CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: All things Christianity

[breakingcontact]

But here is the thing. If you lived in SF or NYC, and the "lesser magistrate" refused to uphold a law you liked, what would you do? This is why having people attempt to nullify laws locally is a bad idea. It ends in anarchy. Even good Christians disagree about the death penalty. Would you want a prison guard to say, "Nope, not taking this guy to death row, it is against my beliefs, and furthermore, I will not let anyone else take him there?"

It ends in anarchy? What do we have now? Socialism at best.

A prison guard is not a magistrate, the sheriff would be.

We have recourse, in our system, to remove bad magistrates.

 

[JettaKnight]

What?

Your presupposition is that we should support all local magistrates no matter how they carry out their office?

If so, you are missing the point entirely.

If not, I do not see your point.

If a Christian in good faith sees the federal immigration laws as unjust and immoral (tested against scripture, of course), then by the doctrine you brought to our attention they should support this woman.

 

[JettaKnight]

It ends in anarchy? What do we have now? Socialism at best.

Balderdash.

A prison guard is not a magistrate, the sheriff would be.

A guard is just a lesser lesser magistrate.

We have recourse, in our system, to remove bad magistrates.

And recourse to change laws... so why promote a doctrine of going against the system and supporting rogue magistrates?

 

[historian]

We have recourse, in our system, to remove bad magistrates.

Indeed...but who determines who is bad?

 

[T.Lex]

Indeed...but who determines who is bad?

INGO.

We do it all the time.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Indeed...but who determines who is bad?

Notice how this question keeps coming up?

There seems to be something to that.

 

[historian]

INGO.

We do it all the time.

Well, I obviously can't vote for any of those Papists! Look at their track record! Getting shot in Dallas, losing cars off of bridges, crashing small airplanes! We can't have any more of them!

 

[T.Lex]

Well, I obviously can't vote for any of those Papists! Look at their track record! Getting shot in Dallas, losing cars off of bridges, crashing small airplanes! We can't have any more of them!

Pence is a recovering Catholic, I think.

 

[foszoe]

Notice how this question keeps coming up?

There seems to be something to that.

Could it be that the first SJWs did so for religious reasons?

 

[historian]

Pence is a recovering Catholic, I think.

Recovering is the key word.

And I have only voted for him in three general elections.

 

[T.Lex]

I think he's never very far from a relapse.

 

[historian]

I think he's never very far from a relapse.

Probably one pretty girl away!

 

[T.Lex]

Probably one pretty girl away!

Like this?

 

[breakingcontact]

Indeed...but who determines who is bad?

You really don't believe in objective truth?

Why so afraid to discern?

 

[breakingcontact]

If a Christian in good faith sees the federal immigration laws as unjust and immoral (tested against scripture, of course), then by the doctrine you brought to our attention they should support this woman.

"In good faith" doesn't always match up with scripture.

Plus our immigration system is immoral, but many of our laws are.

 

[breakingcontact]

Notice how this question keeps coming up?

There seems to be something to that.

It keeps coming up as folks have bought into moral relativism.

 

[breakingcontact]

Balderdash.


A guard is just a lesser lesser magistrate.


And recourse to change laws... so why promote a doctrine of going against the system and supporting rogue magistrates?

What we have now is a complete mockery of what the founding fathers intended.

If you like to wave the flag and feel proud, go ahead.

A guard in this context is like a soldier, no kind of magistrate.

Rogue magistrates? Vs ones that go along with evil?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

You really don't believe in objective truth?

Why so afraid to discern?

It keeps coming up as folks have bought into moral relativism.

Objectivity

Objectivity is a central philosophical concept, objective means being independent of the perceptions thus objectivity means the property of being independent from the perceptions, which has been variously defined by sources. Generally, objectivity means the state or quality of being true even outside a subject's individual biases, interpretations, feelings, and imaginings. A proposition is generally considered objectively true (to have objective truth) when its truth conditions are met without biases caused by feelings, ideas, opinions, etc., of a sentient subject. A second, broader meaning of the term refers to the ability in any context to judge fairly, without partiality or external influence. This second meaning of objectivity is sometimes used synonymous with neutrality.

What makes what you believe to be objective truth the same as someone else's?

World is full of different kinds of people. Why is your truth the only truth?

 

[historian]

You really don't believe in objective truth?

Why so afraid to discern?

I do. I also disagree with others who do. Objective truth is hard to determine outside of clear Biblical mandates. You seem to have a hard time grasping that.

And even with clear Biblical mandates, I don't want to live in a theocracy until there is a King on the throne. Theocracies governed by people always end up badly. I would rather have some laws that I don't agree with and live in a Republic, than with laws that I agree with 100% in a theocracy. I have too many friends who would be executed to enjoy that.

 

[breakingcontact]

I do. I also disagree with others who do. Objective truth is hard to determine outside of clear Biblical mandates. You seem to have a hard time grasping that.

And even with clear Biblical mandates, I don't want to live in a theocracy until there is a King on the throne. Theocracies governed by people always end up badly. I would rather have some laws that I don't agree with and live in a Republic, than with laws that I agree with 100% in a theocracy. I have too many friends who would be executed to enjoy that.

1. So there are clear Biblical mandates, glad you agree there.

2. We don't live in a republican anymore, just in name.

Who is calling for a theocracy? Not me.

There are forms of government which uphold Biblical standards which are not theocracies.