Originally Posted by golfhobo

Not really, Ridge. Keep in mind that I am the SON of a "preacher." And although he is not a sold out conservative, he "leans" that way. Likewise, I am a CENTRIST and not a true Liberal.... but, I guess I do "lean" that way.

Now, I am not (and never WOULD) compare either myself or my father to Jesus or God...but, the dynamic is interesting. We all know that sons are destined to rebel against their fathers (in most families) and often try their best to "get under their skin." So....

It follows that IF your theory is true, and GOD is watching over you poor conservatives and your "monotheistic" values and beliefs, rooted in the idea of a "chosen people" and warmongering against anyone who opposes your religious beliefs...

It would "follow" that HE sent his son Jesus to be the "saviour" of the World.... to offer a NEW COVENANT of "liberal" conciliation with all people... and to set the stage for more "progressive" answers to century old problems, distrust and hatreds.

It would also seem apparent that God has welcomed HOME his true and faithful servants like Kennedy and Murtha after YEARS of dedicated service to the common man and the MILITARY man respectively.... while leaving the Ensigns, Craigs, Sanfords, Gingriches and the multitude of other Republican "charlatans" to live out their lives in shame and ingnomy for their sinful actions in betrayal of the public trust. :lol:

If the Kingdom of Heaven is in ANY way representative of the kingdoms on Earth, then it is well known that OLD kings often "tested" their sons for the ability to lead, and then delegated more and more responsibility TO them before actually abdicating the crown in favor of their successor. It is ALSO well documented in history that these Kings often understood that their sons were more "in tune" with the generation that they would eventually reign over.

Now, I have taken some literary license.... but, if you doubt my logic, answer me this: Why ELSE would an immortal GOD "need".... or mankind even imagine that HE would NEED.... a "son?"

If one studies religion it is actually quite clear... and often declared.... that, the old "conservative" laws of the Jewish GOD were outdated, and even ignored. So, God sent his SON to reach a NEW generation of mankind, with a covenant that THEY would understand and could "accept."

The more conservative and restrictive Jewish Laws were no longer acceptable nor relevant. Warmongering and religious damnation had lost their influence. Jesus was born to be "inclusive" and forgiving. He taught "moderation" and acceptance. He was the "new covenant," the "redesigned and rethought" CONTRACT WITH MANKIND.

Seriously now.... I often wonder WHY Americans think that God is ONLY on "our" side. And in all honesty, I come to realize that it would be because WE established this country, at great peril and effort, for the PURPOSE of FREEDOM OF RELIGION. I don't dispute that. And IF there is a GOD.... he MUST admire and cherish that.

But, we FLED countries that were "UNDER religious rule" and often meted out punishment for heresy. It is PRECISELY our freedom OF AND FROM religion that makes us the (new) chosen people. And....according to what many believe.... we did so WITH his blessing and guidance. OUR "god" is no different than the one worshipped by those we fled! My POINT is.... we believe in the SAME GOD as the people we fled "CONTROL" from! So... it is not our GOD that is different... it is our decision to be FREE from religious CONTROL!

JESUS.... the liberal.... is the foundation of THIS country. And he allowed for ALL types of beliefs and human frailties. And to MY knowledge.... never INSISTED that anyone follow him!

He said, "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's... and to GOD, what is God's." That means, clearly..... a separation of church and state!! It means to live your MORAL (and personal) lives in concert with God's desires, while HONORING the establishment, taxation and representation of a CIVILIAN government. :thumbsup:

I believe that our founding fathers, whether guided by a collective pool of intelligence that would obviously be concentrated in such rebellious people, OR by religious "dedication,".... formulated the "perfect" form of government for ALL people, that was BASED on a belief in GOD, and his intention of FREE WILL for mankind.... but, DECISIVELY "legislated" to protect our future from our PAST! Ensuring for ALL who chose to claim American citizenship, the FREEDOMS of religion AND the freedoms FROM religious CONTROL over civil matters.

200+ years later.... it is not an easy task. Though some polls show that a majority of Americans believe in God.... they ALSO show that a majority believe in Separation principles. We are "EXACTLY" the country we planned for! Yet, we cannot agree on what we are supposed to BE!

For the record... I don't believe that a school day SHOULD begin with a "prayer" but, neither do I believe that Evolution should be taught as FACT, or that schools should give out condoms! I believe that MORALITY should be taught at HOME or in CHURCH.... and schools should confine themselves to the "Liberal Arts."

Okay.... sorry.... I didn't mean to make Windy pee his pants again!

Originally Posted by golfhobo

I just needed to set some things straight. I can play the Laurel and Hardy game if that is all you want out of me. But, I believe I have more to offer in the way of intelligent debate.... IF anyone here is willing to join me.

But, I'm really tiring of all the insults and innuendos. And I apologize for MY PART in any of that.

Hobo

Originally Posted by golfhobo

I've been around this "biz" along time, heard THOUSANDS of sermons from my father, and have read the Bible extensively. I even checked my concordance just now to see if I missed something. But, I have NEVER heard reference to TWO trees in the garden of Eden! Perhaps you can give me the scripture for THAT little bit of wisdom?

Guess you missed Genesis 2:9

And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden,and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

I'm not sure which concordance or bible you're looking in but I don't see how you have missed the reference to the two trees in the garden that Hoggie was referring to.

Originally Posted by RebelDarlin

Guess you missed Genesis 2:9

And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden,and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

I'm not sure which concordance or bible you're looking in but I don't see how you have missed the reference to the two trees in the garden that Hoggie was referring to.

Perhaps it's the way that you refer to it as a 'biz' that makes it appear that you really have no understanding of it beyond an intellectual one. I don't doubt that you've heard thousands of sermons, but have you ever actually listened to one with an open mind? Or more importantly an open heart? Or do you just assume you know what they 'meant' to say?

Originally Posted by Twilight Flyer

OK, Hobo, this one is for you. The rest of you are excused for the day and Windy, if you want to follow along, better get it TiVo’d so you can take regular bathroom breaks. :lol: This post is 6,000 words...it is longer than most short stories I write. But it was a fun one to put together tonight. That said...

Generally, I stay out of the heavy religious discussions but got pulled in yesterday. I will see that through, Hobo, but don’t expect me to make a habit of it.



No one ever questioned your ability to think. I have questioned your conclusions and will continue to do so.



About the only difference here in the two of us are our objections to the Iraq war. My objections were on that it was done completely wrong and half-azzed, while your objections were on principle alone. Other than that, we are very much alike, you and I. I write novels (and poetry, if you can believe that) and have never met a broken appliance or computer that I couldn’t fix. I sing somewhat well and can debate with the best of them. I am a hopeless romantic, cry at chick flicks and get emotional when reading exceptional stories (cracks my wife up), all while enjoying technical specs about our current crop of aircraft and future stuff as well.

Rather scarey thought, eh?



No need. I understand the sentiment because I have met a lot of Christians in name only that caused me to question things, as well. That’s only normal.

All that said, he were go…



If Christ died for all mankind, why would you think that he did not die for those that came before him? Is that millions or even billions of souls that were simply screwed because they were born too early? I think not.



See my above quote.



We, as mortal man and sons and daughters of our Heavenly Father, have always needed a way to salvation. Without Christ’s sacrifice, we could not return to live with God. Again, no unclean thing can enter into the kingdom of God. Without the sacrifice that washes away our sins, Heaven would be off limits.



You can take it however you like and if you want to be offended, that’s on you. But there is a big difference in being knowledgeable about a subject and actually knowing it to be true. Your knowledge about Christianity does not equate to a true Christian’s testimony of the truth. Another difference in you and I. You might believe you are knowledgeable, but I know it to be true. It puts me in a position to successfully debate your position and unfortunately, it puts you in the position to have to be defensive and thus, get your dander up. You believe I am inferring that you are some “rube”, when it is no more than explaining to you why I have the same knowledge that you do, but yet for me, it is so much more. This is one of the reasons I have shied away from debating religion with people over the past few years. I’ve simply grown weary of trying to explain something that a person with no testimony or belief in God would ever understand or even try.



Of course we do. We inherited Adam’s fallen state…we are his mortal sons and daughters afterall. But you are confusing the two ‘deaths’, so to speak. Adam fell that man might be. Because of Adam’s fall, we are also in a fallen state. We are mortal, we are born, we live, and we die. However, without Christ’s sacrifice, there would be no heavenly progression. Without Christ dying FOR OUR SINS, we could not be with God in Heaven.



Again, I would question why you would believe that everyone that came before Christ’s death, would not be covered by his sacrifice? I find it hard to even debate that. I have supposed that anyone that at least understood Christ’s sacrifice would automatically understand that Christ died for ALL man, living at all times, both before and after the crucifixion. Perhaps that was an erroneous assumption on my part.



I see absolutely no difference in our beliefs there. Christ accomplished many things during his mortal life and setting an example is one of the biggest ones. But his main reason, his primary purpose, was to die for our sins, so that we may have the opportunity to be with God (and Him) in heaven.



See, here is where we are going to disagree in the end. I do agree completely with everything that you said here, but Christ was no liberal. He believed in taking care of the poor and the needy, of healing the sick. You might equate those to a liberal mindset, but I simply say they were a Christ-like mindset, of loving your neighbor as yourself. But Christ was also very conservative, at least in today’s current word definition. He believed and taught living within your means, obeying God’s commandments, answering for your sins, etc. etc. He taught that there are very real consequences to disobedience to God’s commandments and failure to repent of your sins. He taught that there is absolutely a hell and that we all risk an eternity in hell if we do not follow His commandments.



I don’t disagree with you at all. There are a lot of Christians that assume that because they believe in God, they are given absolute authority to judge. There are a lot of Christians that give Christianity a very bad name and I do not for a moment discount that bad taste it leaves with non-believers. On a personal note, I am as conservative (there’s that word again) as they come. I believe abortion to be wrong, I believe homosexuality to be wrong, I believe in sex outside of marriage to be wrong, I believe slothfulness and greed to be wrong, etc. etc. etc. I believe all these things, but I also believe that every person has their freedom to choose and that ultimately, they answer for their own sins before God.

Judge not, lest ye be judged is something I try very hard to hold fast to. I am far from perfect; I can be extremely outspoken when discussing a topic that I am passionate about and I will not hesitate to point out what I see wrong with someone’s belief. But I will never judge…that is not for me to do.



I do not hate Liberals any more than I hate the sinner. I hate what liberals stand for because I feel that it stands a polar opposite to the success and continued greatness of our country. There is a difference.

And I will take it a step further and concede that you are right in claiming that not ALL liberals feel that way. However, by the same token, not ALL Conservatives are hate-mongering racists, either. It’s a two way street and for you to expect concession on your behalf, you would also have to offer it on ours.



We may have to agree to disagree here. I do not believe that a “stark raving liberal” can be a God-fearing Christian. It is instead, the same thing that many neo-conservative Christians are…Christians in name only. That won’t get them past Go on God’s Monopoly board.



That is precisely my point. There are going to be many Christians, both liberal and conservative, that are going to be in for a very rude awakening. Just tagging yourself with the Christian moniker will not get you into Heaven. You have to be able to live it.

.
.
.



I’m not the one taking offense and getting absolutely riled up. That would be you. I stand by my conclusions. By and large, Liberals take things to a point where it is most convenient for them and they will go no further. If you make a liberal and a conservative run a foot race for 10 miles, but tell them they can stop when they get tired, a liberal will do just that and claim victory because he stopped first, while a conservative will endeavor to go the full distance. Yes, it’s a broad example, but usually fits.



Your comment was a round about way of saying that God may have called them home because they had done a lot of good. I found that ludicrous, but avoided commenting on it. By and large, the liberal destruction of this country (and it IS being systematically destroyed) does not jive with God’s commandments and if He is not ready for us to get flushed, it’s not going to get flushed. Yet.

I say YET – and here is where we may differ greatly – because I fully believe that in these last days (and we are there), our country will be brought to the brink of ruin, our constitution will hang by a thread, and we will have very little relevance being able to stand up and stop what will the short reign of the antichrist before Christ returns to this earth. These things are happening and we are fast approaching the biblical prophecy of Armageddon. These are my thoughts and my beliefs – I doubt they are yours and they may very well differ from other believers as well. But it is something that I have spent a great many years studying and I believe that we can measure the remaining years of the world as we know it on the fingers of two hands at the very most. No, I do not know or claim to know the day…I do not claim to know who the antichrist is (thought I have my suspicions)…I do not claim to know how it will all come together. I only know that we are close, nothing more, and the rest of that is a discussion for another time.

But as it pertains to OUR discussion, it will not happen until God deems it is time and if that means that God believes in term limits before it all goes to pot here, then so be it.



I continue to maintain that you are wound entirely too tight. :roll: It was not meant as an insult at all. As a matter of fact, it was meant as my acknowledgement that you are free FROM religion if that is your choice and that I acknowledge that you do NOT believe as I believe. Nothing more.



I have never wavered on that. You have simply never asked.



Again, I seldom get involved in religious discussions anymore because they generally degenerate into something I do not want to be a part of. I am only getting involved in this discussion with you because I usually discount your political leanings as a far left liberal or at the very least, a far left liberal sympathizer, and felt that you deserved more consideration, at least for something not so politically driven.

That being said, while I will absolutely not agree with you on the political front, there are a great many things we have common ground on when it comes to the Bible and Christ and his teachings. I will endeavor to operate from that viewpoint a little more often when it comes to debating topics with you.

.
.
.

Now, I’m going to break your next paragraph up point by point, so bear with it.



Perhaps, but I think it is more a person’s definition of morality. 50 years ago, it was taught and teachers were not shy about telling it like it is. We, as a country, got well away from that and today? We have more instances of teenage pregnancy, of STD’s, of outright moralistic failures, than ever before. I see the correlation in that even if you do not.



I agree completely. In the home, we teach our children abstinence. But we also teach them that if they do go out and do something stupid, they better follow another method and abortion is absolutely not an option in our home. If you want to hit the home run, you better be prepared for whatever consequences come with it. Do I think they will all follow my teachings? Dude, I’ve got 7 kids from 7 to 17…um, NO. I hope they all do, but I am a realist before I’m an optimist.

As far as school goes, I'm all for health and sex education classes. Done right, they are a good course for a teenager to take where it may not be so easy to talk about that stuff to mom and dad. That being said, though, I am absolutely against the liberal teachings of self pleasure, self awareness, sexual deviancies, etc. I will teach my children all about that in the home, but will also teach them high standards and morals, as well as acceptance for those that might think or act differently.



I agree and disagree both, with this. I believe that Evolution and Creation are mutually inclusive and that both should be taught. There was a time when they were. Today, only evolution is taught. Why should creation be excluded? When scientists can come out and absolutely prove that creationism is a fallacy, then it should not be taught. But they cannot and they never will be able to. Scientists can no more prove that God doesn’t exist than I can prove that he does. It’s a matter of faith and always has been. But when it comes to what to teach in school, then I put forth the conclusion that the reason that creation is no longer taught is because God has been kicked out of our schools, again to our detriment as a country.



Perhaps. But then again, it should not be outlawed, either. If a teacher wants to begin his or her class with a prayer, he or she should be able to. Whether that means that those that don’t want to participate can leave for a minute or those that do, do so somewhere else, it should still be an option. If a student wants to say grace before he eats his lunch, he should be able to do so without running afoul of those that would cry foul. If he wants to read the Bible during his study hall, he should be allowed to.

By the same token, I can make the same argument for the Pledge of Allegiance. It should be allowed and those that do not want to participate should be allowed to opt out. The whole thing about removing prayer and the pledge from schools is simply a loss of freedom, no matter how you disguise it. However, the liberals (or atheists) don’t see that they are infringing upon the rights and freedoms of someone else, because they (the liberals and the atheists) are not the ones losing the freedom.



And you would be incorrect. As I said, we are guaranteed freedoms and rights in this country and that includes freedom of or from religion, whatever trips your trigger. However, while you still have your freedom FROM religion, a lot of people have lost their freedom OF religion. And that’s not right.



I’m going to stop you right there. I read the rest of your point here, but in no way do you prove me wrong. Perhaps we are both right, but approaching it from a different standpoint. I maintain that this is all about taxes and tithing. For example, I pay taxes to a government that continues to oppress me and my beliefs, but I do so because it is the law of the land…ie, render unto Caesar that which is his. I may not like it, but I will continue to follow the law of the land. And I render unto God that which is his, ie. a tithe on my weekly earnings. Certainly, there is a separation of church and state there, but not on the level that you believe.

.
.
.



That door swings both ways, I will point out.



I know you just like to argue. I have pointed it out here on many posts and have also pointed it out in the Moose Lodge.



Again, what you have the biggest problem with is that you wear your heart on your sleeve. When someone disagrees with you, by golly, they are taking personal shots at you and you won’t stand for it! You’ll stand up on your soapbox and yell and berate and play the martyr card like no other. You, Hobo, are a drama queen. And I say that with the utmost respect and a little bit of teasing.

As far as your claim that I post with an air of superiority, that is in the eye of the beholder. While I will endeavor to have a meaningful and civil debate with someone, I will not, at any time, compromise who I am or what I believe. If I believe that someone has pointed out something I have not thought about, I will take that under consideration and reconsider where I stand on things. I have done that on numerous occassions, too. But I do not walk on eggshells. I have no problem posting what I feel about a certain topic and I’m not concerned if it hurts someone’s feelings or personal sensibilities.

For example, this thread was about Murtha passing away. While I never cheer anyone’s death, even someone who I believe is evil, I will also not mourn where I do not believe mourning is warranted. I think Murtha was a piece of crap and just because he is now dead, does not change that belief. I’m not concerned if that hurts someone’s feelings because they are my opinions and my thoughts and I’m not going to change them because someone wants to shed a tear.

Cold? It’s not meant to be. It simply is what it is – my opinion on this man. And at this moment, I am still free to state that.




But don’t you see…that works both ways? I agree that those that want to IMPOSE their beliefs on another are wrong. But the same goes for the liberals and non-believers of this land, too. Every year, there are more and more laws being passed that curtail the freedoms and beliefs of believers, while non-believers continue to reap the benefits (as it were) of forcing God out of more and more places.

What I wouldn’t give to see a law passed that allows for the 10 Commandments to be posted on a plaque on a courthouse wall because they are simply good rules to live by and if someone was offended by it, they simply don’t have to look. But it doesn’t work that way and you know it. Freedoms are being lost and those freedoms are being lost by and large by believers. Doesn’t matter how you try to spin that, because that is what is happening.



You don’t have to continue to be “confused”, you know. Just sayin’

.
.
.


But if I am right, then what have you gambled and lost? If I’m wrong, I lose nothing. If you are wrong, you lose everything. I consider myself a pretty practical person, but that is something I have simply never been able to understand. It’s not so much a fear of God, but more a facet of wanting there to be so much more, of wanting to believe that we are not just accidents and here because we evolved from a single cell that sprang into existence billions of years ago.



I understand the concept of being agnostic and whether you believe it’s a copout or not is your own opinion and choice. But agnostic would still be classified as an unbeliever. It is like Yoda in Empire Strikes back…you either do or you do not.



He was a believer with questions. Probably every believer has questions about some aspect of God’s plan.



And that is no different than any believer. It’s healthy to have questions – it forces one to seek answers and hopefully progress. Simply shutting your mind down and refusing to believe or even consider that God lives is not progress; it’s stagnation.



Certainly. I believe that we are all God’s children and that He is a loving God that wants nothing more than to have us with Him. What about those that never get the opportunity to hear and learn of God? What about the baby that dies immediately after birth? What about the African pygmy tribes or the Amazon Indians that are never seen by modern day man? What about the Aborigines? What about the Arab that has been taught from birth to hate the infidels? Do I know how this all works? No, I don’t. I only know that as God’s children, ALL of us are afforded the opportunity somehow to learn of Him, to know Him, and to live in Heaven with Him.



I don’t believe that at all. I am a firm believer in the idea that works without faith is dead and similarly, faith without works is equally dead. My belief, and I believe this to be fully supported by scripture, is that you can be saved, but you still need to work at it. By the same token, we are also going to screw up on a daily basis, which is why the atonement is so crucial to our spiritual progression. And I believe there to be truly only one unforgivable sin and that is accepting Christ and then later denying him.

With Peter, I don’t believe he ever truly accepted Christ, before he finally did. I don’t profess to know that for certain, but judging by the fact that he became what he became, I believe it to be so. But in the end and this goes with everyone ever alive…God knows our hearts. He can see through the rhetoric and the pretty words and the firm stances and know. And that is what is truly important.



I don’t know. I know that Judas betrayal of Christ was known about and ultimately had to happen for Christ to be sacrificed. But that gets into the whole preordination discussion and nobody, no matter how learned they might be, can effectively argue that. Does the fact that God already knows what we are going to do, what decisions we are going to make, and who we are going to be, mean that we are already all pre-ordained to do these things and be who we are? Or is it a matter of God simply already knowing what decisions we are going to make in our lives? I can’t honestly answer that, though I know what my own beliefs are.



And again, what you believe to be condescension is nothing more than me disagreeing with you and not sugarcoating it. I was condescending in an earlier post in this thread when I made the comment that “at least I made a post about it”, but it was lighthearted and carried no venom.



You know, we had a teaching moment last night with our children, talking about God’s plan and how he felt when our boys (11 and 14) were always cutting each other and their sisters down. They’re good kids, but one is a teenager that knows absolutely everything and the other is of the same mold who is already there, despite the fact that he’s not quite 12. David made the comment that he knew everything I was telling him and could sit down and teach a Sunday School lesson about it. I pointed out that you can know it all in your head, but if you don’t know it in your heart, then you don’t know it at all. A computer can work any mathematical calculation we want it to work. But what does it truly know? Nothing.

Same can be said for someone that professes to know everything about a topic and can quote book and verse of every scripture that speaks of it. But if one doesn’t know it in his heart, then what do you truly know?



Yeah, it doesn’t always have to be political sparring, although I admit that I do find a sort of perverse enjoyment in smacking down a liberal idealogue. :moon:

Have a good night. :thumbsup: