The Consequences of a Post-Christian America Revealed by COVID-19

[there4eyeM]

I have never understood the logic behind believing that unless everyone is kept safe or nothing bad can ever happen that there can be no God.

Could one of you good people explain that to me?

Coyote Montrovant JoeB131 ESay

I don't think that argument would be that everyone has to be kept safe or there can be no god. It would probably be more along the lines of everyone should be kept safe or there is no all-powerful, all-knowing, loving and merciful god. The reason for that would be that allowing pain and suffering, when it doesn't have to exist, doesn't seem to be loving or merciful.

That's the best I've got off the top of my head. I'm not sure I've ever seen that argument presented, at least not in quite that form.

Pain and suffering exist because this ain't Heaven yet

It can as easily and logically be maintained that "pain and suffering" exist so that we can experience their lack.

My belief is that God created the material world to experience the material world through us.

Interesting, though clearly this anthropomorphizes 'God', indicating that 'God' had a desire for something 'God' lacked.

 

[SweetSue92]

From a biblical perspective the spirit of God is within us all. Therefore God is experiencing the material world through us.

That is absolutely false again. Wow, ding.

The Spirit of God is not "within us all". It only comes to those who accept Jesus Christ as their personal Savior. The Spirit of God is one of the Trinity, the living Witness.

I don't know what you believe frankly but I would warn you not to pass it off as Christianity.

That’s not what Jesus told the woman at the well.

Quote exactly what you're talking about, from the Bible and give me the translation you're using. It's Sunday. Let's do this.

 

[ding]

This isn’t the first time I have been told by a Christian that I’m not a Christian and I doubt it will be the last.

 

[SweetSue92]

I have never understood the logic behind believing that unless everyone is kept safe or nothing bad can ever happen that there can be no God.

Could one of you good people explain that to me?

Coyote Montrovant JoeB131 ESay

I don't think that argument would be that everyone has to be kept safe or there can be no god. It would probably be more along the lines of everyone should be kept safe or there is no all-powerful, all-knowing, loving and merciful god. The reason for that would be that allowing pain and suffering, when it doesn't have to exist, doesn't seem to be loving or merciful.

That's the best I've got off the top of my head. I'm not sure I've ever seen that argument presented, at least not in quite that form.

Pain and suffering exist because this ain't Heaven yet

It can as easily and logically be maintained that "pain and suffering" exist so that we can experience their lack.

My belief is that God created the material world to experience the material world through us.

Interesting, though clearly this anthropomorphizes 'God', indicating that 'God' had a desire for something 'God' lacked.

God is Creator. A Creator desires to Create, absolutely. God did not create us because he needed to experience His own Creation through our eyes. God needs nothing from us, including our experience. God is complete fullness.

 

[SweetSue92]

This isn’t the first time I have been told by a Christian that I’m not a Christian and I doubt it will be the last.

Your soul you must reconcile with God. I respect that. Just do not pass off to others that they have the Spirit of God, especially in what I many others believe are these last days, when they most decided do not, but need Him.

 

[ding]

I have never understood the logic behind believing that unless everyone is kept safe or nothing bad can ever happen that there can be no God.

Could one of you good people explain that to me?

Coyote Montrovant JoeB131 ESay

I don't think that argument would be that everyone has to be kept safe or there can be no god. It would probably be more along the lines of everyone should be kept safe or there is no all-powerful, all-knowing, loving and merciful god. The reason for that would be that allowing pain and suffering, when it doesn't have to exist, doesn't seem to be loving or merciful.

That's the best I've got off the top of my head. I'm not sure I've ever seen that argument presented, at least not in quite that form.

Pain and suffering exist because this ain't Heaven yet

It can as easily and logically be maintained that "pain and suffering" exist so that we can experience their lack.

My belief is that God created the material world to experience the material world through us.

Interesting, though clearly this anthropomorphizes 'God', indicating that 'God' had a desire for something 'God' lacked.

If that’s how you want to see it but that seems to be a position led by confirmation bias. As in you don’t want to believe God exists so you create arguments that confirm that belief.

whereas I started from the position of why would God create existence and looked for the most plausible reason I could find. So if you started from the position of why what would your answer be?

 

[there4eyeM]

If any attitude to 'God' is necessary, it would be child like, not childish, as today's religions are.

That is not only a blanket statement but an oversimplification.

yes, we are supposed to be childlike in our relationship with God.

no, we are not supposed to be childish in our faith.

To argue today’s religion is childish is to ignore that for any given thing there will be a distribution.

Calling religions "childish" is being kind. They are rather an insult to human intelligence in addition to being an insult to 'God' (to use a thoroughly misunderstood noun). In a context of theology, these religions are blasphemous.

It’s what you make it to be. It is all part of the conflict and confusion process.

why would you throw the baby out with the dirty bath water?

The "baby" and the "bath water" are one, and there is no "out" where they can be thrown.

 

[ding]

This isn’t the first time I have been told by a Christian that I’m not a Christian and I doubt it will be the last.

Your soul you must reconcile with God. I respect that. Just do not pass off to others that they have the Spirit of God, especially in what I many others believe are these last days, when they most decided do not, but need Him.

Thanks for judging my soul, Sue.

 

[sparky]

Quote exactly what you're talking about, from the Bible and give me the translation you're using. It's Sunday. Let's do this.

Trump is my shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me high like good religmo boys, they feedeth me lies on constitutional matters
He restoreth my soul: they leadeth me in the paths of social retardation in HIS name's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadowy libtards, I fear no zombie, for thou art with me; thy bible thumps comfort me.
Thou preparest a Congress before me in the presence of mine libtard enemies: thou fillest my head with bullsh*t…. my maga cap runneth over
Surely the sleazy mercenaries shall pick my pockets all my life, and I will dwell with the KKKristians forever


~S~w/no apologies to religmo fools

 

[SweetSue92]

You expect me to actually respond to your stupid, inane, junior high level strawman argument

And include a winky sign because you think you actually GOT ME. That's embarrassing, for you. But okay.

I'm going to start again with the OP, alright there, pal? The FUNCTION of the US govt is not to "keep us safe". That's why we have the 2nd amendment. It is only a small measure of safety against "enemies, foreign and domestic". You somehow now want to twist this into gotcha games with human beings and parents-children, as if you prove some kind of point that parents can, in some measure, keep children safe, you have won a Constitutional argument, or proven what the government's role should be.

The Constitution was written, and works, because the American populace never NEEDED the government to "keep us safe". I'm really going to end there because your skills at argumentation are beyond frustrating, to be honest.

Perhaps your skills at explanation are a bit lacking.

I see you still don't care to explain your statements. If it's frustrating for you to be asked to clarify things like "Christians know that no other human being can keep them safe," you might not want to post them.

I'm not at all embarrassed by using emojis. I do it all the time. It's what they are there for!

That is exactly the truth, actually. No other human being can keep them safe. Now you want to argue semantics. I'm not interested, unless YOU are interested in arguing this statement: "Americans know that the government cannot keep them safe".

It's ridiculous. You knew what I meant and expect me to go down a rabbit trail.

No.

I STILL don't know just what you meant. You may be happy to assume you know what someone means other than what they actually post, but I'm not going to do that, especially with the OP you created. I'm not even sure what you mean by a post-Christian America.

I don't think that Americans en masse "know that the government cannot keep them safe." Some believe that to be true, others don't. It depends in part on what they are being kept safe from; I hope you are just talking about the COVID-19 virus. The government can certainly do things to make things safer for Americans with regards to the virus. Some of the things it can do will cause other problems. Your posts so far in this thread, including the OP, still have me wondering if you believe the government (local/state/federal) should do/have done nothing at all in response to this pandemic.

When you have no belief in God, your god is your stomach. That's in the Bible. Your chief goal in life then is to simply stay alive. I know it's probably impossible for a non-Christian to imagine any OTHER goal or higher values. But they exist.

When your chief goal is survival, you will look anywhere for safety. When you don't believe in God, and you're an adult, who keeps you safe?

"The Authorities"

For pity's sake, look at the wreckage of human history for how THAT turns out

Wait, you don't think people of faiths other than Christianity, or those without religious faith, can imagine a higher goal than simple survival?

Yes. People of other faiths are more likely to live for more than "safety".

People without any faith at all mostly live for their stomach.

 

[ding]

If any attitude to 'God' is necessary, it would be child like, not childish, as today's religions are.

That is not only a blanket statement but an oversimplification.

yes, we are supposed to be childlike in our relationship with God.

no, we are not supposed to be childish in our faith.

To argue today’s religion is childish is to ignore that for any given thing there will be a distribution.

Calling religions "childish" is being kind. They are rather an insult to human intelligence in addition to being an insult to 'God' (to use a thoroughly misunderstood noun). In a context of theology, these religions are blasphemous.

It’s what you make it to be. It is all part of the conflict and confusion process.

why would you throw the baby out with the dirty bath water?

The "baby" and the "bath water" are one, and there is no "out" where they can be thrown.

That’s silly and showing your bias.

 

[SweetSue92]

This isn’t the first time I have been told by a Christian that I’m not a Christian and I doubt it will be the last.

Your soul you must reconcile with God. I respect that. Just do not pass off to others that they have the Spirit of God, especially in what I many others believe are these last days, when they most decided do not, but need Him.

Thanks for judging my soul, Sue.

Actually you just judged me totally apart from the very words I said. Interesting!

 

[ding]

I don't think that argument would be that everyone has to be kept safe or there can be no god. It would probably be more along the lines of everyone should be kept safe or there is no all-powerful, all-knowing, loving and merciful god. The reason for that would be that allowing pain and suffering, when it doesn't have to exist, doesn't seem to be loving or merciful.

That's the best I've got off the top of my head. I'm not sure I've ever seen that argument presented, at least not in quite that form.

Pain and suffering exist because this ain't Heaven yet

It can as easily and logically be maintained that "pain and suffering" exist so that we can experience their lack.

My belief is that God created the material world to experience the material world through us.

Interesting, though clearly this anthropomorphizes 'God', indicating that 'God' had a desire for something 'God' lacked.

God is Creator. A Creator desires to Create, absolutely. God did not create us because he needed to experience His own Creation through our eyes. God needs nothing from us, including our experience. God is complete fullness.

Who said anything about need? Other than thereforeiam?

does God need to create?

 

[ding]

This isn’t the first time I have been told by a Christian that I’m not a Christian and I doubt it will be the last.

Your soul you must reconcile with God. I respect that. Just do not pass off to others that they have the Spirit of God, especially in what I many others believe are these last days, when they most decided do not, but need Him.

Thanks for judging my soul, Sue.

Actually you just judged me totally apart from the very words I said. Interesting!

Actually I didn’t. But I am open to hearing how you believe I did?

 

[there4eyeM]

The difference with your post, of course, is that you didn't base your questions on anything I said. You just made them up. I, on the other hand, have quotes from you saying that Christians know no human can keep them safe (post #59), and you responding with a yes when I asked you if Christian children know their parents cannot keep them safe (post #67).

You didn't actually answer my questions, but I'm happy to answer yours.

The US government is my government and your government, assuming you are a US citizen. I don't think of it as precious. I certainly don't think it can keep everyone safe every day in every circumstance, from this virus or anything else. On the other hand, I also don't think that this is a binary equation in which the government either keeps everyone safe from everything all of the time, or does nothing.

Of course, I also think it's possible for one person to keep another person safe, at least in some circumstances.

You expect me to actually respond to your stupid, inane, junior high level strawman argument

And include a winky sign because you think you actually GOT ME. That's embarrassing, for you. But okay.

I'm going to start again with the OP, alright there, pal? The FUNCTION of the US govt is not to "keep us safe". That's why we have the 2nd amendment. It is only a small measure of safety against "enemies, foreign and domestic". You somehow now want to twist this into gotcha games with human beings and parents-children, as if you prove some kind of point that parents can, in some measure, keep children safe, you have won a Constitutional argument, or proven what the government's role should be.

The Constitution was written, and works, because the American populace never NEEDED the government to "keep us safe". I'm really going to end there because your skills at argumentation are beyond frustrating, to be honest.

Aren’t you making an argument to disband the military?

The military is a government institution that keeps us safe.

Same with the local and state police.

Sure, on an national and societal level.

They do not keep us safe on a personal level as their chief function, and were not intended to. Our gov't chief function is to protect individual rights conferred by God.

"Government" is the result of the social contract, and exists to regulate society. If society expresses a value for "individual rights" (whatever they may be), that would then play its part. There are governments and societies that put the emphasis on collective security and the freedom from violence and crime over personal, individual liberties that are often misused against others.

Governments are comprised of men, no different than religions.

Precisely, and this is how and why religions are essentially political.

 

[SweetSue92]

If any attitude to 'God' is necessary, it would be child like, not childish, as today's religions are.

That is not only a blanket statement but an oversimplification.

yes, we are supposed to be childlike in our relationship with God.

no, we are not supposed to be childish in our faith.

To argue today’s religion is childish is to ignore that for any given thing there will be a distribution.

Calling religions "childish" is being kind. They are rather an insult to human intelligence in addition to being an insult to 'God' (to use a thoroughly misunderstood noun). In a context of theology, these religions are blasphemous.

It’s what you make it to be. It is all part of the conflict and confusion process.

why would you throw the baby out with the dirty bath water?

The "baby" and the "bath water" are one, and there is no "out" where they can be thrown.

That’s silly and showing your bias.

BTW, I did not judge your soul, I judged your faith. And that is totally valid, and based on your words.

The 21st century is a total head fake. It's got to be the most mind-bending century since the Salem Witch Trials. We are the most judgey, shaming culture EVER....but man. Judge someone by the very words they said and we all melt down.

 

[SweetSue92]

Pain and suffering exist because this ain't Heaven yet

It can as easily and logically be maintained that "pain and suffering" exist so that we can experience their lack.

My belief is that God created the material world to experience the material world through us.

Interesting, though clearly this anthropomorphizes 'God', indicating that 'God' had a desire for something 'God' lacked.

God is Creator. A Creator desires to Create, absolutely. God did not create us because he needed to experience His own Creation through our eyes. God needs nothing from us, including our experience. God is complete fullness.

Who said anything about need? Other than thereforeiam?

does God need to create?

No

 

[jillian]

We have no higher ideals in 21st century, post-Christian America than our own personal safety, and perhaps the safety of our nearest loved ones.

"Safety" is not a foundation upon which to build, or sustain, a republic. Our Founding Fathers understood that. Liberty, prosperity, even happiness does not flow from "safety". And yet, in this Coronavirus madness, the secularized masses look to their Government gods to keep them "safe", no matter the cost. Steal my liberties, lock me up, crash our economies...as long as I get another few years on this spinning rock, safe. Or I should really say, "safe".

I won't say we deserve this, but a lot of us saw this coming. When you unseat God from His Throne, you will have another god, even if you deny it. As the Bible says, "your god is your stomach" (Philippians 3:19). And now we see what happens.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha

 

[SweetSue92]

This isn’t the first time I have been told by a Christian that I’m not a Christian and I doubt it will be the last.

Your soul you must reconcile with God. I respect that. Just do not pass off to others that they have the Spirit of God, especially in what I many others believe are these last days, when they most decided do not, but need Him.

Thanks for judging my soul, Sue.

Actually you just judged me totally apart from the very words I said. Interesting!

Actually I didn’t. But I am open to hearing how you believe I did?

I said, LITERALLY, "your soul you must reconcile with God". What does that mean to you? That means I cannot judge it, ding. But you made the blanket statement that "we all have the spirit of God", which is utter nonsense that I would expect anyone NOT professing to be a Christian to utter.

 

[ding]

Quote exactly what you're talking about, from the Bible and give me the translation you're using. It's Sunday. Let's do this.

Trump is my shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me high like good religmo boys, they feedeth me lies on constitutional matters
He restoreth my soul: they leadeth me in the paths of social retardation in HIS name's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadowy libtards, I fear no zombie, for thou art with me; thy bible thumps comfort me.
Thou preparest a Congress before me in the presence of mine libtard enemies: thou fillest my head with bullsh*t…. my maga cap runneth over
Surely the sleazy mercenaries shall pick my pockets all my life, and I will dwell with the KKKristians forever


~S~w/no apologies to religmo fools

You do realize the KKK was established as the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party for the express purposes of taking back the state houses in the south, right?