Christian values

[RandomVariable]

Again it is the nuance of timing and the question of following Christian values. So is it practical to live by the values Christ, Jesus, espoused? Jesus thought that one should live as if God is in control of all things; if slapped on one cheek, turn the other, god must have had a reason; if a woman gets pregnant, the child should be born, god must have had a reason; if there is a sinner unless one is without sin they can not judge another. I mentioned Islam as a contrast. Islam teaches that god is not in control of all things and that one must identify and eliminate sin, no questions asked, no answers required. Even a sinner can enforce the law of god in Islam.

'Turn the other cheek' is not a command to allow others to beat on you, the expression is set within the context of the people to whom Christ was addressing; who were Semites.

A God fearing Semite would only slap you with their clean hand... by turning the other cheek, you invite the individual to strike you with their unclean hand... which was a sin. Where the individual moved to slapped you with their unclean hand, they were exposed as a sinner and, in so doing they would immediately establish themselves as being unworthy of God's trust, thus unworthy of the life God had given them.

Matthew 5 KJV

38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. 41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 46For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 48Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.​

Yes yes... The Scriptures as interpreted by the Godless... what could be of less potential value?

Turn the other cheek to test the cleanliness of the individual. If he sues you to take your coat, give them your cloak also, to test his heart... If they force you to walk a mile, walk two... to test their determination... .

What is it about these lessons that confuses you people?

Christ subjected himself to unimaginable pain and suffering to PAY YOUR DEBT... You REJECT HIS GIFT and then come to confuse his flock with your foolish interpretation that THIS MAN IS A PERSON WHO YOU CAN FOOL THROUGH YOUR OWN FOOLISHNESS?

A man that will subject himself to such a price, is a man who KNOWS THE PRICE and UNDERSTANDS THAT THE PRICE MUST BE PAID.

Understand Reader... Christ paid the price ONLY for those who accept him, as their Lord and Savior. It is a GIFT TO YOU. Your rejection of Christ serves only to subject yourself to the penalty of DEATH... THE HARD WAY.

You believe that Christ's way is the easy way?

ROFL! Guess again... . As in most everything else, the Ideological Left is dead wrong about Christ... .

The Narrow Path is such because THE MAJORITY is always WRONG.

Wouldn't he need to do more than cite the scriptures to interpret the passage?

Quiet. You're messing up his offense.

 

[guno]

Absent God there is no potential for a moral code... as the morality merely becomes your opinion over the next guys.

God's authority is what provides morality... and absent that, it's just the short road to chaos, calamity and catastrophe.

Wrong. Many societies have developed moral code. According to you, only the Judeo-Christian societies did it under the guidance of a real god. But the Babylonians, Egyptians, Chinese, Persians, Greeks, Indians, etc, etc, etc all developed moral codes without the guidance of your god. So ... you are absolutely wrong.

Stating a moral code and BEING A MORAL CODE are two entirely different things.

You and your coven mates have proven that throughout this thread through your inability to answer the standing queries.

If it helps, I've presented that same challenge thousands of times and to date, not a single valid response has come forth on any of dozens of sites.

How hard is it for you to understand that Christian values are good values. THey are just not EXCLUSIVE to the club because you received them from God.. It's pretty arrogant to believe you OWN EXCLUSIVELY a prohibition against adultery for example. Is that why you're pissed? Because no one else can possess that value without paying homage to you or your church?

I'll tell you one moral value that MAY be in the Bible -- but it not a front page hell-burner. And that is TOLERANCE for the actions of others -- even if you disagree with the choices. Seems like you are demonstrating that one clearly right now as we speak..

As to the OP -- there is a desperate need to return to morality and values in this country. We are being consumed by sin. Whether defined as biblical or not...

How non believers define it is irrelevant.

REALLY??? So "dont commit adultery" is somehow ambiguous without FAITH? So "Don't bear false witness" isn't legally well enough defined without joining a congregation? Keys said it outright. You can't value it without God (and presumably a membership fee). Is that your contention also?

I've tried very hard to make clear how much I VALUE Judeo/Christian tenets. But I've never witnessed this "exclusivity" clause that you and others are putting on what are clearly common sense moral values..

Absent God there is no potential for a moral code... as the morality merely becomes your opinion over the next guys.

God's authority is what provides morality... and absent that, it's just the short road to chaos, calamity and catastrophe.

Wrong. Many societies have developed moral code. According to you, only the Judeo-Christian societies did it under the guidance of a real god. But the Babylonians, Egyptians, Chinese, Persians, Greeks, Indians, etc, etc, etc all developed moral codes without the guidance of your god. So ... you are absolutely wrong.

Stating a moral code and BEING A MORAL CODE are two entirely different things.

You and your coven mates have proven that throughout this thread through your inability to answer the standing queries.

If it helps, I've presented that same challenge thousands of times and to date, not a single valid response has come forth on any of dozens of sites.

How hard is it for you to understand that Christian values are good values. THey are just not EXCLUSIVE to the club because you received them from God.. It's pretty arrogant to believe you OWN EXCLUSIVELY a prohibition against adultery for example. Is that why you're pissed? Because no one else can possess that value without paying homage to you or your church?

I'll tell you one moral value that MAY be in the Bible -- but it not a front page hell-burner. And that is TOLERANCE for the actions of others -- even if you disagree with the choices. Seems like you are demonstrating that one clearly right now as we speak..

As to the OP -- there is a desperate need to return to morality and values in this country. We are being consumed by sin. Whether defined as biblical or not...

How non believers define it is irrelevant.

REALLY??? So "dont commit adultery" is somehow ambiguous without FAITH? So "Don't bear false witness" isn't legally well enough defined without joining a congregation? Keys said it outright. You can't value it without God (and presumably a membership fee). Is that your contention also?

I've tried very hard to make clear how much I VALUE Judeo/Christian tenets. But I've never witnessed this "exclusivity" clause that you and others are putting on what are clearly common sense moral values..

Judeo/Christian

No such thing

There’s No Such Thing as Judeo-Christian Values
The label “Judeo-Christian” tends to assume, at the expense of Judaism, that Christians and Jews believe essentially the same things.

There’s No Such Thing as Judeo-Christian Values

 

[sealybobo]

Don't you think that we should go back to our Christian values? Liberalism is a road to nowhere, it's just impossible to become absolutely 'free'. Christian way of life is the perfect way to reach happiness and protestant ethics help people to work better and earn more. It's not like we need to become religious. There are just too many good things in the Christian way of life which are almost completely forgotten nowadays.

How does it help people work better and earn more?

How does being honest in all of your dealings help you to earn more? Seriously?

You're asking how being known as being worthy of trust can help you work better with people?

Come on... .

I have a rule. Never trust someone who talks about God too much.

Well, that is what one should reasonably expect from Evil. So that serves reason.

Yes. Evil would try to pass itself off as religious and do a bad job. Always talk about God but then be hypocrites.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I think the state OUGHT to stay the hell out of Morals enforcement -- .

Really?
So you feel that we, the people, should have no say in matters where one's would-be moral code provides that they're entitled to take the life of another; or that we, the people, should keep our religion to ourselves, when our belief that the product of one's labor is their own, and other's feel that they're entitled to the product of another's labor?

Doesn't sound like you've given this much thought... . Perhaps you'd like to spend a few minutes going over it and get back, once you've had a chance to work out the kinks.

 

[RandomVariable]

Matthew 5 KJV

38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. 41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 46For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 48Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.​

Yes yes... The Scriptures as interpreted by the Godless... what could be of less potential value?

? That is text directly from the King James Version. Are you saying you use a different version? Also from the KJV here is Scripture from the book of Luke:
Luke 6 KJV

27But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, 28Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. 29And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also. 30Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again. 31And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. 32For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them. 33And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same. 34And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again. 35But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. 36Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.
​

For contrast's sake here is the reference to the OT's Scripture.
Leviticus 24 KJV

17And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death. 18And he that killeth a beast shall make it good; beast for beast. 19And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him; 20Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again. 21And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it: and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death. 22Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the LORD your God. 23And Moses spake to the children of Israel, that they should bring forth him that had cursed out of the camp, and stone him with stones. And the children of Israel did as the LORD commanded Moses.​

I don't debate scripture with the Godless. Christ did not come to change the law... he came to ENFORCE THE LAW. Until you understand THAT... you've no means to understand much of anything.

Understand that to reason soundly, one must be in fellowship with the Father... as sound reason is the product of the soul; the conduit to God. Absent THAT... you're just a piece of meat making its way back to dust.

Might want to consult someone before labeling me godless.

We are discussing what Christ espoused us to do, not what Christ came to do. There is a difference.

No, there's not. They are one in the same.

And with that I will let Avatar take over if he chooses.

 

[sealybobo]

Wrong. Many societies have developed moral code. According to you, only the Judeo-Christian societies did it under the guidance of a real god. But the Babylonians, Egyptians, Chinese, Persians, Greeks, Indians, etc, etc, etc all developed moral codes without the guidance of your god. So ... you are absolutely wrong.

Stating a moral code and BEING A MORAL CODE are two entirely different things.

You and your coven mates have proven that throughout this thread through your inability to answer the standing queries.

If it helps, I've presented that same challenge thousands of times and to date, not a single valid response has come forth on any of dozens of sites.

How hard is it for you to understand that Christian values are good values. THey are just not EXCLUSIVE to the club because you received them from God.. It's pretty arrogant to believe you OWN EXCLUSIVELY a prohibition against adultery for example. Is that why you're pissed? Because no one else can possess that value without paying homage to you or your church?

I'll tell you one moral value that MAY be in the Bible -- but it not a front page hell-burner. And that is TOLERANCE for the actions of others -- even if you disagree with the choices. Seems like you are demonstrating that one clearly right now as we speak..

As to the OP -- there is a desperate need to return to morality and values in this country. We are being consumed by sin. Whether defined as biblical or not...

How non believers define it is irrelevant.

REALLY??? So "dont commit adultery" is somehow ambiguous without FAITH? So "Don't bear false witness" isn't legally well enough defined without joining a congregation? Keys said it outright. You can't value it without God (and presumably a membership fee). Is that your contention also?

I've tried very hard to make clear how much I VALUE Judeo/Christian tenets. But I've never witnessed this "exclusivity" clause that you and others are putting on what are clearly common sense moral values..

Wrong. Many societies have developed moral code. According to you, only the Judeo-Christian societies did it under the guidance of a real god. But the Babylonians, Egyptians, Chinese, Persians, Greeks, Indians, etc, etc, etc all developed moral codes without the guidance of your god. So ... you are absolutely wrong.

Stating a moral code and BEING A MORAL CODE are two entirely different things.

You and your coven mates have proven that throughout this thread through your inability to answer the standing queries.

If it helps, I've presented that same challenge thousands of times and to date, not a single valid response has come forth on any of dozens of sites.

How hard is it for you to understand that Christian values are good values. THey are just not EXCLUSIVE to the club because you received them from God.. It's pretty arrogant to believe you OWN EXCLUSIVELY a prohibition against adultery for example. Is that why you're pissed? Because no one else can possess that value without paying homage to you or your church?

I'll tell you one moral value that MAY be in the Bible -- but it not a front page hell-burner. And that is TOLERANCE for the actions of others -- even if you disagree with the choices. Seems like you are demonstrating that one clearly right now as we speak..

As to the OP -- there is a desperate need to return to morality and values in this country. We are being consumed by sin. Whether defined as biblical or not...

How non believers define it is irrelevant.

REALLY??? So "dont commit adultery" is somehow ambiguous without FAITH? So "Don't bear false witness" isn't legally well enough defined without joining a congregation? Keys said it outright. You can't value it without God (and presumably a membership fee). Is that your contention also?

I've tried very hard to make clear how much I VALUE Judeo/Christian tenets. But I've never witnessed this "exclusivity" clause that you and others are putting on what are clearly common sense moral values..

Judeo/Christian

No such thing

There’s No Such Thing as Judeo-Christian Values
The label “Judeo-Christian” tends to assume, at the expense of Judaism, that Christians and Jews believe essentially the same things.

There’s No Such Thing as Judeo-Christian Values

Good point. Is there a hybrid book of what Jews and Christians agree on?

Maybe the constitution?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Don't you think that we should go back to our Christian values? Liberalism is a road to nowhere, it's just impossible to become absolutely 'free'. Christian way of life is the perfect way to reach happiness and protestant ethics help people to work better and earn more. It's not like we need to become religious. There are just too many good things in the Christian way of life which are almost completely forgotten nowadays.

How does it help people work better and earn more?

How does being honest in all of your dealings help you to earn more? Seriously?

You're asking how being known as being worthy of trust can help you work better with people?

Come on... .

I have a rule. Never trust someone who talks about God too much.

Well, that is what one should reasonably expect from Evil. So that serves reason.

Yes. Evil would try to pass itself off as religious and do a bad job. Always talk about God but then be hypocrites.

Oh... SO its hypocrisy that you're intolerant of?

ROFLMNAO! A Leftist intolerant of hypocrisy... now THAT is ADORABLE!

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Yes yes... The Scriptures as interpreted by the Godless... what could be of less potential value?

? That is text directly from the King James Version. Are you saying you use a different version? Also from the KJV here is Scripture from the book of Luke:
Luke 6 KJV

27But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, 28Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. 29And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also. 30Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again. 31And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. 32For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them. 33And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same. 34And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again. 35But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. 36Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.
​

For contrast's sake here is the reference to the OT's Scripture.
Leviticus 24 KJV

17And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death. 18And he that killeth a beast shall make it good; beast for beast. 19And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him; 20Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again. 21And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it: and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death. 22Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the LORD your God. 23And Moses spake to the children of Israel, that they should bring forth him that had cursed out of the camp, and stone him with stones. And the children of Israel did as the LORD commanded Moses.​

I don't debate scripture with the Godless. Christ did not come to change the law... he came to ENFORCE THE LAW. Until you understand THAT... you've no means to understand much of anything.

Understand that to reason soundly, one must be in fellowship with the Father... as sound reason is the product of the soul; the conduit to God. Absent THAT... you're just a piece of meat making its way back to dust.

Might want to consult someone before labeling me godless.

We are discussing what Christ espoused us to do, not what Christ came to do. There is a difference.

No, there's not. They are one in the same.

And with that I will let Avatar take over if he chooses.

You did the best ya could... Your concession is duly noted and Summarily Accepted.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

It's been my pleasure...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Christian values"

In many respects an oxymoron.

It's telling how many Christians are incapable of abiding by the very 'values' they espouse.

 

[sealybobo]

I think the state OUGHT to stay the hell out of Morals enforcement -- .

Really?
So you feel that we, the people, should have no say in matters where one's would-be moral code provides that they're entitled to take the life of another; or that we, the people, should keep our religion to ourselves, when our belief that the product of one's labor is their own, and other's feel that they're entitled to the product of another's labor?

Doesn't sound like you've given this much thought... . Perhaps you'd like to spend a few minutes going over it and get back, once you've had a chance to work out the kinks.

When your ignorant religion is twisted and outdated we throw it out with the Greek gods, Mohammad and Joseph smith

 

[rdean]

Don't you think that we should go back to our Christian values? Liberalism is a road to nowhere, it's just impossible to become absolutely 'free'. Christian way of life is the perfect way to reach happiness and protestant ethics help people to work better and earn more. It's not like we need to become religious. There are just too many good things in the Christian way of life which are almost completely forgotten nowadays.

There are the traditional Christian values and then there are the US right wing Christian values which include "let him die" and "feed the poor and they will breed" and "It's not my kid. I'm not helping take care of it", and so one. They hide behind Jesus, but I'm pretty sure their God is named Satan.

 

[sealybobo]

"Christian values"

In many respects an oxymoron.

It's telling how many Christians are incapable of abiding by the very 'values' they espouse.

They want to be free to give to charity but don't want a government helping the poor even if they are vets.

How are Christian Republicans doing with the wounded warrior fund? Last I checked we still have a lot of homeless unemployed vets. Shouldn't shell haloburton and bp pay for them? Isn't that why we sent them to Iraq?

 

[flacaltenn]

Wrong. Many societies have developed moral code. According to you, only the Judeo-Christian societies did it under the guidance of a real god. But the Babylonians, Egyptians, Chinese, Persians, Greeks, Indians, etc, etc, etc all developed moral codes without the guidance of your god. So ... you are absolutely wrong.

Stating a moral code and BEING A MORAL CODE are two entirely different things.

You and your coven mates have proven that throughout this thread through your inability to answer the standing queries.

If it helps, I've presented that same challenge thousands of times and to date, not a single valid response has come forth on any of dozens of sites.

How hard is it for you to understand that Christian values are good values. THey are just not EXCLUSIVE to the club because you received them from God.. It's pretty arrogant to believe you OWN EXCLUSIVELY a prohibition against adultery for example. Is that why you're pissed? Because no one else can possess that value without paying homage to you or your church?

I'll tell you one moral value that MAY be in the Bible -- but it not a front page hell-burner. And that is TOLERANCE for the actions of others -- even if you disagree with the choices. Seems like you are demonstrating that one clearly right now as we speak..

As to the OP -- there is a desperate need to return to morality and values in this country. We are being consumed by sin. Whether defined as biblical or not...

How non believers define it is irrelevant.

REALLY??? So "dont commit adultery" is somehow ambiguous without FAITH? So "Don't bear false witness" isn't legally well enough defined without joining a congregation? Keys said it outright. You can't value it without God (and presumably a membership fee). Is that your contention also?

I've tried very hard to make clear how much I VALUE Judeo/Christian tenets. But I've never witnessed this "exclusivity" clause that you and others are putting on what are clearly common sense moral values..

Wrong. Many societies have developed moral code. According to you, only the Judeo-Christian societies did it under the guidance of a real god. But the Babylonians, Egyptians, Chinese, Persians, Greeks, Indians, etc, etc, etc all developed moral codes without the guidance of your god. So ... you are absolutely wrong.

Stating a moral code and BEING A MORAL CODE are two entirely different things.

You and your coven mates have proven that throughout this thread through your inability to answer the standing queries.

If it helps, I've presented that same challenge thousands of times and to date, not a single valid response has come forth on any of dozens of sites.

How hard is it for you to understand that Christian values are good values. THey are just not EXCLUSIVE to the club because you received them from God.. It's pretty arrogant to believe you OWN EXCLUSIVELY a prohibition against adultery for example. Is that why you're pissed? Because no one else can possess that value without paying homage to you or your church?

I'll tell you one moral value that MAY be in the Bible -- but it not a front page hell-burner. And that is TOLERANCE for the actions of others -- even if you disagree with the choices. Seems like you are demonstrating that one clearly right now as we speak..

As to the OP -- there is a desperate need to return to morality and values in this country. We are being consumed by sin. Whether defined as biblical or not...

How non believers define it is irrelevant.

REALLY??? So "dont commit adultery" is somehow ambiguous without FAITH? So "Don't bear false witness" isn't legally well enough defined without joining a congregation? Keys said it outright. You can't value it without God (and presumably a membership fee). Is that your contention also?

I've tried very hard to make clear how much I VALUE Judeo/Christian tenets. But I've never witnessed this "exclusivity" clause that you and others are putting on what are clearly common sense moral values..

Judeo/Christian

No such thing

There’s No Such Thing as Judeo-Christian Values
The label “Judeo-Christian” tends to assume, at the expense of Judaism, that Christians and Jews believe essentially the same things.

There’s No Such Thing as Judeo-Christian Values

Don't stress me out Guno.. I can only stand being scorned and pummeled by one side at a time..
Don't care to read about negating Judeo-Christian values.. NEVER meant acceptance of each other tenets.
In fact -- we disagree from BIRTH with this "original sin" versus "original virtue" split..

The term has always referred to the work as a WHOLE moral/values code and excluded a lot of the finnicky less important "soul and belief:" mystique around it...

 

[koshergrl]

Absent God there is no potential for a moral code... as the morality merely becomes your opinion over the next guys.

God's authority is what provides morality... and absent that, it's just the short road to chaos, calamity and catastrophe.

Wrong. Many societies have developed moral code. According to you, only the Judeo-Christian societies did it under the guidance of a real god. But the Babylonians, Egyptians, Chinese, Persians, Greeks, Indians, etc, etc, etc all developed moral codes without the guidance of your god. So ... you are absolutely wrong.

Stating a moral code and BEING A MORAL CODE are two entirely different things.

You and your coven mates have proven that throughout this thread through your inability to answer the standing queries.

If it helps, I've presented that same challenge thousands of times and to date, not a single valid response has come forth on any of dozens of sites.

How hard is it for you to understand that Christian values are good values. THey are just not EXCLUSIVE to the club because you received them from God.. It's pretty arrogant to believe you OWN EXCLUSIVELY a prohibition against adultery for example. Is that why you're pissed? Because no one else can possess that value without paying homage to you or your church?

I'll tell you one moral value that MAY be in the Bible -- but it not a front page hell-burner. And that is TOLERANCE for the actions of others -- even if you disagree with the choices. Seems like you are demonstrating that one clearly right now as we speak..

As to the OP -- there is a desperate need to return to morality and values in this country. We are being consumed by sin. Whether defined as biblical or not...

How non believers define it is irrelevant.

REALLY??? So "dont commit adultery" is somehow ambiguous without FAITH? So "Don't bear false witness" isn't legally well enough defined without joining a congregation? Keys said it outright. You can't value it without God (and presumably a membership fee). Is that your contention also?

I've tried very hard to make clear how much I VALUE Judeo/Christian tenets. But I've never witnessed this "exclusivity" clause that you and others are putting on what are clearly common sense moral values..

It's not an exclusivity clause...that's just your incorrect interpretation. But, again, your interpretation doesn't matter a whit.

 

[flacaltenn]

How hard is it for you to understand that Christian values are good values. THey are just not EXCLUSIVE to the club because you received them from God.. It's pretty arrogant to believe you OWN EXCLUSIVELY a prohibition against adultery for example. Is that why you're pissed? Because no one else can possess that value without paying homage to you or your church?

I'll tell you one moral value that MAY be in the Bible -- but it not a front page hell-burner. And that is TOLERANCE for the actions of others -- even if you disagree with the choices. Seems like you are demonstrating that one clearly right now as we speak..

As to the OP -- there is a desperate need to return to morality and values in this country. We are being consumed by sin. Whether defined as biblical or not...

How non believers define it is irrelevant.

REALLY??? So "dont commit adultery" is somehow ambiguous or unclear without FAITH? So "Don't bear false witness" isn't legally well enough defined without joining a congregation? Keys said it outright. You can't value it without God (and presumably a membership fee). Is that your contention also?

I've tried very hard to make clear how much I VALUE Judeo/Christian tenets. But I've never witnessed this "exclusivity" clause that you and others are putting on what are clearly common sense moral values..

It's not an exclusivity clause...that's just your incorrect interpretation. But, again, your interpretation doesn't matter a whit.

I told you the nation was being consumed by sin whether defined biblically or not. You tell me "how non-believers define it is irrelevent".. Then I ask you specifically if certain moral tenets are ambiguous without FAITH --- And you ditch the question and tell me that my "interpretation" doesn't matter a whit.. Well kiddo -- that wasn't "an opinion" ..

It was a question about whether "dont covet your neighbor's ass" is only VALID accompanied by FAITH in God and a membership fee ---- as a moral prescription. Seems to me that you and Keys are ATTEMPTING to enforce some kind of exclusivity deal on those rational ideas and precepts..

 

[IronFist]

"Christian values"

In many respects an oxymoron.

It's telling how many Christians are incapable of abiding by the very 'values' they espouse.

Still there are much more Christians than unbelievers who really abide those 'values'. In fact you can believe into any other god or just be completely secular. Those Christian commandments are just the best thing the human civilization ever invented.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Don't you think that we should go back to our Christian values? Liberalism is a road to nowhere, it's just impossible to become absolutely 'free'. Christian way of life is the perfect way to reach happiness and protestant ethics help people to work better and earn more. It's not like we need to become religious. There are just too many good things in the Christian way of life which are almost completely forgotten nowadays.

In the absence of God, there is no potential for happiness, as there is no means for human rights... .

Thank you Ted Haggard.

 

[frigidweirdo]

"Christian values"

In many respects an oxymoron.

It's telling how many Christians are incapable of abiding by the very 'values' they espouse.

One of the reasons Christianity has been so popular is that it allows you to murder someone, go to church on Sunday or speak to the priest, and everything is forgiven. It's the ultimate chocolate of the religious world. Islam requires fasting. It requires praying 5 times a day. It requires not drinking alcohol. Islam requires not eating stuff and praying too. Christianity requires that you feel good about doing bad stuff.

 

[koshergrl]

How hard is it for you to understand that Christian values are good values. THey are just not EXCLUSIVE to the club because you received them from God.. It's pretty arrogant to believe you OWN EXCLUSIVELY a prohibition against adultery for example. Is that why you're pissed? Because no one else can possess that value without paying homage to you or your church?

I'll tell you one moral value that MAY be in the Bible -- but it not a front page hell-burner. And that is TOLERANCE for the actions of others -- even if you disagree with the choices. Seems like you are demonstrating that one clearly right now as we speak..

As to the OP -- there is a desperate need to return to morality and values in this country. We are being consumed by sin. Whether defined as biblical or not...

How non believers define it is irrelevant.

REALLY??? So "dont commit adultery" is somehow ambiguous or unclear without FAITH? So "Don't bear false witness" isn't legally well enough defined without joining a congregation? Keys said it outright. You can't value it without God (and presumably a membership fee). Is that your contention also?

I've tried very hard to make clear how much I VALUE Judeo/Christian tenets. But I've never witnessed this "exclusivity" clause that you and others are putting on what are clearly common sense moral values..

It's not an exclusivity clause...that's just your incorrect interpretation. But, again, your interpretation doesn't matter a whit.

I told you the nation was being consumed by sin whether defined biblically or not. You tell me "how non-believers define it is irrelevent".. Then I ask you specifically if certain moral tenets are ambiguous without FAITH --- And you ditch the question and tell me that my "interpretation" doesn't matter a whit.. Well kiddo -- that wasn't "an opinion" ..

It was a question about whether "dont covet your neighbor's ass" is only VALID accompanied by FAITH in God and a membership fee ---- as a moral prescription. Seems to me that you and Keys are ATTEMPTING to enforce some kind of exclusivity deal on those rational ideas and precepts..

yes, well, you're insane. You should try to stick what we actually say instead of all your weird interpretation, because you suck at interpretation and mind reading.