he thought that God would come soon and administer all the violence necessary. No need to be violent when God will do it soon anyway.
 
He realized the state is a reality, but he let people know there are more important things than the state, something communists don't realize.

The state is the highest authority. You can't compel a secular state to god or the church, so to the exception of the sovereignty of the people, the state is the "most important thing".:crazyeye:
 
The state is the highest authority. You can't compel a secular state to god or the church, so to the exception of the sovereignty of the people, the state is the "most important thing".:crazyeye:

There was a time where there was no state and perhaps it will be so in the future as well. So I dont think that state is the most important ...
 
He didn't reject the state...
"render unto Caesar"...

He realized the state is a reality, but he let people know there are more important things than the state, something communists don't realize.

I think its hard to say Jesus would have supported or opposed the state. Yeah, he did (Probably, I recognize the other interpretations) consider fiat money to be "Belonging to Caesar" but he didn't condone his existance.

The state is the highest authority. You can't compel a secular state to god or the church, so to the exception of the sovereignty of the people, the state is the "most important thing".:crazyeye:

Yeah, worship at its feet LoE.

I think you might have been happier in Mussolini's Italy:crazyeye:
 
Yeah, worship at its feet LoE.

I think you might have been happier in Mussolini's Italy:crazyeye:

I can't help that you apparently don't understand how human societies are organized. See the below.

There was a time where there was no state and perhaps it will be so in the future as well. So I dont think that state is the most important ...

There has never "not been a state". Ever since people have existed in groups there has been a non-religious authority that governs things, regardless of whether that authority was an elected body of officials or the oldest and wisest people in the village.

If you think there was a time when there "wasn't a state", then you don't understand what the state is.
 
wasnt that man pretty close to becoming president of the usa?

He was the runner up in the 2008 Republican Primary. My family voted for him, as did a majority of the voters in my state of Georgia. He still finished a distant second though. Huckabee was well behind Romney when Romney withdrew, but he refused to concede until it was mathematically impossible to win the nomination. As such, he drew most of the anti-McCain votes from the later primary elections and had pulled sightly ahead of Romney by the end.


It is unclear how well he would have done in the general election. He made a big deal about how he was able to defeat the Clinton political machine and won 48% of the African American vote in Arkansas (which is usually almost purely Democratic). He very well might have had good odds of defeating Hilary Clinton if the Democrats had nominated her, but I don't his chances against Obama were ever very strong.
 
There has never "not been a state". Ever since people have existed in groups there has been a non-religious authority that governs things, regardless of whether that authority was an elected body of officials or the oldest and wisest people in the village.

If you think there was a time when there "wasn't a state", then you don't understand what the state is.

You make an interesting point even though I think its still debatable. But since you yourself admit that existence of state is fixed on existence of people living in organised groups (gorillas do the same btw) you are only proving my point that state is only a tool but certainly not the "most important thing".

Authority is most important thing. The highest authority is the Natures law. State is product of human nature but human nature is neither highest nature nor finished product - the evolution goes on....
 
There has never "not been a state". Ever since people have existed in groups there has been a non-religious authority that governs things, regardless of whether that authority was an elected body of officials or the oldest and wisest people in the village.

If you think there was a time when there "wasn't a state", then you don't understand what the state is.
Well, what is it? The convention is usually to default to Weber (centralised bureaucracy with a monopoly on legitimate violence), which you're contradicting fairly directly, so it's not really obvious where you're working from.
 
Back
Top Bottom