Are the Constitution and the Gospel in Conflict?

[houndawg]

What denomination are you, native?

I used to be Episcopalian, skelly.

You?

Do you not wish to share your current affiliation with us, Nathan? I guess it doesn't matter much since there isn't a dimes worth of difference between them.

[native]

I used to be Episcopalian, skelly.

You?

Do you not wish to share your current affiliation with us, Nathan? I guess it doesn't matter much since there isn't a dimes worth of difference between them.

What is your faith, dawg?

[Skjellyfetti]

It's impossible to get native to answer a question.

[houndawg]

Do you not wish to share your current affiliation with us, Nathan? I guess it doesn't matter much since there isn't a dimes worth of difference between them.

What is your faith, dawg?

Physics.


Yours?

[houndawg]

It's impossible to get native to answer a question.

Yeah, he seems to be a little sensitive about answering the same questions he asks. Hell, you'd think he's rolling on the floor and speaking in tongues or handling snakes the way he ducks the question....

[JohnStOnge]

No. The Gospels don't address what government is supposed to do or not supposed to do at all.

[native]

It's impossible to get native to answer a question.

That's BS skelly. I answered "Episcopalian" within seconds. Did you answer at all?

[native]

No. The Gospels don't address what government is supposed to do or not supposed to do at all.

+1

[native]

What is your faith, dawg?

Physics.


Yours?

I am with CS Lewis. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain by believing in God, and eveything to lose and nothing to gain by not believing.

I like physics, too. I am encouraged by the astrophysicists who believe in God, and not discouraged by those who do not.

[Skjellyfetti]

It's impossible to get native to answer a question.

That's BS skelly. I answered "Episcopalian" within seconds. Did you answer at all?

You said it in the past tense... so I took that to mean you weren't anymore? I thought that's how the English language worked, my bad.

I used to be Episcopalian, skelly.

Are you still Episcopalian?


And, I'm Episcopalian... I've said it on this forum many times.

[native]

...Are you still Episcopalian?...

I'm not rot really sure.

[BlueHen86]

...Are you still Episcopalian?...

I'm not rot really sure.

Fence sitter!

[Skjellyfetti]

...Are you still Episcopalian?...

I'm not rot really sure.

Why? Glenn Beck working you towards Mormonism?

[native]

I'm not rot really sure.

Fence sitter!

Oh, geez, how long have you been waiting to pounce on that one?

[BlueHen86]

Fence sitter!

Oh, geez, how long have you been waiting to pounce on that one?

It took me 2 seconds to come up with that. I wish I could type faster.

[native]

I'm not rot really sure.

Why? Glenn Beck working you towards Mormonism?

No. I have worked with Mormons, found them to be extremely reliable and trustworthy, and I admire their faith and dedication.

On the other hand, I have also enjoyed partying with the "jacks."

Blogging BS notwithstanding, I try not to judge people by what they say they believe. Instead, I judge them by their actions.

As Heinlein manages to point out so eloquently, and dawg somewhat less eloquently, what we proclaim can often be perceived to be absurd.

Since "cosmologies" are often irreconcilable, I find judging actions to be more practical on earth. That's one reason that government should just be kept to the absolute minimum.

The only practical place for the heavy hand of government is where everyone shares the same cosmology, e.g., sharia law in an Islamic country or communism in a communist country. In both cases, control, intimidation and physical violence are required to make the system work.

[native]

Oh, geez, how long have you been waiting to pounce on that one?

It took me 2 seconds to come up with that. I wish I could type faster.

Yeah, but how long before I gave you that opportunity for a payback?!???

And since you didn't mention anything about fenceposts, I guess you have already figured that I am wound up so tight that the fencepost wouldn't fit!

[native]

That's BS skelly. I answered "Episcopalian" within seconds. Did you answer at all?

You said it in the past tense... so I took that to mean you weren't anymore? I thought that's how the English language worked, my bad.

I used to be Episcopalian, skelly.

Are you still Episcopalian?


And, I'm Episcopalian... I've said it on this forum many times.

I'm old. I forgot. You must be old, too, if you forgot that I prolly forgot because I'm old.

[Skjellyfetti]

It's impossible to get native to answer a question.

[native]

It's impossible to get native to answer a question.

I forgot the question...

[T-Dog]

So if you say God, then do Catholics have Rome-rule?

Do you do something that is destructive to the US, but furthers what you think will bring back Christ?

I'm a Christian and I don't follow the Pope. He is not someone to be worshiped or held up as a messenger of God. Catholicism doesn't teach the principles Christ did. It drew it's own conclusions and established a system that is not what God or Jesus wanted.

My faith comes before my patriotism.

As for the issues of wealth, it is said in the Bible (forgot where) that "a worker deserves its wages" but it reminds us that money is not ours but God's who lets us to do the right thing with money.

One of the Ten Commandements in to not worship any false idols. Back in Moses' time, this was correlated to when people would create statues of false idols from the earth and worship them in order to quench their sinful lusts. In modern times, this is often overlooked since it seemingly doesn't relate to us. However, quite the opposite is true. Money can be an idol that we worship and crave before worshiping and craving God. Anything that we put before God (money, gossip, fame, clothes, possesions, etc) is creating an idol before God.

Best thing to do with money is to tithe, not let the pursuit of money overcome our pursuit of a Christian life and pray.

[JohnStOnge]

am with CS Lewis. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain by believing in God, and eveything to lose and nothing to gain by not believing.

Well...I don't know. If the truth is that there is no God you could lie and cheat and do whatever to your own benefit as much as you want and as long as you weren't caught by human beings there would be no consequences. Or somebody could find himself in a position like Stalin was in. In that case believing in God would only encumber you. You'd be disuaded from killing everybody you thought might be to your advantage to kill when there is really no reason to be disuaded.

If you felt like having sex with a five year old you could do it as long as you weren't caught. Or just on a less reprehensible level you could cheat on your wife without remorse. Then, even if you were caught, it might have been worth it to you depending on how much you enjoyed it. Basically, there would be potential that you could do whatever you want so long as it was either legal or illegal but in a situation where you wouldn't get caught.

So, yes, if there is no God you may lose something in that you inhibit yourself from doing things you'd enjoy, find gratifying, find to our advantage, etc.

[houndawg]

Why? Glenn Beck working you towards Mormonism?

No. I have worked with Mormons, found them to be extremely reliable and trustworthy, and I admire their faith and dedication.

On the other hand, I have also enjoyed partying with the "jacks."

Blogging BS notwithstanding, I try not to judge people by what they say they believe. Instead, I judge them by their actions.

As Heinlein manages to point out so eloquently, and dawg somewhat less eloquently, what we proclaim can often be perceived to be absurd.

Since "cosmologies" are often irreconcilable, I find judging actions to be more practical on earth. That's one reason that government should just be kept to the absolute minimum.

The only practical place for the heavy hand of government is where everyone shares the same cosmology, e.g., sharia law in an Islamic country or communism in a communist country. In both cases, control, intimidation and physical violence are required to make the system work.

[native]

am with CS Lewis. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain by believing in God, and eveything to lose and nothing to gain by not believing.

Well...I don't know. If the truth is that there is no God you could lie and cheat and do whatever to your own benefit as much as you want and as long as you weren't caught by human beings there would be no consequences. Or somebody could find himself in a position like Stalin was in. In that case believing in God would only encumber you. You'd be disuaded from killing everybody you thought might be to your advantage to kill when there is really no reason to be disuaded.

If you felt like having sex with a five year old you could do it as long as you weren't caught. Or just on a less reprehensible level you could cheat on your wife without remorse. Then, even if you were caught, it might have been worth it to you depending on how much you enjoyed it. Basically, there would be potential that you could do whatever you want so long as it was either legal or illegal but in a situation where you wouldn't get caught.

So, yes, if there is no God you may lose something in that you inhibit yourself from doing things you'd enjoy, find gratifying, find to our advantage, etc.

I am trying to look at a bigger picture, so guess I perceive your enumerted limitations on behavior as empowering and not encumbrances, JSO. I prefer to believe in God but if dawg prefers physics that's just dandy with me as long as he refrains from the "sins" you mentioned, like mass murder, adultry and child molestation.

[native]

No. I have worked with Mormons, found them to be extremely reliable and trustworthy, and I admire their faith and dedication.

On the other hand, I have also enjoyed partying with the "jacks."

Blogging BS notwithstanding, I try not to judge people by what they say they believe. Instead, I judge them by their actions.

As Heinlein manages to point out so eloquently, and dawg somewhat less eloquently, what we proclaim can often be perceived to be absurd.

Since "cosmologies" are often irreconcilable, I find judging actions to be more practical on earth. That's one reason that government should just be kept to the absolute minimum.

The only practical place for the heavy hand of government is where everyone shares the same cosmology, e.g., sharia law in an Islamic country or communism in a communist country. In both cases, control, intimidation and physical violence are required to make the system work.

C'mon, dawg! Are you laughin' with me or against me? What parts of that last para do you agree or disagree with? Feed me a bone!