To find the answer to your question, you would need to go back to the
original Aramaic phrase used and translate that..
If I was to bet, and extrapolate from the Muslim side, it would be
Jesus said to Pay the Romans their taxes, cause it is right to submit
to Earthly Laws, unless they are in total violation of Religious law
(that is when Migration is recommended)
Regards
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Adam Moffett" <[email protected]>
*To: *[email protected]
*Sent: *Thursday, December 22, 2016 2:34:23 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] OT - trolling again
I was just reading last night about a phrase Jesus said: "Render
under to Caesar that which is Caesar's" in response to a question
about whether it was right for Jews to pay Roman taxes. I was
taught in the Baptist church that he was telling them to pay the
Romans their taxes, and in effect that it was right to submit to
earthly laws. I was unaware until last night that there were
alternate interpretations by scholars looking at the historical
context and alternate translations. Depending on who you ask, it
could have meant "yes pay the Roman tax", or the exact opposite,
or it could have been dodging the question.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Faisal Imtiaz" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: 12/22/2016 2:11:28 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT - trolling again
Interesting discussion... If I may join in :)
From a Muslim perspective....
We don't believe in Evolution, believe in Adam & Eve being the
first humans created by God (A Singular Unique Entity), and
Jesus being the Messiah.
For the sake of not forking the discussion into something
else, I will stay away from the difference in 'Religion' and
just look at the 'Common' elements.
There have been 100's of Prophets since Adam, and a number of
'Holy Text(Books)'... Torah,(Psalms) Zabur & Injeel (Bible)
and the Quran
In all of these 4 Books (Covering the Abrahamic Faiths) there
more in common than what is not common.
As such, I will make the case that, All Constitutions
(irrespective of which part of the world) start out with these
common elements, let's just call them "Humanity first" Elements,
and then they go thru the contortions by the law makers to
fit their desired needs.
Having known that Muslim's come in more than 31 Flavors of
Belief, and have learnt that so do Christians and Jews of
today's world, it is rather amusing and en-lighting to see
such conversations.
I thought it's only the Muslims that have an ongoing debate in
'translating' the Arabic from the Quran. I cannot speak about
the Jewish Torah, but in regards to the Bible, it would appear
that it has gone thru a few 'translation' cycles.
I can tell you, that in the Quran, there are some verses which
have been very difficult to translate in the past, but as time
has passed those have become a lot easier to understand.
So if I was infer from this I can see why there would be
issues with any Holy Book which was translated a while back...
In my humble opinion, the problem is not with the Holy Text,
but more with the 'translation' choosen by the person or folks
who did the translation.
And, yes there is no shortage of people who are willing to
distort the text to suite their needs on any side, part of the
world.
And I fully understand that someone else may have a very
different POV due to their upbringing.
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email:
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Gino Villarini" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*To: *[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent: *Thursday, December 22, 2016 11:36:30 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] OT - trolling again
I was raised Catholic, now im Agnostic almost Atheist. I
believe the bible is a book put together through time to
accomplish 2 main things (same as religion) : Give
purpose / meaning to your life, put together social norms.
They way that they are convey, that’s another topic of
discussion.
Too many things in the bible that nowadays makes no sense
at all to take it literally…
From: Af <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Chuck McCown
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Thursday, December 22, 2016 at 12:18 PM
To: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT - trolling again
*//*
*/Gino Villarini/*
President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
Not no problem with what he is saying, I largely have the
same opinion. I look at Science and Religion as two views
of the exact same thing. I only believe in one thing...
truth.
*From:* Bill Prince
*Sent:* Thursday, December 22, 2016 9:11 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT - trolling again
What Neil has to say
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRt0FKeorlM
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 12/22/2016 7:12 AM, Chuck McCown wrote:
Western Law does in fact have deep roots in the bible.
Western Common Law is the basis of our constitution
modified with the benefit of historical observations
of failed nation states.
But those that reject the biblical ancestry of our
legal system need to actually read the bible, the
whole thing. Perhaps several times.
1) I am the LORD thy God… Thou shalt have no other
gods before me.
OK, we have substituted our allegiance to our nation
in the place of god. Ye shall not pledge allegiance
to any other nation. Same idea. You can lose your
citizenship.
2) Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
This is pretty much limited to counterfeiting these
days. (ok that is a bit of stretch...)
3) Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in
vain
Huge expansion of this one, you even have to utter
trigger warnings if you take the name of Che Guevara
in vain on some college campuses. Holy cow has the
list of things we cannot say grown lest we offend the
snowflakes.
4) Remember the Sabbath day
Just Google “Blue Laws”, lots of stuff is based on
this. Including the spelling of an ice cream sundae.
5) Honor thy father and thy mother
Talk to an emancipated minor for a new view on how the
law forces you to literally obey your parents until
18. They can even force you to get a job and take
your money...
6) Thou shalt not kill.
Duh?
7) Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Not only is it against the law, it is very good
advice. And if you do it, your spouse can sue your
girlfriend for alienation of affection.
8) Thou shalt not steal.
ibid Duh?
9) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
Slander, Libel, just ask the tabloids if this has ever
been an issue.
10) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou
shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his
manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his
ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's.
Scheming is illegal and scheming normally starts in
coveting.
So far I am arguably batting 1000, but wait there’s more!
Things as arcane as the time periods between
bankruptcy “At the end of every seven years you shall
grant a remission of debts. “
Look at Exodus 21 and 22, most of our tort laws can be
traced to this.
Property laws are in there.
Some folks really hate to admit that the bible had
anything to do with our constitution or the founding
of our nation. But some folks think that Sandy Hook
was a fabrication too....
From: Jeremy
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 7:54 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT - trolling again
"
Argument One: Our Legal System is Based on the Ten
Commandments
The legal system of the United States of America is
based on the U.S. Constitution, which includes its own
Ten Commandments, if you will. It starts off with ten
rules which ensure the freedoms we have come to know
and love in this modern democracy. The very first
one—in fact the very first line of the Bill of
Rights—says that government shouldn’t be in the
business of favoring one set of religious beliefs over
another. Religious liberty is something Americans have
historically taken very seriously, and we have always
tried to remember that the only way one person can be
free to worship as she pleases is if everyone else is
free to worship as they please (or by extension free
not to worship at all).
In short, it stipulates that one God cannot be placed
above all the others. That’s bedrock for religious
liberty in this country. No favoritism.
Now let’s look at the Ten Commandments of the Bible.
That set of rules begins with the exact opposite
assertion: That there is only one true God—ostensibly
that would be the God of the Hebrews, Yahweh—and all
others are illegitimate. “You shall have no other gods
before me,” it says as clear as day.
So right out of the gate, we’ve got a fundamental
conflict between these two sets of rules. One is
fundamentally pluralistic and “secular” in the sense
that it resolves to be nonsectarian, free from
entanglement with any one denominational belief set.
The other is just the opposite–it prohibits any other
commitments and places this One True Faith above all
over belief systems. These two ideologies are
diametrically opposed to each other. I don’t see how
anyone who’s thinking very hard about this can escape
the conclusion that you have to choose which of these
two ideologies should govern our local, state, and
federal governments.
What you do in your own houses of worship is another
story. According to the way our government is set up,
in the private sphere an individual, a family, or a
religious community is free to worship (or not
worship) as they see fit. But in a nation founded on
the principle of nonsectarian pluralism, you simply
cannot say that our legal system is based on the
dictates of one religion or another, least of all one
that starts out the way the Ten Commandments does.
Incidentally I could go on and cover other things that
don’t sit right as well. For example, the notion of
observing a Sabbath (that’s on Saturdays, btw) isn’t
exactly carried over into the New Testament, and
simply saying that you worship on Sundays isn’t the
same thing, strictly speaking. We don’t have laws
about making graven images either (which is a good
thing considering this monument is literally a graven
image), nor can we possibly legislate coveting.
Come to think of it, can you imagine how the
arch-capitalists among the GOP would howl if we began
to write laws about coveting? Good heavens. Are you
really sure you want to say the Ten Commandments
should be the basis for American legal system? But I
digress…
Those things which you can extract from the Ten
Commandments which made their way into our legal code
like lying, stealing, and murder predated the Hebrew
religion by many centuries and are nearly universal
among belief systems the world over. So it’s not
really accurate to talk as if the Ten Commandments are
the sole proprietary basis for those things, either."
-Neil Potter
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 7:51 PM, Josh Reynolds
mailto:[email protected] wrote:
Excellent points.
On Dec 21, 2016 8:46 PM, "Jeremy"
mailto:[email protected] wrote:
Because it gives the appearance that government is
favoring a specific religion, in violation of the 14th
amendment. It shows a lack of separation of church
and state. If we are going to allow christian displays
on public property then we also have to allow the
Church of Satan to erect Baphomet as well. The issue
is that Satanic churches, Muslims, and Secular belief
systems are not given the same rights as Christians.
Just look at the Atheists and agnostics who have
attempted to give the opening invocations at our
legislature meetings all over the country, and the
reactions that they got. They have been berated and
disrespected. This is the ground zero for the
establishment of a government-favored religion.
"The claim that America was founded as a “Christian
nation” is at best a gross over-simplification and at
worst a myth fabricated in order to manipulate
contemporary sensibilities. Many of the prominent
“Founding Fathers,” were in fact not Christians in the
sense that contemporary evangelical, mainline
Protestant, and Roman Catholic churches understand the
term. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas
Paine, Benjamin Franklin, and a host of others were
Deists, or at least influenced by deist philosophy.
They conceived of God as a divine watchmaker – this
impersonal, inaccessible deity set the universe in
motion then sat back and watched history unfold
completely independent of any transcendent
intervention, miracles, or divine-human relationships
(Jefferson famously edited the New Testament to remove
all references to Jesus as a divine miracle worker and
render him merely a moral philosopher). The position
of these Founding Fathers was far from any orthodox
theology of divine immanence.
Further, the idea that the United States could be a
“Christian nation” is theologically problematic. The
only “Christian nation” which the New Testament
envisions is the Kingdom of God, which transcends
national, cultural, and ethnic boundaries. Were the
United States to be a “Christian nation,” she would
have to do more than celebrate Christmas as a federal
holiday and display the Ten Commandments in her
courthouses. If she were held to the same standards
to which the New Testament holds the Christian
community, the United States would have to embody
Christian principles, including the mandate to love
one’s enemy, eschew power, put away the sword, give
freely without any expectation of repayment, and –
because she is very rich – sell all her material
possessions, donate the proceeds to the poor, then
take up a cross of discipleship. The consumerism and
materialism which characterize so much of the American
ethos – Jefferson’s “life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness” was a modification of John Locke’s “life,
liberty, and the pursuit of property,” and indeed most
versions of the American Dream equate property with
happiness – seem to be at odds with most versions of
core Christian values. In short, the United States is
not a “Christian nation,” and simply displaying
representations of the Ten Commandments in public
locations does not change this reality."
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:29 PM, Jaime Solorza
mailto:[email protected] wrote:
yep but you will probably be yelling oh God when under
dangerous or extremely pleasurable situation,
Like Blood Sweat and Tears said, "I know there is no
heaven, but I pray there is no Hell!"
zaz...in your face
Jaime Solorza
Wireless Systems Architect
915-861-1390
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:39 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm
mailto:[email protected] wrote:
so, we use the Gregorian calendar which is named after
a pope... I wonder if I can skip court dates on the
grounds it offends me
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Bill Prince
mailto:[email protected] wrote:
Roadside displays should be free speech.
Anything guvmint should be looked at suspiciously.
Whether it is christian, jewish, muslim, pagan, or
whatever.
On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 12:46 PM, Jay Weekley
mailto:[email protected] wrote:
Maybe. All those displays of Lady Justice at the
court houses have to go.
Chuck McCown wrote:
> How about flowers or crosses on the side of the road
where someone died?
>
> Do you tear down the pyramids or stone hinge?
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Jay Weekley
> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 1:42 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT - trolling again
>
> Do you stop all religious displays or just
Christian, Jewish or Muslim?
> There are plenty of religious symbols from ancient
religions all over
> public property. I'd kind of like them removed as well.
>
> Lewis Bergman wrote:
>> I have a friend who is an atheist. He compares it
to how I feel about
>> any resources from my tax money going to abortion.
Not sure I agree
>> with the equivalency of the resources involved but
I can see his
>> point. If that is his only issue with my stance I
would like to ask
>> to stop all displays of Nativity Scenes in trade
for not funding any
>> abortions. Anyway, I thought his argument was
fairly reasoned.
>>
>> I still ddon't understand why they care. It seems
some are just
>> purely to try and rub Christians nose in the fact
they don't believe
>> and think you are stupid for doing so. I view it
like a lot of
>> things. I don't care f you are gay or straight,
married or just
>> living with someone, Dem or Rep. As long as it
doesn't affect me I
>> simply don't give a shit.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 1:09 PM That One Guy /sarcasm
>> <[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> attention seeking behavior
>>
>> most of these "athiests" "agnostics" "satanists"
whatever "ist"
>> they present as, couldnt even tell you the basic
tenets of their
>> "ist" and all they do is parrot simplistic
talking points from the
>> borg of nevergrewups ... "if you celebrate
christmas, than a
>> pagan" nonsense like that
>>
>> society has slowly moved to the age of adulthood
being a sliding
>> scale, with fewer and fewer on the lower end
every generation.
>>
>> the bulk of actual athiests, agnostics,
satanists and other non
>> attention whore ists could really give a shit
less what others do
>>
>> just remember, just because the loudmouth makes
the most noise, it
>> doesnt mean they represent the majority of their
fellows. Also,
>> remember, everyone is unique, just like everyone
else.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Chuck McCown
<[email protected]
>> mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> We have days on the calendar about people.
>> Presidents day used to be Wash’n and Linc’n
bdays.
>> MLK day.
>> Casmir Pulaski day.
>> Columbus day.
>> So, why are the atheists and others so
unhappy about displays
>> on public property about Jesus.
>> I doubt anyone in Illinios would get unhappy
if the local park
>> had a Lincoln-Douglas plaque... actually
Quincy had exactly
>> that.
>> Public displays frequently celebrate or
inform about events in
>> history.
>> Our legal system has its basis in the bible,
with some of the
>> legal doctrine based on the advise of Jesus.
>> He lived. He taught. He gave advice. It
affected history.
>> Just like MLK.
>> But on MLK day do the pentagram sculptures
try to share space
>> with MLK events?
>> I don’t get why the Jesus events on public
property are such
>> an insult or affront to some people.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- If you only see yourself as part of the
team but you don't
>> see
>> your team as part of yourself you have already
failed as part of
>> the team.
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
>> Version: 2016.0.7924 / Virus Database: 4739/13627 -
Release Date:
>> 12/21/16
>>
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7924 / Virus Database: 4739/13629 -
Release Date:
> 12/21/16
>
>
--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you
don't see your team as part of yourself you have
already failed as part of the team.
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7924 / Virus Database: 4739/13634 - Release Date: 12/22/16
