Christianity and our Nation.

You are correct it was Religion pure and simple that burned people at the stake. It was not Christian Culture. My wifes great x 5 grandfather was burned at the stake, John Rogers. He is in Foxes Book of Martyrs, merely for translating the Bible from the Latin so common people could read for themselves. The Religious leaders did that to try and procure power.

 

Perhaps we should abandon the Bible and just refer to Yardmeat to solve our moral dilemmas.

 

You could try using logic and reason and empathy for your moral dilemmas, instead of supporting scriptures that justify slavery, genocide, infanticide, etc. But that would require a sliver of critical thought. Which you guys are now calling a sin.

 

That's the point.....it's YOUR logic, Your reason. I follow Jesus. he never justified slavery, genocide, infanticide. He did not come to do away with the O.T. and it's laws. He came to fulfill them. You just have a lack of understanding. Instead of looking to God for logic, you expect everyone to follow your own. You know how many people are on this earth with their own logic?

 

Do you disagree with the God of the Bible when he commanded slavery, genocide, and infanticide? Did Jesus fix God? I acknowledge that morality can be complicated, but your religion does NOTHING to fix that. If anything, it makes it worse. And even your own religious text contradicts you.

 

Also, quick question before I respond to some of your other comments, @yabberefugee , because I do applaud your latitudinarianism, but what counts as being a Christian? What is required? I get that you want to focus on the essentials, but what are the essentials? You've said that deists are godless, but do unitarians count as Christians? If I believe in God, but not the Trinity, if I believe that Jesus was a wise man and even maybe the adopted son of God, but I don't acknowledge him as BEING God, am I Christian? Every conservative church I've attended would say no. But you appear to say yes, correct? Are unitarianis Christains or are they just as "godless" as the deists?

 

Between the two of us (by which I mean me and the Bible), only one advocates slavery, infanticide, murdering non-believers, etc. You openly defend the Bible for saying that. I disagree. I don't think that slavery, infanticide, and murdering non-believers are good things. Why do you disagree?

 

I agree with you mostly, but you were not around 2500+ years ago and you do not have the mind of God. You do not look into the future and know whether or not a culture has any potential to overcome it's evil tendencies. Sometimes those things are better left to the One that knows. We can study, and learn from the character of One who is Holy but we can never take His place. Now, for our day to day living, I think it is all laid out in the New Testament.

 

Allow me to answer you from my own prospective. The Unitarian viewpoint is a go along to get along approach. It denies the "power and resurrection" of our Lord. The word "trinity" is found no where in the Bible of course. There are a great many references to it ,however. throughout. Some have suggested the trinity means more than one god.
Jesus is not the adopted son of God, He is the only BEGOTTEN Son of God. In other words he is the ONLY one made of the same substance of God. (I would reference Philippians 3) I will refer to the scripture in Genesis where the Creator often refers to "We". God, being the summation of the trinity, the Holy Spirit being the powerline He has sent to the earth and Jesus being His word and representation to all in need of salvation, everyone of us.

Today, many call themselves Christians.....especially in America. If it is defined as a club, or organization, that stands on it's own. Yes, I guess, if you are an American then, you are a Christian unless you define as otherwise. I can quote scripture with the best of them but I would spare you from that. I know of a thief on the cross next to Jesus that could do nothing more than "believe". His hands and feet were occupied. Nevertheless, Jesus new his heart and promised him a place in "Paradise". I would say that man fit the true definition of "Christian". He didn't, however need a label. For the sake of language I would prefer the term "Believer" or "Part of the Body of Christ", but I guess one could take those terms and make a religion out of them as well! The human heart is incredibly deceitful, but the gift of God is incredibly easy, even a small child can do it!

 

Thank you for the thoughtful and detailed response. I promise to give a more detailed response of my own soon, but just wanted to acknowledge that this line was banger.

 

I wish I had also referenced for you especially Philippians 2:6. ! It's all good but my intent centered on that passage. Thanks for any consideration.

 

I'm prepping some stuff for response and will also be giving a bit of a defense of Biblical unitarianism, but nothing too much, just enough to steelman the argument. And I honestly only bring it up here because John Adams was unitarian. Some of the things you said about morality I think are both far more biblically accurate than the typical Divine Command Theory that I hear and is simultaneously something that I think most secular folks could agree with. But I'll need to get back to you on that.

 

While doing that, I want you to consider that Unitarian to many means "united among Christian Denominations". When I was growing up, even, that is how I took it. I know a lot of denomination oriented people fiercely defend their denomination and especially during Colonial times. Christ called us to "Unity" and so with that in mind, it is a Christian principle. Even Paul in the early Church had to address individual leaders with followers that identified with those leaders and were divisive. It is human nature.

Now today, their is a very large, worldwide movement away from that denominational pull. To many, it is that pull that turns off so many to the Gospel. However, the term "Unitarian" to many, suggests Buddha, Joseph Smith, Charles Russel, Hinduism, Muslim are all on an equal footing with Jesus. Even Denominations that were originally Christian have spin offs. They often preface their split with United, or Universal. These are liberal spin offs and they all tend to "be Godlike in form but they deny the power thereof".

 

Okay, just let me clarify, when I talk about unitarians, I'm talking about the more historical use of the term. The term refers to people who believe that God the Father is the only God and that there is no Trinity. Just clarifying. This is what the term meant in John Adams's time and how most people used it up until the unitarians joined the universalists (Christians who believe in universal salvation and deny the existence of an eternal hell) and things got even more broad.

 

Very interesting. I have only recently explored different doctrines of organized Religion. Never heard of "Divine Command Theory" until you mentioned it. I looked it up and I understand it is used in philosophy. Socrates and Plato discussed the subject. I have never taken a course in "Theology" or "Philosophy". From what I read about it I may be guilty.....or I may not. The Trinity is merely the attributes of God. I would define cold is the absence of heat, dark is the absence of light, evil is the absence of good, and hell is the absence of God and His Kingdom. Perhaps some use different words but mine are derived from what I find in scripture.

God is the standard of "Holiness". The righteous try to obtain it. It is impossible. Human beings can do good works of their own accord but, they always fall short of the "standard". God was aware of that when He created us in His own image. Because God desires relationship and because God is perfect Love, He gave us choice. We, by choice can choose good but we always fall short of "Holiness". God devised a plan. We can be "justified by faith" through His provision and Christ made that provision apparent to all who believe. After that, "good works" come out of us through faith in that provision. When we are "justified through faith", God counts us as Holy even though we still fall short but we improve toward the end of life. Doctrine becomes a heavy load when we get hung up on words. I don't believe John Adams, and certainly George Washington would have a problem with what I have spelled out. Actually, I believe this is why Washington never regularly attended a particular denomination. He didn't want to be cast in that light. Neither do I.

So, am I guilty of "Divine Command Theory"? Maybe, I don't know.

 

"FACT CHECK: DID PATRICK HENRY SAY THE US WAS FOUNDED ON CHRISTIANITY?"

Yes... the USA was primarily founded by Pilgrims and Baptists and Anglicans and Roman Catholics and deeply religious people who were persecuted in Europe and fled to the United States in hope that they might find religious tolerance in the new world.

 

Okay, I'm going to circle back to the unitarianism thing as well, but I wanted to touch on this point. We are obviously doing a bit of a reset here, or at least that's what I'm attempting, but I chose this particular post to respond to because I think we are going to end up agreeing.

All of us have to use our own judgment to solve our moral dilemmas. Surely we can agree on that. In fact, I think Jesus agreed. It is impossible to implement the Golden Rule without doing so. The Golden Rule encourages us to reflect on our own feelings and experiences, estimate how our actions will impact others, and rely on our empathy to determine incongruities. I know we've all heard the "lean not on your own understanding" concept, but the Golden Rule REQUIRES us to lean on our own understanding. It can't operate without it. Even appealing to scripture requires us to use our own judgement to interpret the scripture. Even "listening" for God's voice to guide us requires us to use our own judgement to determine if what we are experiencing is actually coming from God. Even if we knew for certain that it came from God, we'd have to use our judgement to determine, okay, but does that make it right?

You asked earlier about Divine Command Theory, and I'm just going to place my answers to that inquiry here. Divine Command Theory states that an action is good or bad BECAUSE God says it is good or bad. Consequences and other factors don't matter. In DCT, the only thing that determines right and wrong are God's subjective feelings without any reference to anything else. The Socrates/Plato thing you were mentioning earlier was probably the Euthyphro Dilemma, which asks: is an action good/evil because God says so or does God say so because he recognizes, in his wisdom, something about the act that makes it good/evil? Divine Command Theory takes the first option and says the second option is bunk.

I'd argue that the book of Genesis proves that DCT is non-biblical.

 

John 16:5-16 Jesus explains He will send the Hoy Spirit to guide us in all truth. When a person "submits" to the Holy Spirit He does that. I see the evidence of that in the unity of those that really seek. No one is an island to himself.

Again, this is the work of the Holy Spirit. I would test the voice from the Word and also look for a confirmation.

Isn't that beautiful? God gives us choice because he Loves us and desires relationship.

The precepts God has given, interpreted as laws, are not given to exact merely an act of obedience. They are given for our own good so that our days can be prosperous in the earth. As for your last comment, Yardmeat, I don't understand if DCT is biblical or non-bibical. I just know what the Word offers. What do you learn from the Book of Job?

 

Have you ever thought about "good and evil"? Is there any good or evil if we take humans out of the picture?

Humans create the notions of good and evil. And what is the basis of the determination of what is good and what is evil? Any thoughts?

 

There's so much wrong with that.

Moving on, can you either show me the Holy Spirit or tell me how to confirm the Holy Spirit for myself?

 

Can you see the wind? No you can't but you know it is there. Read the Word and sincerely look for it without any preconceived ideas. Ask for it. If that is impossible for you.....then move on.

 

Of course I have. You know, I never really thought about it but really, if we take humans out of the picture, I would guess there would be no evil, only good. Great point. We are above all creation and because we were made in the "image" of God. We alone were given choice between good and evil. We were given that for the purpose of "relationship" on a deep level. We can decide. We can choose.

 

"Read the Word"???? I know you're referring to the bible but that shows your worldly, unspiritual, carnal mind grasp of your own religion!!! Are you sincerely and honestly telling me you don't know what is meant by The Word????? IT'S NOT A BOOK!!

Sounds to me like too much religion and no Spirit!

Secondly, I spent about 7 years determined to obtain the Spirit's meaning of the bible whereas you've spent your years obtaining man's meaning of the bible!! And you want to lecture me??? LOL!!!!

Do you know what it's like to sit in meditation on a verse, asking for "light", working as diligently as you can to bring NOTHING to the table, having NO IDEA what the real meaning might be, surrendering all control to the Spirit, and suddenly have the spiritual meaning of the entire chapter DUMPED into your awareness, complete with detail? .... -going from zero to 100% in one second? I know you've never experienced that because you never meditate on the bible or trust the Spirit. You trust man. You trust writers. You trust people with an agenda, but not the Spirit. Otherwise you would know exactly what I'm telling you.

I Corinthians, 2:14 - "But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

 

There would be neither. Good and evil are judgements ..... HUMAN judgements.

You just sparked my interest! Tell me what "the image and likeness of God" means and is trying to convey.

 

You have judged me....but I do both. I don't lecture you but you quote the scripture you mock. Move on.