RC Macaulay wrote:
Interesting subject ----- Original Message ----- From: RC Macaulay <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Christian Fellowship <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 10:21 PM Subject: Re: Role of God in government
The reference article by Brooke Allen attached to Dr. Storms post quotes Ben Franklin.
" as for Jesus of Nazareth.. is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it and think it needless to busy myself with now,"
Franklin had the insight to admit he could not express an opinion because he had NOT studied the words of Jesus Christ.
That is a most revealing statement. At least Franklin had the wisdom to defer an opinion because he didn't know the subject. Today, our nation has an entire cadre of learned educators that have no qualms about expressing their opinions without knowing their subject.
What do people find that is offensive in Jesus teaching? No, not what people say that Jesus taught.. BUT.. what Jesus taught.. His words.
I doubt that anyone rejects the words of Jesus. In any case, that is not the issue. The issue is the teachings of certain religious sects that have been created based on their understanding of the Bible. These sects are based on conclusions that are not universally accepted and are damaging to the general public when they are put into policy.
>
I am a believer, I am a servant / follower of Jesus Christ.
I believe in the separation of church and state. I believe in voluntary prayer in schools and in government.
I do not believe it should be mandated.
If everyone had this approach, the problems would not exist.
I cannot change anyones mind about their beliefs. I can tell you what wonderful things that God has done for me . You have the freedom in this great nation to make up your own mind. After all, you are the one that is betting your life on your decision.
Dr. Storms quotes a poorly written article in the " Nation" , an AP/CBS interest which hardly compares with Paul's writing in Romans 1st chapter. Compare them for yourself. Paul's writing is an accurate portrayal of what happens to people that lie to themselves.
Poorly written or not, a reading of any good history book shows that the founding fathers did not believe that Christianity should be the basis for the US government. The point of the article is that the Bush administration is giving the impression that this is a Christian nation in which the other religions are tolerated. Therefore, he feels free to impose policies that is based on what certain Christians believe. For example, that homosexuality is a sin, that life begins at conception, and that the Rapture is a real event. All of these beliefs are unique to certain Christian sects and not to religion in general, yet the beliefs are being supported with enthusiasm by the administration.
Perhaps the greatest hindrance to the advancement of science is the habit of lying to oneself, not to others.
Perhaps, but eventually people who lie to themselves also lie to others. Also, two kinds of lying people exist. Some people lie because they can not help it. They base their view of reality on their unique understanding that is unmodified by experience. On the other hand, people lie for personal gain. These people know they are lying and are only intent on gaining power and advantage over other people. Politicians are noted for being this kind of liars.
For those of you who think this thread has gone too far from an accepted subject for Vortex, let me propose that the attitude of government plays a significant role in the creation and solving of problems. Science can not do everything, especially when the insights of science are ignored. For example, as a previous thread has argued, ignoring global warming may require creative solutions that may not work. Would it not be better to have a government that saw the danger and stepped in before such solutions are required. The question is, why does the US government and the Christians who support it fail to recognize obvious problems, the example above being only one of many? Why do they accept obvious lies and policies that are clearly harmful to the general population? What makes Christians so blind? Science in the US would have fewer problems to solve if such blindness did not exist. Also, to be practical, science would have more money to solve the unavoidable problems if the policies were not so wasteful. Why are conservatives and Christians not up in arms and on the street demanding that changes be made rather than ranting against people who suggest that the system is broken?
Perhaps answers to these questions can not be given. In which case, I apologize for the bother.
Regards. Ed Storms
Richard
