A Plea to All Christians

[fredtoast]

(07-01-2015, 12:21 PM)PhilHos Wrote: First off, I'm pretty sure I said more than "pre-marital sex and cursing" so thanks for "accurately" representing my viewpoint. 

Secondly, I never claimed America was better in the past or not. I simply agreed with the viewpoint that many Christians espouse that America used to be a Christian nation.

Thirdly, whether it was a Christian nation or not, it is not one today. 

Lastly, I never called for a return to a Christian nation (and even if I did, I certainly wouldn't call for a return of slavery, women's suffrage, etc. as well). I called for a return to Christian roots. Back to the teachings of Jesus where we are to LOVE our enemies, to turn the other cheek, etc. 

Here is the problem.  Your "proof" that the United States was no longer a Christian nation was the things that have become acceptable.

"A nation that has become okay with pre-marital sex, adolescent sex, recreational drug usage, cursing, divorce, and a whole host of other issues is not a Christian nation."


Yet you insist that a country that was okay with slavery, slaughtering native Americans, and denying equal rights to women was a Christian nation.


See the problem with that argument?


If you want to claim that we are no longer a Christian nation you need to post some numbers about the percentage of citizens who are Christian, because there were much more evil things accepted back in the time you are claiming we were a Christian nation.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-01-2015, 12:21 PM)PhilHos Wrote: First off, I'm pretty sure I said more than "pre-marital sex and cursing" so thanks for "accurately" representing my viewpoint. 

Secondly, I never claimed America was better in the past or not. I simply agreed with the viewpoint that many Christians espouse that America used to be a Christian nation.

Thirdly, whether it was a Christian nation or not, it is not one today. 

Lastly, I never called for a return to a Christian nation (and even if I did, I certainly wouldn't call for a return of slavery, women's suffrage, etc. as well). I called for a return to Christian roots. Back to the teachings of Jesus where we are to LOVE our enemies, to turn the other cheek, etc. 

I commend you for trying to lead by example.  

[*Nately120*]

(07-01-2015, 12:33 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I said it earlier, but I defined a Christian nation as a nation whose vast majority of citizens were Christians and lived Christian lives.

True, but that's a multi-faceted thing.  Is Christianity accepting Jesus as the one true path, or actually doing what he said, or what?  70+% of American identify as Christians, but does that matter?  If I act in a Christian manner but when put on the spot say that I don't really think about Jesus or God or anything, does that make me less of a Christian than someone who plays up the whole "sin and repent later" aspect of things?

It seems to me that being a Christian and living a Christian life are two vastly different things that can either co-inside or not.

Tricky stuff, this.

[*PhilHos*]

(07-01-2015, 12:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Here is the problem.  Your "proof" that the United States was no longer a Christian nation was the things that have become acceptable.

"A nation that has become okay with pre-marital sex, adolescent sex, recreational drug usage, cursing, divorce, and a whole host of other issues is not a Christian nation."


Yet you insist that a country that was okay with slavery, slaughtering native Americans, and denying equal rights to women was a Christian nation.


See the problem with that argument?

I see where you're coming from now, but what YOU need to remember is that my OP was written for the average Christian. The average Christian views America as a Christian nation and that it always was. They don't think about slavery and whatnot when they think about how America used to be more of a Christian nation.

Besides that, my point was to point out that America is no longer a Christian nation anyways. So does it really matter if we disagree on it being a Christian nation in the past?

[*PhilHos*]

(07-01-2015, 12:43 PM)Nately120 Wrote: True, but that's a multi-faceted thing.  Is Christianity accepting Jesus as the one true path, or actually doing what he said, or what?  70+% of American identify as Christians, but does that matter?  If I act in a Christian manner but when put on the spot say that I don't really think about Jesus or God or anything, does that make me less of a Christian than someone who plays up the whole "sin and repent later" aspect of things?

It seems to me that being a Christian and living a Christian life are two vastly different things that can either co-inside or not.

Tricky stuff, this.

That's why I added the living a Christian life quantifier. Unfortunately, I know of a great many people who would self-identify as Christians, yet their lives would show them to be anything BUT Christian.

I mean, I think it's still a majority of this country calls themselves Christian, but in terms of those living Christian lives, it seems to me to be far less.

[SteelCitySouth]

(07-01-2015, 12:56 PM)PhilHos Wrote: That's why I added the living a Christian life quantifier. Unfortunately, I know of a great many people who would self-identify as Christians, yet their lives would show them to be anything BUT Christian.

I mean, I think it's still a majority of this country calls themselves Christian, but in terms of those living Christian lives, it seems to me to be far less.

LOL...This is all highly subjective and judgmental on your part there Phil.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(07-01-2015, 11:55 AM)PhilHos Wrote: If that's what you read, you need to bone up on your reading comprehension skills.

What I said was there was no rational reason if you "take away the religion." To conclude that this means religion is irrational is disingenuous at best and complete idiocy at worst.

Christianity requires you to make two assumptions.

1. You assume the Bible is true.
2.  You assume the Bible is true because the Bible tells you the Bible is true.

If you apply those two assumptions to any religion they are all believable. Everything afterwards are just rationalizations to support those two assumptions.  I would call that irrational.

[Bengalzona]

(07-01-2015, 12:56 PM)PhilHos Wrote: That's why I added the living a Christian life quantifier. Unfortunately, I know of a great many people who would self-identify as Christians, yet their lives would show them to be anything BUT Christian.

I mean, I think it's still a majority of this country calls themselves Christian, but in terms of those living Christian lives, it seems to me to be far less.

Your sig is freaking me out, dude. I could swear that that tiger is staring at me!!!

Maybe its because I touched my self impurely and it knows somehow!!!

[*rfaulk34*]

(07-01-2015, 12:08 PM)wildcats forever Wrote: Well said. It has always seemed to me that the Christian Nation has had problems with the separation of church and state. Further, my experience with members of the Christian Nation has been more of a 'do as I say, not as I do'. I will only consider following those who lead by example.

Fatal flaw there. Leading by example is bad since man is so imperfect. Its exactly why i would never say follow my lead or do as i do. Guiding people towards Christ so that they can have a personal relationship with Him, is what a Christian should strive to do.

[SteelCitySouth]

(07-01-2015, 04:05 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Fatal flaw there. Leading by example is bad since man is so imperfect. Its exactly why i would never say follow my lead or do as i do. Guiding people towards Christ so that they can have a personal relationship with Him, is what a Christian should strive to do.

so...erm...leading.

[*PhilHos*]

(07-01-2015, 01:04 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Christianity requires you to make two assumptions.

1. You assume the Bible is true.
2.  You assume the Bible is true because the Bible tells you the Bible is true.

If you apply those two assumptions to any religion they are all believable. Everything afterwards are just rationalizations to support those two assumptions.  I would call that irrational.

False.

Christianity requires you to BELIEVE the Bible is true.

[tigerseye]

My point was we shouldn't support sin by going along with it. simple.
 
Which we as a nation have made the mistake of doing in the past like slavery and others. Which was brought up.

People can call it being judgemental if you wish but your mistaken.

We are all sinners but if you talk about any sin you get attacked and labeled thats why nothing can ever get resolved.

Jesus loves us all and wants us to help each other.

But when any discussion is started the spin doctors immediately stir everyone up to try to stop it.

I just hope people reading can pick out who those individuals are and make note of it.

Kind of makes me wonder what their agenda really is on this forum.

Jesus loves all of us. Even a sinner like me.

Who Dey.

[*PhilHos*]

(07-02-2015, 01:10 PM)tigerseye Wrote: My point was we shouldn't support sin by going along with it. simple.

But we can't force people to stop sinning, though. There's nothing wrong with trying to get someone free from sin, but there are wrong ways to go about it. But it is still up to that individual to stop their sinful ways. If they don't, that doesn't mean we go along with it and it certainly doesn't mean we are supporting it.

[*Nately120*]

(07-02-2015, 01:15 PM)PhilHos Wrote: But we can't force people to stop sinning, though. There's nothing wrong with trying to get someone free from sin, but there are wrong ways to go about it. But it is still up to that individual to stop their sinful ways. If they don't, that doesn't mean we go along with it and it certainly doesn't mean we are supporting it.

Not everyone believes in the concept of "sin" and even less people seem to care about a large amount of sinning either way.

[Beaker]

The concepts of sin and judgement or punishment were created as a means to control the congregation.

[*Nately120*]

(07-02-2015, 01:37 PM)Beaker Wrote: The concepts of sin and judgement or punishment were created as a means to control the congregation.

There are arguments for doing or not doing things that fit in with religious doctrine, I just find the arguments are easier to dismiss if someone mentions it being an affront to some deity I don't believe exists.  Oy, don't even get me started on people who don't understand how someone who doesn't believe in eternal hell can keep himself from being a serial rapist/killer.

[*rfaulk34*]

(07-01-2015, 04:11 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: so...erm...leading.

Basing your decision on someone's example and taking advice to try it yourself are two different things.

[fredtoast]

(07-02-2015, 01:10 PM)tigerseye Wrote: My point was we shouldn't support sin by going along with it. simple.
 
Which we as a nation have made the mistake of doing in the past like slavery and others. Which was brought up.

People can call it being judgemental if you wish but your mistaken.

We are all sinners but if you talk about any sin you get attacked and labeled thats why nothing can ever get resolved.

Jesus loves us all and wants us to help each other.

But when any discussion is started the spin doctors immediately stir everyone up to try to stop it.

I just hope people reading can pick out who those individuals are and make note of it.

Kind of makes me wonder what their agenda really is on this forum.

Jesus loves all of us. Even a sinner like me.

Who Dey.

The problem is that there is no way to agree on what "sin" is.  I know you have a rule book you follow, but her is no real logic to back most of it up.  So instead, as a nation, we have to base our rules on "compelling public interest" or "general welfare of the nation".  And there is no real logical reason to make things like same sex marriage illegal.

As for my "agenda", I believe in equality and freedom.  Freedom should only be limited when it adversely effects the nation or other citizens.  I also believe that we can't create laws based on a book with no logic behind it.

[SteelCitySouth]

(07-02-2015, 04:01 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Basing your decision on someone's example and taking advice to try it yourself are two different things.

Both forms of leading.  This is fun.

[*rfaulk34*]

(07-02-2015, 04:17 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Both forms of leading.  This is fun.

No denying that, but that was never in question. Since i'm pretty sure you've engaged in debates about the application of a word in its proper context, i'm gonna have to ask, what's your point here?