Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What's going on in Tennessee?
Quote:Middle school parents in Tennessee are up in arms upon learning that their children were being forced to recite and write the Islamic Shahada conversion creed: “Allah is the only god and Muhammad is his prophet,” as part of an alleged ‘world history’ project.

Public Middle School is forcing non-Muslim students to praise Islam and “Allah as the only god”

Paladin, what's going on down there?
'It's not who votes that matters, it's who counts the votes'  |  György Schwartz, Budapest, Hungary
(10-18-2016, 06:18 PM)WarBicycle Wrote:
Quote:Middle school parents in Tennessee are up in arms upon learning that their children were being forced to recite and write the Islamic Shahada conversion creed: “Allah is the only god and Muhammad is his prophet,” as part of an alleged ‘world history’ project.

Public Middle School is forcing non-Muslim students to praise Islam and “Allah as the only god”

Paladin, what's going on down there?

Well, I can tell you what's going on there.  Its Phase One of the four main phases of Islamic Conquest.  

And this has absolutely Nothing to do with religion.  Islam has only a religious shell, covering totalitarianism.  That's it in a nutshell, and these Middle Tennessee, Spring Hill fools are just that,.............Fools.  Instead they should be taught about the dangers(plural) of allowing such a system into the country.

[Image: quote-it-is-the-nature-of-islam-to-domin...0-17-1.jpg]

One of my daughters-in-law is a teacher, just outside of Nashville, and is proud that her school does not believe in all the PC-stuff and refuses to teach it. Good for them.
I have to say, this is exactly what I've warned fundies about. They want tax payer cash to pay secular teachers to teach our children about God and Christ.

Well, guess what? Not all people are Christians and I always asked these guys, "what if the teacher wants to teach about Islam or what if the teacher is an atheist"? No answer.

Good for the goose, good for the gander.
Get a grip. A teacher can legitimately teach the things our country was founded upon, and mention other world views - but not to make some PC version of views that discredits Christianity and glamorizes religions that want to kill us.
America was not founded upon a religion and it was always seen as wise not to mix state with religion until the fundy Christians around 1980 started selling out their faith for political access via the stupid GOP.

You can't pick and choose religions to favor by this state, have you actually ever read our constitution?

That's a formal law here, move to Mecca if you want to preach religion via state agents. Take this Muslim teacher with you.

This is wrong and it's happening because we've tolerated idiotic suggestions from apostate Christians to use Caesar to teach their kids about Christ. If they had any spiritual content at all, they'd know better.
Who told you America was not founded on a religion? Of course it was. All the Founders were Judaeo-Christian, and the philosophy they were educated under came from John Locke, Adam Smith, David Hume, and the Bible. They were concerned with Natural Rights and the Creator's wisdom. They recognized that the Church of England had appropriated Natural Rights by creating a State Church and wanted to restrain that concept - but there was no hint of separation of religion from America. No state religion because the faith of the nation was already there and they wanted to preserve it.
Believing God exists is not a religion, IMO. That's where natural rights comes from. No worship, no religion there.

Most the guys you mentioned were not Christians and its difficult to get a handle on what they believed. Locke lost his faith, don't know if went atheist or agnostic.

Anyway, you can't get a secular governing principal out of the bible like this. That's not what the bible is about. Jury trials, separation of powers, limitations on authority, none of that is biblical, the bible doesn't speak to secular governance at all. That's human tradition.

I like it, it is not biblical though.

If we operated like the bible taught governance( which is only in the OT), we'd be closer to communists than individualists. We'd have mandated farm policies where you had to grow more than you needed and allow me to come glean your crops if mine failed, stuff like that is "biblical governance" because it was a theocracy. Your taxes would be paid to the church to manage, etc.

Name me something from the bible that is codified in our law? Wrong to murder maybe?
(10-24-2016, 11:47 AM)WmLambert Wrote: Who told you America was not founded on a religion? Of course it was. All the Founders were Judaeo-Christian, and the philosophy they were educated under came from John Locke, Adam Smith, David Hume, and the Bible.

Bill, this is not what the problem is here.  It was Patrick's inability to use the proper wording.  What he meant, or should have meant, to say was not religion, the word he used, but rather a specific "Denomination", or "Sect"(i.e. Church of England).  Even at that time, there were different denominations in Christianity, and that is where the crux of the matter originated.  At the time, the "Church of England" was England's official Christian entity, and therefore the problem.  That is what the Founders were against, when they denounced the possibility of a particular "church", or "denomination" controlled things.  

We all know that the US was founded upon Christian values and thinking.  Its just that the other "denominations" were not to be shoved aside in favor of that one "official" religious entity.  And this 'so called' Separation Church and State  is a non-issue, because it was only mentioned one time in a personal letter from Jefferson to a church group.  And it was not used in the context everyone today seems to view it.


Name the Christian value the constitution develops? Support with biblical passages please. I ask anyone here to do this. There is nothing in the bible about secular governance directing believers how to be governors that any American law reflects. This is the biggest canard going, outside that we are exceptional which is more dangerous and bigger.

You're accurate on the Anglicans causing our separation policies, most people assume it was anti Catholic driven.
There never was any doubt about the Church of England being the reason our founders fought for religious freedom. It is also the reason the Pilgrims fled to come here for a better life. Some of those crossing the sea brought their own sectarian churches with them - which is why many states did have legal state religions. The only prohibition was no nationwide church that denied others.

I wonder why Palladin doesn't understand what Judaeo Christian values mean. Why does he need someone to explain them to him with passages from the Bible? How can anyone understand the faith of our Fathers and not understand how and why our laws were written?

You don't have to ask John, I can answer myself.

What is Christian or Jewish about our constitution? As opposed to Hindu or Muslim or wiccan or 1000 other religions?

Limiting human authority is not a biblical mandate. Voting is not a biblical mandate. There are no biblical mandates limiting security functionaries such as the 4th amendment, no jury trials. Monarchy is the sole organizing principle in the bible's historic review.

Why not explain 1 point where our constitution reflects the thinking of Moses or Jesus Christ for me? There is 1. It's the sole idea I can imagine you could say, "this is also in the bible".
(10-25-2016, 05:39 PM)Palladin Wrote: ... explain 1 point where our constitution reflects the thinking of Moses or Jesus Christ for me?

Moses led his people out of bondage. He wanted to take them to the promised land. That's us.

Nowhere in the Bible or Torah will you find a neat instruction book, except maybe for the Ten Commandments. They, of course, are as much a part of our founding as anything else. So was the Code of Hammurabi. Laws come from culture and our culture comes from the Judaeo Christian traditions of our Founders. Why so stuck on microspecifics?

I think you are trolling here: looking for some vector to claim enmity with your own country. Just stop trying so hard to make a point that is wrong-thinking from the outset.

Just get these priorities straight:
  1. Best country in the history of the world.
  2. Only nation ever conceived on the sovereignty of the individual.
  3. Constitutionally limited government.

Why so angry?
I'm not angry, I want to talk to people that will intellectually support their views instead of call me names or act like I'm retarded. You might be right on these views, just explain why when you're challenged, I do that even if I'm wrong.

I learned to do this from years of an atheist challenging my faith in Christ. He forced me to confront some darn good objections to my faith and I did so. Anyone should be prepared to defend their views.

Anyway, if we're Israel coming our of Egypt, William, how is it we allowed slavery here for so many years? How is it your great grandparents had a lawful responsibility to catch and deport from Michigan a poor slave who fled the egregiously evil bastards that built this system down here? That was a federal law, lawfully passed and upheld by the cruel bastards on our SCOTUS back then?

Think that is a micro thing? If it is, it's less micro than the holocaust. That's so egregious it as bad as what the Egyptians did to the Israelites William!

We're the Egyptians, not Israel in this metaphor.

1) according to what your criteria is.

2) Sovereignty of the individual is in your dreams, go get the local DA to indict you falsely and see how much you count when you're the poor defendant. You can't afford decent representation, you will be in jail as a slave. Not to mention it is NOT a biblical concept.

Jewish religion and Christian religion is a collective effort of God's people loving and working together to reflect God's virtues to the world. If it is not operationally that way, it is apostate. That's why theocratic Israel does not exist anymore and the church is dying fast in the "west". We act like self absorbed individuals, we hate on our fellow Christian that is not in our "camp" . Not what the bible teaches.

3) Almost all states have paper limitations on the state, is our's operational? Was it when we held slaves? Was it when we executed the Indian removal Act? Was it when Lincoln jailed democrats in 1863? Was it when Clinton assaulted Serbia w/o authorization? Obama did Libya w/o authorization?

Is it when the NSA sees every move you make w/o your permission? Is it if the IRS calls you?
Once again, I see you still haven't seen "Hillary's America!" It is now in Red Box or On Demand through most Cable providers, so the reluctance to have invested a little time to get another viewpoint recommended to you is almost an insult. I mention this because of how slavery was explained in it, and how the institution was historically depicted. I think it would point you in the right direction. You should feel proud that your nation overcame the entire world's acceptance of slavery and defeated it. It took awhile and was a hard fight, but that we did it should make you proud - not constantly condemning.

You also don't seem to get, just what sovereignty of the individual means. It doesn't mean that individuals get to break the law, it means that the laws are made for the benefit of the person and not for the state. Misapplication of beneficial laws happen ,  but less often here than any place or time in history. Of course it is not in the Bible. Many things have come from the Judea-Christian ethic which were inspired there, but not yet in existence. Revere that which has evolved from it, not exclude it because it is not old.

Nothing is perfect, the idea is to point ourselves in the right direction and make things work as best we can. Sometimes criminals block our way. Sometimes some politician with delusions of grandeur gathers together other low-lifes and block what's right. Your response is what is important. If you protest everyone is a loser and only you have all the answers you need, then you assume the mantle of victim.

The Constitution is a good starting point, but it is the people who make it work.
Patrick, all you have to do is read the preamble to the Declaration of Independence, to see what the founders of our nation considered to be the very basis of human rights:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Link:

Notice they said that the unalienable rights are those endowed by the Creator, not those arbitrarily claimed by men.

Unfortunately, most of the founders did not understand the term "all men" to include blacks or women. But our nation has grown spiritually so that they are now, and so the principles of liberty apply to them too, as expressed in amendments to the Constitution.
The constitution is a very fine intellectual work no doubt. Question you generated was, is it related to anything to do with biblical principles?

The pilgrims of the 1st generation were animated by pseudo Christian concerns, but, it is clear they were as screwed up as anything in the UK at the time( more than likely worse than the Anglicans) when John Winthrop appropriated for their governance the association with Christ Jesus claimed for HIS church, "the city on a hill" metaphor.

That is still reverberating in this apostate church over here among fundies, too. WRONG people, it isn't this flawed nation of all sorts of people, that is the ideal for Christ's church at it's apotheosis according to Christ.

The pilgrim 2cd generation became so arrogant and got themselves almost massacred in King Phillip's War. Who were the first victims of that 2cd generation?

Innocent, harmless and disarmed Indian Christians who had left their tribes to be among fellow Christians. Not exactly what John Winthrop imagined just a generation earlier, but, even a blind Christian should have seen the dangers Winthrop unleashed.

The hateful, racist murderers surely saw themselves as just Christian men when they murdered those innocent Indian women and children, too.

There is nothing about anything in the history of English speaking people's legal basis in this land that is related to God beyond what an Indian Hindu agrees with now,no on bestiality, incest, murder, polygamy and incest and polygamy are on their way out as well legally as long as they are adults, the gay rights crowd has seen to this inadvertently, just a matter of time, etc.

Sovereignty of the individual is a human tradition. Opposite polarity to secular collective humanism. Both are not of God. Nationalism is collectivism BTW. You and this board can have both.

I am for the type of collectivism the bible teaches Jews and Christians to follow, unity centered on the desires of YHWH driven by His spirit.
Who are you to say what is not of God? You deny the righteousness of Winthrop while elevating yourself to the omnipotence of the all-knowing. You and people like you, have succumbed to the base human psychological mechanism that what you have come to believe beyond any proof is the only truth and all others be damned. Civilization, culture, and faith evolve and have been merging with science. Science began with the Christian church when the adherents came to believe that God gave them the keys to knowledge, and that the physical laws of the universe were there to be discovered and understood. The Greeks and Romans didn't have the scientific method - that was brought about with the Christian idea that learning God's physical laws of the universe glorifies Him. He put them there for us to loearn.

Cycles and growing - they all intertwine. But you look for exceptions that may, if massaged enough, endorse your dark view of humanity. Well, I reject that and trust in our future. You can study the Bible for a thousand years and never get the solution you are looking for. All that lies ahead - not behind.

I deny the righteousness of Winthrop and any other person who attempts to assign a role to anything that Christ reserved for His church.

Who am I to say such things? Just a guy who thinks higher of Christ than the world does, that's all.

Who are you to say I cannot say or think such things?
BTW, I need to re consider the Winthrop comments. He knew that group of first generation pilgrims WERE the church or a prolepsis of it and as such, described a society of the Body of Christ as the "shining city on a hill". I think he gets a pass as an idealistic preacher.

The fault lies with people like us now who know the society did not develop like Winthrop prayed it would and we persist in pushing Winthrop's idealistic stuff relating it to a very flawed society, not the church at it's best.

He could not have imagined his own children would be involved in mass murder just years after he made this statement or that folks in Virginia were already dreaming of slavery. Had he observed that, he would have died of heartbreak, he would not have continued calling this development the city on a hill.

Well William, how about it, who are you to tell me what to think and say? I never have challenged your rights. Just your logic.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)