South Carolina target for secession

Guest · #41 Postby **Guest** » Tue May 25, 2004 4:53 pm

What is the problem with Christianity??? Christianity teaches good MORAL behavior. Isn't that what we all want, citizens that actually have morals? Christians shouldn't be expected to change their religious beliefs just because the state says homosexuality and abortion are legal. I think secession is a bit extreme, but something has to be done. Christians are good people. OtherHD, please try to refrain from such childish outbursts.
...Jennifer...

Lindaloo · #42 Postby **Lindaloo** » Tue May 25, 2004 4:57 pm

Well said Jen!! :clap:

#43 Postby **wx247** » Tue May 25, 2004 5:03 pm

mrschad wrote:What is the problem with Christianity??? Christianity teaches good MORAL behavior. Isn't that what we all want, citizens that actually have morals? Christians shouldn't be expected to change their religious beliefs just because the state says homosexuality and abortion are legal. I think secession is a bit extreme, but something has to be done. Christians are good people. OtherHD, please try to refrain from such childish outbursts.
...Jennifer...

I pretty much agree. I don't think though that the state is asking Christians to change their beliefs, I just think that they are asking that other beliefs have the same rights. I don't disagree with that. If they started saying that we all had to be homosexuals or have abortions or marry 7 women, then I could see the point. The extreme Christian groups do give a bad name to the rest of us Christians, however.

CaluWxBill · #44 Postby **CaluWxBill** » Tue May 25, 2004 5:04 pm

mrschad wrote:What is the problem with Christianity??? Christianity teaches good MORAL behavior. Isn't that what we all want, citizens that actually have morals? Christians shouldn't be expected to change their religious beliefs just because the state says homosexuality and abortion are legal. I think secession is a bit extreme, but something has to be done. Christians are good people. OtherHD, please try to refrain from such childish outbursts.
...Jennifer...

There is no problem with Christianity, there is problems with teaching it in public school, although I do see reason for a general religion class in high school, of course other religions would end up being introduced, which you may or may not like, and it wouldn't be influential, rather informative, and in a more socialogical nature. at homeschool or Catholic, or Christian school fine teach it. Yes Christianity definitely holds good values, that are good to have, but many other religions share these values.

furluvcats · #45 Postby **furluvcats** » Tue May 25, 2004 5:08 pm

But this IS America Bill! Whether you want to belive it or not, this country WAS founded on Christianity! Our forefathers would roll over in their graves if they knew how far from their ideas, this country has gotten! We were not founded on Buddaism, or any other belief...why can't people understand that??? Other religions should be taught, but not as an equal to Christianity...NOT in American History!

#46 Postby **wx247** » Tue May 25, 2004 5:11 pm

furluvcats wrote:But this IS America Bill! Whether you want to belive it or not, this country WAS founded on Christianity! Our forefathers would roll over in their graves if they knew how far from their ideas, this country has gotten! We were not founded on Buddaism, or any other belief...why can't people understand that???

I agree that we were founded on Christianity, but we have freedom of religion in this country and we should be tolerant of those religions. I am not asking you to join them or even think they are right. We Christians however must be tolerant of others though. It is not up to us to say no you can't do that as long as it does not affect us or our brothers and sisters in Christ.

furluvcats · #47 Postby **furluvcats** » Tue May 25, 2004 5:19 pm

Ok, that's fine, but when the government says Christianity isn't allowed in public schools, then something is wrong...When kids only hear about Christianity grouped in with all the other religions, and its not given any special place in American History....then there I have a problem.

CaluWxBill · #48 Postby **CaluWxBill** » Tue May 25, 2004 5:23 pm

If somebody knows a link that I can read that would show me that we were found based on Christianity. Yeah I know all people (except for Native Americans) were Christians colonialist, but I think there was alot of Protestant sects fighting each other and Catholics, so we weren't one religion, but I guess you can group them together, but there are still differences among Christians. I see the first amendment as protecting all people from being imposed any religion by our government. Please I am confused on how we were found on Christianity, just because the people who wrote the constitution were Christian.

furluvcats · #49 Postby **furluvcats** » Tue May 25, 2004 5:28 pm

Read your Currency....In God We Trust.

CaluWxBill · #50 Postby **CaluWxBill** » Tue May 25, 2004 5:29 pm

furluvcats wrote:Read your Currency....In God We Trust.

Tell me how long that was on our currency.

CaluWxBill · #51 Postby **CaluWxBill** » Tue May 25, 2004 6:01 pm

CaluWxBill wrote:
furluvcats wrote:Read your Currency....In God We Trust.

Tell me how long that was on our currency.

Well okay that was proposed in 1861, and Under God was added to the pledge of allegiance in 1954, but there certainly has been a recognition of God in all of American History, I am still not sure whether it would be right for the government to actively support the teaching of Christianity in public schools. Maybe from a historical perspective.

Lindaloo · #52 Postby **Lindaloo** » Tue May 25, 2004 6:11 pm

For starters, the Bible and Christianity were the main influence on the writing of the Declaration of Independence.

Rainband · #53 Postby **Rainband** » Tue May 25, 2004 6:36 pm

Everyone in this world is entitled to their beliefs and to be who they are. The key is to respect the beliefs you hold dear and to respect those who have beliefs you don't agree with. We aren't meant to understand everything or everyone. One thing I do know is it is easier to forgive than it is to Hate. I don't judge anyone..I just expect the same in return

I think that the people in SC that feel like they need to cut ties with the United States, feel like their religious beliefs are being threatened, that is truly sad. Why you ask?? Because who we are religiously isn't influenced by any earthbound decision, law or criteria..it's who we are in our soul..Our faith isn't shaped by anything that happens to us it's only strengthened. I hope someday people realize we are all children of god. Though we come in many shapes, sizes, colors..etc. We all have that in common. That is one thing that no one can or ever will ever change. God Bless you all

#54 Postby **streetsoldier** » Tue May 25, 2004 7:26 pm

Even I, as a comunicant in the Episcopal Church, have not been left unscathed in the push for "political correctness" over Christian doctrine.

My little church, St. Paul's, may have to close its doors over the number of parishioners who have left (with their long-standing support) over the General Convention's actions last year.

Our church didn't agree with the Convention, or the vote of our Bishop...but to keep our church building, we have to "buy" the decision as legitimate, or else the Diocese of Missouri can either cut off the financial support for the rector, or confiscate the property and do with it what they wish.

We are caught in the middle...we strongly disapprove, but we don't want to "break away" and allow our Church to hold fast to apostasy. Those who have done so, we regard as "moral cowards"; when their faith is put to the test, they RUN...leaving their "full armor of God" in the dust.

Instead, we who remain will stand for what we believe...even if it costs us our meeting place. "For are we not called to be the Light and the Salt?"

#55 Postby **wx247** » Tue May 25, 2004 7:28 pm

streetsoldier wrote:Even I, as a comunicant in the Episcopal Church, have not been left unscathed in the push for "political correctness" over Christian doctrine.

My little church, St. Paul's, may have to close its doors over the number of parishioners who have left (with their long-standing support) over the General Convention's actions last year.

Our church didn't agree with the Convention, or the vote of our Bishop...but to keep our church building, we have to "buy" the decision as legitimate, or else the Diocese of Missouri can either cut off the financial support for the rector, or confiscate the property and do with it what they wish.

We are caught in the middle...we strongly disapprove, but we don't want to "break away" and allow our Church to hold fast to apostasy. Those who have done so, we regard as "moral cowards"; when their faith is put to the test, they RUN...leaving their "full armor of God" in the dust.

Instead, we who remain will stand for what we believe...even if it costs us our meeting place. "For are we not called to be the Light and the Salt?"

This is exactly the kind of case where a dialogue and discussion about splitting/succession should take place. Not because there is a law allowing something that doesn't affect you. Bill, you have provided a pertinent example as to where a certain decision DOES directly affect. Thus, need for action exists.

Rainband · #56 Postby **Rainband** » Tue May 25, 2004 7:44 pm

wx247 wrote:

This is exactly the kind of case where a dialogue and discussion about splitting/succession should take place. Not because there is a law allowing something that doesn't affect you. Bill, you have provided a pertinent example as to where a certain decision DOES directly affect. Thus, need for action exists.

Excellent post!!!!!!!!!!! :wink:

#57 Postby **streetsoldier** » Tue May 25, 2004 7:44 pm

Well, perhaps I should state our objections...

That the man in question is in a same-sex "union" is his business, and it is he who must eventually answer for it before God...but, then, that such a man, living out openly a lifestyle that is prohibited explicitly in Scripture, should accept nomination and consecration as a Bishop, who is supposed to be the arbiter of faith and morals within his Diocese, is "apostasy" (i.e., the act[s] of those who KNOW the faith, yet promulgate behavior that is against the very faith they are consecrated to defend).

More, the vote of the General Convention paints the entire Episcopal Communion with a broad brush...even as there are those who cling to the faith and doctrine as we have always understood it, plainly set forth in Scripture and traditions of the Church.

And, as a result, all of the Anglican Communions across the world have already cut off the American Church from full communion, save the "rebel" congregations. Only Canterbury has yet to take a position...the "mother Church"...and their decision is merely a matter of time, given the overwhelming opposition worldwide.

NO, we will not "leave"...someone has to stand for something Greater, or we shall all fall for anything that fits into the current "fad" of liberal demagoguery,

Rainband · #58 Postby **Rainband** » Tue May 25, 2004 8:28 pm

Isn't not judging someone in the scriptures :roll:

#59 Postby **streetsoldier** » Tue May 25, 2004 8:42 pm

"Not judging" doesn't mean acquiescing to false doctrine, Rainband...at the very least, John Robinson should have, for the good of the Church, recused himself from consideration.

That he did not speaks for itself...and that the General Convention voted to consecrate a Scripturally-unfit Shepherd (despite widespread grassroots opposition) speaks even more loudly that, if we fall, it will not be from "without", but from "within"...by means of "well-meaning" but politically motivated people, who have chosen to ignore God's Word for the sake of some intangible they call "inclusiveness".

One cannot have it both ways.

Rainband · #60 Postby **Rainband** » Tue May 25, 2004 8:47 pm

streetsoldier wrote:"Not judging" doesn't mean acquiescing to false doctrine, Rainband...at the very least, John Robinson should have, for the good of the Church, recused himself from consideration.

That he did not speaks for itself...and that the General Convention voted to consecrate a Scripturally-unfit Shepherd (despite widespread grassroots opposition) speaks even more loudly that, if we fall, it will not be from "without", but from "within"...by means of "well-meaning" but politically motivated people, who have chosen to ignore God's Word for the sake of some intangible they call "inclusiveness".

One cannot have it both ways.

Wasn't talking about this dude. Just in general :wink:

South Carolina target for secession

Who is online