RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


Alumbrado -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 8:52:48 PM)

Beating swords into plowshares is generally considered to be bad for business by the DoD.




celticlord2112 -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 8:52:48 PM)

quote:

Which still doesn't answer the question 'whose Christianity?'. Your's? Reverend Wright's? The Quaker's? Rev. Wildemon's? Westboro Baptist church? Louis Farrakhan's?

For each individual legislator, his/her own Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.

Whose?  All.

Religion is a big tent, not a little one.




atursvcMaam -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:06:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

Beating swords into plowshares is generally considered to be bad for business by the DoD.


   Thank you, most of the new testament would be kind of bad for business across the board.  Although, come to think of it, plowshares could be used for corn which could be converted into fuel.....and all those rich bastards will have trouble making it into heaven.
    




TheHeretic -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:06:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

Which still doesn't answer the question 'whose Christianity?'.  Your's?  Reverend Wright's? The Quaker's?  Rev. Wildemon's?  Westboro Baptist church? Louis Farrakhan's?



         Read the last line of O59's link, Celt.  Even Dobson's own spokeshole says that "Without question, Dr. Dobson is speaking for millions of evangelicals because his understanding of the Bible is thoroughly evangelical."   The Evangelical denomination (or non-denomination as they often market themselves) is right down there with the Fundies and Baptists and Assembly of God in my book.  How dare a near-cult of a sect, barely 30 years old, decide what is "traditional," and what isn't?

         The Bible must be taken as a whole?  Says who exactly, ... the Bible?  My acceptance level of that as a source document may vary from yours.  Men who think, which would certainly be the ones I try to elect, reserve the right to make informed choices about what they pay attention to.

        A Christian may--and I would argue, should--point to his religious faith as justification for his vote on a matter of public policy, ...  And if those votes can be interpreted as imposing a particular belief (ie. an establishment of religion) upon the rest, our Constitution disallows the laws.

               (Just using the quote for emphasis; reply is to CelticLord. Well put, Alum.)




atursvcMaam -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:08:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

Which still doesn't answer the question 'whose Christianity?'. Your's? Reverend Wright's? The Quaker's? Rev. Wildemon's? Westboro Baptist church? Louis Farrakhan's?

For each individual legislator, his/her own Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.

Whose?  All.

Religion is a big tent, not a little one.



   "in my father's house there are many rooms" 
    The unity candidate?




Alumbrado -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:11:30 PM)

quote:

The Bible must be taken as a whole?  Says who exactly, ... the Bible? 


Not to mention 'which Bible'?




atursvcMaam -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:16:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


     A Christian may--and I would argue, should--point to his religious faith as justification for his vote on a matter of public policy, ...  And if those votes can be interpreted as imposing a particular belief (ie. an establishment of religion) upon the rest, our Constitution disallows the laws.




Hence the reason that there are multiple representatives, and even the Supreme court does not make decisions alone.  There is always room for debate, discussion, understanding, and with any luck a representation of the majority of opinion.




celticlord2112 -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:18:42 PM)

quote:

The Bible must be taken as a whole? Says who exactly, ... the Bible?

Actually, yes, the Bible.  Matthew 5:18.




celticlord2112 -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:20:53 PM)

quote:

How dare a near-cult of a sect, barely 30 years old, decide what is "traditional," and what isn't?

They argue their position--or rather, Dr. Dobson argues his and presumes to speak for the great mass of evangelicals.

And others will argue their positions.  Which is the order of things ordained by the Constitution and the First Amendment.




atursvcMaam -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:24:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

quote:

The Bible must be taken as a whole?  Says who exactly, ... the Bible? 


Not to mention 'which Bible'?


Certainly not the chinese menu style bible, "a little from column a, a little from column b"




Alumbrado -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:27:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

The Bible must be taken as a whole? Says who exactly, ... the Bible?

Actually, yes, the Bible.  Matthew 5:18.



Nice try...'the law' in Matthew is Mosaic law... the very old testament laws that Dodson says don't apply to being a 'twue Christian', and other Christian groups adhere to.. 




Owner59 -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:27:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

quote:

The Bible must be taken as a whole?  Says who exactly, ... the Bible? 


Not to mention 'which Bible'?


True.

How many versions is there?

How many times and how many languages has it been translated from,beginning with Hebrew?

The bible wasn`t written in English.

How much of the original books and texts aren`t included in the King James version?

Who is King James and what does he have to do with it?





celticlord2112 -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:30:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

The Bible must be taken as a whole? Says who exactly, ... the Bible?

Actually, yes, the Bible.  Matthew 5:18.



Nice try...'the law' in Matthew is Mosaic law... the very old testament laws that Dodson says don't apply to being a 'twue Christian', and other Christian groups adhere to.. 

How unlucky for you I am not discussing Dodson's screed, but Obama's.  I don't give a tinker's damn about Dodson.




celticlord2112 -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:31:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

quote:

The Bible must be taken as a whole?  Says who exactly, ... the Bible? 


Not to mention 'which Bible'?


True.

How many versions is there?

How many times and how many languages has it been translated from,beginning with Hebrew?

The bible wasn`t written in English.

How much of the original books and texts aren`t included in the King James version?

Who is King James and what does he have to do with it?



The one that is read by the individual.

And yes, that is the answer to your question. 




Owner59 -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:36:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

Which still doesn't answer the question 'whose Christianity?'. Your's? Reverend Wright's? The Quaker's? Rev. Wildemon's? Westboro Baptist church? Louis Farrakhan's?

For each individual legislator, his/her own Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.

Whose?  All.

Religion is a big tent, not a little one.



So after all the steam and heat,you`re agreeing with Obama.

You`re most sincerest compliment to the man.




Alumbrado -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:38:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

The Bible must be taken as a whole? Says who exactly, ... the Bible?

Actually, yes, the Bible.  Matthew 5:18.



Nice try...'the law' in Matthew is Mosaic law... the very old testament laws that Dodson says don't apply to being a 'twue Christian', and other Christian groups adhere to.. 

How unlucky for you I am not discussing Dodson's screed, but Obama's.  I don't give a tinker's damn about Dodson.



You aren't discussing anything, as usual, you are desperately slinging high school level debate tactics in support of imaginary facts, and agitprop. 
And once backed into a corner on the facts and your own words, can the standard 'yawns' and 'chuckles' of retreat be far behind?




atursvcMaam -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:38:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

The Bible must be taken as a whole? Says who exactly, ... the Bible?

Actually, yes, the Bible.  Matthew 5:18.



Nice try...'the law' in Matthew is Mosaic law... the very old testament laws that Dodson says don't apply to being a 'twue Christian', and other Christian groups adhere to.. 


Beg Pardon?  Unless i slept through yet another batch of sunday school classes, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John sort of were the basis of the conversion to New Testament Christianity. 




Owner59 -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:40:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alumbrado

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

The Bible must be taken as a whole? Says who exactly, ... the Bible?

Actually, yes, the Bible.  Matthew 5:18.



Nice try...'the law' in Matthew is Mosaic law... the very old testament laws that Dodson says don't apply to being a 'twue Christian', and other Christian groups adhere to.. 


I like the parts about owning slaves........

I need a witness!




celticlord2112 -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:44:54 PM)

quote:

You aren't discussing anything, as usual, you are desperately slinging high school level debate tactics in support of imaginary facts, and agitprop.
And once backed into a corner on the facts and your own words, can the standard 'yawns' and 'chuckles' of retreat be far behind?

How am I backed into a corner?

Certainly not by these non-sequiturs and pretensions of authority.




Alumbrado -> RE: James Dobson to blast Obama (6/24/2008 9:52:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: atursvcMaam

Beg Pardon?  Unless i slept through yet another batch of sunday school classes, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John sort of were the basis of the conversion to New Testament Christianity. 


Last I checked, both sides (adherence to the law, and antithesis of the law) claim that Matthew proves their point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_5:17




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125