Godly Love

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

 

 

 

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzY2NlGPe3A

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

 

 

 

[cuchulain]

I think it's ironic that the deistic view demonizes atheists in an attempt to "cast us out", castigate us, make us into lesser beings who are somehow lacking...and then decry that we have no morals and are evil to others.  It's like they simply project what they are doing to us, onto us as if we are doing it to them...when the reverse is true.

 

I had a debate on a local board with a Christian who insisted he was persecuted, yet for the life of him he couldn't answer how.  He couldn't name one single instance, even though I repeated the question over and over, but he insisted it was true that he was a persecuted Christian.  I don't think they understand that when you do something to another group, it's not you that's persecuted but rather it's you that's doing the persecuting.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

8 hours ago, cuchulain said:

I think it's ironic that the deistic view demonizes atheists in an attempt to "cast us out", castigate us, make us into lesser beings who are somehow lacking...and then decry that we have no morals and are evil to others.  It's like they simply project what they are doing to us, onto us as if we are doing it to them...when the reverse is true.

 

I had a debate on a local board with a Christian who insisted he was persecuted, yet for the life of him he couldn't answer how.  He couldn't name one single instance, even though I repeated the question over and over, but he insisted it was true that he was a persecuted Christian.  I don't think they understand that when you do something to another group, it's not you that's persecuted but rather it's you that's doing the persecuting.

 

 

You are confused by the Fundamentalist mindset.  Possibly, because you expect rational thought.

 

When the Fundamentalist is not allowed to oppress others -- that's them being persecuted.

 

When Gay people engage their Human Rights -- and wed -- that's Christians being persecuted.

 

When we have rule of law -- and witches can't be persecuted -- that's Christians being persecuted.

 

When Atheists take their rightful place in society -- that's Christians being persecuted.

 

There is real persecution of Christians in the world.  The Copts of Egypt are facing genocide.  The Christians of Iraq and Afghanistan are being murdered.  The Government of China is relentless in the crushing of "Unauthorized" Christians and "House Churches". 

 

None of this concerns American crybaby Christians.  They would much rather get hysterical about the War on Christmas.  You know.  When people say, Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas.  Oh, the horror.  The Horror.     

 

 

 

 

Edited December 18, 2018 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[cuchulain]

I never understood the offense at happy holidays...it's a saying that has been around in the united states for more than a hundred years, it doesn't have any blatantly negative connotations, it doesn't persecute Christmas or demand that the person hearing it said believe something other than they already do...

 

There I go again, expecting rational thought...

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, cuchulain said:

I never understood the offense at happy holidays...it's a saying that has been around in the united states for more than a hundred years, it doesn't have any blatantly negative connotations, it doesn't persecute Christmas or demand that the person hearing it said believe something other than they already do...

 

There I go again, expecting rational thought...

 

 

And yet, President Trump ran on that issue.  That under his administration, people would say "Merry Christmas".

 

This is something that we need to understand about Christian Dominionists.  It's not about piety.  The goal is power over the rest of us.  Religious power, backed up by the Civil Authorities, is a potent intoxicant.  This is why they want their Ten Commandment Monuments -- and their Nativity scenes -- on Public spaces.  It's about power.  The rest of us need to learn our place -- at the bottom.

 

 

Isaiah 45:23

I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.

In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

 

 

Romans 14:11

For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

King James Version (KJV)

 

Something to keep in mind, next time you are challenged about the message of the Bible.

 

Psalm 14:1 & 53:1 -- "The Fool says in his heart, there is no God."

 

It's about power.  Real power in this world.  Of course, Atheists don't get respect.

 

 

 

Edited December 18, 2018 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Dan56]

On 12/17/2018 at 9:40 AM, cuchulain said:

I had a debate on a local board with a Christian who insisted he was persecuted, yet for the life of him he couldn't answer how.

 

I don't think Christians in the USA are persecuted, but there is an effort to interfere with what they choose to believe.

 

On 12/17/2018 at 6:28 PM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

When the Fundamentalist is not allowed to oppress others -- that's them being persecuted.

 

Remove "God' from coins, the pledge... Remove God from schools, along with prayers... Putting Satanic symbols along Christian ones for the sole purpose of ruining Christian holidays... That's oppression.

 

The minority often insist that since they don't believe what the majority believes, the majority must be silent.

 

The difference between Atheist and Christians is not only belief, but also moral values.. Christians have a set of morals given to govern them, while Atheist are bound by no set of moral authority.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

18 minutes ago, Dan56 said:

 

I don't think Christians in the USA are persecuted, but there is an effort to interfere with what they choose to believe.

 

 

Remove "God' from coins, the pledge... Remove God from schools, along with prayers... Putting Satanic symbols along Christian ones for the sole purpose of ruining Christian holidays... That's oppression.

 

The minority often insist that since they don't believe what the majority believes, the majority must be silent.

 

The difference between Atheist and Christians is not only belief, but also moral values.. Christians have a set of morals given to govern them, while Atheist are bound by no set of moral authority.

 

 

Of course.  A Christian without State backed power to be a bully -- is being oppressed.

 

Of course.  Fundamentalists maintain the right to regulate slavery -- instead of forbidding slavery -- in accordance with Scripture.  So much for Godly morals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[cuchulain]

12 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

I don't think Christians in the USA are persecuted, but there is an effort to interfere with what they choose to believe.

 

 

Remove "God' from coins, the pledge... Remove God from schools, along with prayers... Putting Satanic symbols along Christian ones for the sole purpose of ruining Christian holidays... That's oppression.

 

The minority often insist that since they don't believe what the majority believes, the majority must be silent.

 

The difference between Atheist and Christians is not only belief, but also moral values.. Christians have a set of morals given to govern them, while Atheist are bound by no set of moral authority.

I dont believe in an effort to interfere with christian beliefs. Can you provide proof?

I dont believe removing religion from public space such as money and schools is oppression.  Oppression is defined as unjust treatment.  Can you prove removing religion from public spaces, such as satanic symbols, is oppression?

I dont believe satanic symbols are for the purpose of ruining christian holidays.  Can you provide proof?

I dont believe atheists arent bound by morals.  Can you provide proof?

[Dan56]

15 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

Fundamentalists maintain the right to regulate slavery -- instead of forbidding slavery -- in accordance with Scripture.

 

I'm a fundamentalist and can attest to the fact that we don't approve of slavery, so your comment just ain't true.

 

3 hours ago, cuchulain said:

I dont believe satanic symbols are for the purpose of ruining christian holidays.  Can you provide proof?

 

In the other thread, what do you suppose the purpose of putting a satanic statue right next to a nativity scene was? It sure wasn't to celebrate a satanic holiday, it was a blatant and deliberate attempt to disrupt  and interfere with a big Christian holiday. That to me is a form of oppression, they can't stop it, so they attempt to ruin it.

 

3 hours ago, cuchulain said:

I dont believe atheists arent bound by morals.  Can you provide proof?

 

My point was that they don't have an official definitive set of moral values that they abide by, and not that Atheist don't have independent morals. The difference is that Christian morals are based on something.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

I'm a fundamentalist and can attest to the fact that we don't approve of slavery, so your comment just ain't true.

 

 

In the other thread, what do you suppose the purpose of putting a satanic statue right next to a nativity scene was? It sure wasn't to celebrate a satanic holiday, it was a blatant and deliberate attempt to disrupt  and interfere with a big Christian holiday. That to me is a form of oppression, they can't stop it, so they attempt to ruin it.

 

 

My point was that they don't have an official definitive set of moral values that they abide by, and not that Atheist don't have independent morals. The difference is that Christian morals are based on something.

 

 

I congratulate you.  Just like Atheists, you have outgrown the Bible.  

 

[Dan56]

4 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

Just like Atheists, you have outgrown the Bible.

 

No, I just understand the bible and know that except for cases of prisoners of war, the term slave was generally used to described  Indentured servitude, which was essentially equivalent to paid labor. 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

33 minutes ago, Dan56 said:

 

No, I just understand the bible and know that except for cases of prisoners of war, the term slave was generally used to described  Indentured servitude, which was essentially equivalent to paid labor. 

 

 

Don't you wish.  I read the Book for myself.  I read the context for myself.  It is shameful.  No.  This was not indentured servitude.  This was slavery in it's worst aspects.

 

What a shame that with all the "Thou shalt nots" -- there was never a prohibition of owning human beings, as property.  

 

One more detail.  No, I just understand the bible          Everything you just said, proves that you do not understand the Bible.  Sadly for you, it speaks for itself.  Your assertions to the contrary count for nothing.  

 

 

 

 

[Dan56]

15 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

Sadly for you, it speaks for itself.

 

Yes it does... "He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death." (Exodus 21:16)

 

                        "If a slave has taken refuge with you, do not hand them over to their master. Let them live among you wherever they like and in whatever town they choose. Do not oppress them." (Deuteronomy 23:15-16)

 

"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28)

 

The idea that God or Christianity encourages or approves of slavery is shown to be false. But since voluntary slavery was widely practiced during biblical times, the bible proscribes laws to protect the lives and health of slaves. Paul virtually ordered the Christian Philemon to release his Christian slave from his service to "do what is proper".

[mark 45]

On 12/19/2018 at 4:52 PM, Dan56 said:

 

 

 

 

In the other thread, what do you suppose the purpose of putting a satanic statue right next to a nativity scene was? It sure wasn't to celebrate a satanic holiday, it was a blatant and deliberate attempt to disrupt  and interfere with a big Christian holiday. That to me is a form of oppression, they can't stop it, so they attempt to ruin it.

 

 

My point was that they don't have an official definitive set of moral values that they abide by, and not that Atheist don't have independent morals. The difference is that Christian morals are based on something.

first,i think that by displaying a statue next to a nativity scene,on public property(something you left out)is not to ruin anything.if your going to allow one,your going to have to allow all.if it's on private property,put up whatever you like.

 

as to your second statement,i heard something like it from a humanist group.i guess the laws of the land mean nothing.really don't agree with your conclusion.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

3 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Yes it does... "He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death." (Exodus 21:16)

 

                        "If a slave has taken refuge with you, do not hand them over to their master. Let them live among you wherever they like and in whatever town they choose. Do not oppress them." (Deuteronomy 23:15-16)

 

"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28)

 

The idea that God or Christianity encourages or approves of slavery is shown to be false. But since voluntary slavery was widely practiced during biblical times, the bible proscribes laws to protect the lives and health of slaves. Paul virtually ordered the Christian Philemon to release his Christian slave from his service to "do what is proper".

 

 

 

So far as I can tell, this is a declaration of spiritual equality.  Spiritual equality, does not mean that any sub-set has been forbidden or removed.

 

The distinctions between Jew and Gentile have not been removed.  Some people are Jewish.  Others are not Jews.  Nothing in Scripture forbids the distinction between Jews and Gentiles.  Jews and Gentiles both continue to exist.  Try and find a passage in Scripture, that outlaws Jews or Judaism.  This is the passage you chose, as proof that Scripture outlaws slavery.  For this to be true, it would also have to outlaw Jews or Judaism.

 

The distinctions between Male and Female continue to exist.  Some people are male.  Some people are female.  At no point did Scripture forbid the distinction between men and women -- or boys and girls.  This is your proof that Scripture outlaws slavery.  For this to be so, it would have to outlaw gender identity.

 

That leaves one final sub-set of people.  Slaves.  At the time of the American Civil War -- or The War Between the States -- The clergy of the Slave owning  States, made use of Christian Scripture, in order to justify their Slave owning.  It was an interpretation that Southern clergy hotly held.  Hot enough to fight a disastrous war over.  Nothing in Christian Scripture -- or Jewish -- explicitly forbids slavery.

 

Is all your theology that faulty?  Your history certainly is.  If we want to know how people in the past understood Scripture -- we are using the same methodology as used by lawyers and judges to understand law.  The process of precedent.  

 

Distinct from going to one individual -- such as your own highly esteemed self -- to find out what YOU think.

 

 

 

Edited December 21, 2018 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[cuchulain]

On 12/19/2018 at 4:52 PM, Dan56 said:

 

 

 

 

In the other thread, what do you suppose the purpose of putting a satanic statue right next to a nativity scene was? It sure wasn't to celebrate a satanic holiday, it was a blatant and deliberate attempt to disrupt  and interfere with a big Christian holiday. That to me is a form of oppression, they can't stop it, so they attempt to ruin it.

 

 

 

You suppose wrong.  As i explained and you ignored(because it shows your deliberate bias) they put up displays to peacefully protest the use of gov funds and public land for supporting your religion over others.  That is an action taken against oppression on the part of christians against other religions that are not allowed equality.

[Dan56]

6 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

That leaves one final sub-set of people.  Slaves.  At the time of the American Civil War -- or The War Between the States -- The clergy of the Slave owning  States, made use of Christian Scripture, in order to justify their Slave owning.  It was an interpretation that Southern clergy hotly held.  Hot enough to fight a disastrous war over.  Nothing in Christian Scripture -- or Jewish -- explicitly forbids slavery.

 

Because of the socioeconomic situation of old testament Israel, God did allow slavery, but He allowed it for a simple purpose: to help the poor survive. A person could sell himself into slavery (akin to indentured servitude) in order to pay off debt or provide a basic subsistence. That is a far cry from the slavery endorsed by the south in the civil war, where people were captured and removed from their own country and forced to work at the end of a whip. Slavery in colonial America in the 18th century was fraught with racism and abuse, but in old testament Israel, entrance into slavery simply became a necessity for some. No one forced anyone else into slavery. The slave signed a contract agreeing to serve the master’s family for a period of 7 years. At the end of this time, the law required the cancellation of the contract. During the indenture period, the slave was entitled to all the rights of any other family member, except the right of inheritance. A good example is Jacob, in order to earn Rachel’s hand in marriage, he met with her father Laban and arranged to become a slave in the household for seven years.

 

7 hours ago, mark 45 said:

first,i think that by displaying a statue next to a nativity scene,on public property(something you left out)is not to ruin anything.if your going to allow one,your going to have to allow all.if it's on private property,put up whatever you like.

 

as to your second statement,i heard something like it from a humanist group.i guess the laws of the land mean nothing.really don't agree with your conclusion.

 

The main point was that the Nativity scene was in celebrating a specific date, while the Satanic statue was in protest.

I didn't know that Atheist held the "laws of the land" as their morals?

 

5 hours ago, cuchulain said:

You suppose wrong.  As i explained and you ignored(because it shows your deliberate bias) they put up displays to peacefully protest the use of gov funds and public land for supporting your religion over others.  That is an action taken against oppression on the part of christians against other religions that are not allowed equality.

 

The law simply allows religious beliefs to be celebrated, whether its a Christmas tree or a Menorah for Hanukkah. The Satanic symbol was allowed the same access, but my point was that it was in celebration of nothing, but only a means of attempting to ridicule and interfere with what others hold sacred. By your own words, it was only a means to protest religious symbolism on public property. 

Edited December 21, 2018 by Dan56

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

5 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Because of the socioeconomic situation of old testament Israel, God did allow slavery, but He allowed it for a simple purpose: to help the poor survive. A person could sell himself into slavery (akin to indentured servitude) in order to pay off debt or provide a basic subsistence. That is a far cry from the slavery endorsed by the south in the civil war, where people were captured and removed from their own country and forced to work at the end of a whip. Slavery in colonial America in the 18th century was fraught with racism and abuse, but in old testament Israel, entrance into slavery simply became a necessity for some. No one forced anyone else into slavery. The slave signed a contract agreeing to serve the master’s family for a period of 7 years. At the end of this time, the law required the cancellation of the contract. During the indenture period, the slave was entitled to all the rights of any other family member, except the right of inheritance. A good example is Jacob, in order to earn Rachel’s hand in marriage, he met with her father Laban and arranged to become a slave in the household for seven years.

 

 

The main point was that the Nativity scene was in celebrating a specific date, while the Satanic statue was in protest.

I didn't know that Atheist held the "laws of the land" as their morals?

 

 

The law simply allows religious beliefs to be celebrated, whether its a Christmas tree or a Menorah for Hanukkah. The Satanic symbol was allowed the same access, but my point was that it was in celebration of nothing, but only a means of attempting to ridicule and interfere with what others hold sacred. By your own words, it was only a means to protest religious symbolism on public property. 

 

The regulations for what you call, "Indentured Servitude" come from Exodus 21:

 

20  And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.²¹ 

 

21 Not withstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

 

Striking a "servant" so that he dies is punishable.  Unless the servant lingers for a few days before dying.  Because this is a property crime.  No.  Not an indentured servant.  A slave.