TakeYouToTasker Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) We're in it. Huckabee's statements, depending on how you wish to interpret absolute idiocy, points the fingers at we the people who have removed God from schools. The people did no such thing. Religion has ZERO place in government. The founding fathers, the overwhelming majority of whom were NOT practicing Christians but instead Diests (if not out right atheists) feared religion's reach into government. Read Jefferson or Madison's works, then come back and talk about it. All the Constitution of the Framers has to say on the matter is: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." To interpret the meaning of this, we must look to why this particular cage was placed on the newly established government. Jefferson (who was in France when the document was written), Madison, Adams, Franklin and most all other the other prominent Founders, had their governing phlosophies very much influenced by the work of John Locke and other enlightenment philosophers. As liberals of their time, they were waging a war against The Divine Right of Kings, which relied on the establishment of a state religion to validate it's ruling authority. Locke, whom argued that all men were created equal and as such possessed equal rights granted to them by their creator, believed that men had the right to choose for themselves how they would be ruled. The Founders agreed. Furthermore, this edict only applied to the Federal Government. The states were completely free to align themselves as religious bodies, and many did; including Massachusetts, where the Revolution began. Ultimately, what the Founders encoded at the Federal level was the Freedom of Religion, not the freedom from religion, and for good reason. You cannot separate religion from government unless you disallow the religious from participating in government, which speaks to the meaning of the second half of the above quoted portion of the First Amendment. Edited December 19, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker
....lybob Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 West Nickel Mines School 2006, STFU Mike Huckabee
LeviF Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 Huckster needs a Christian reality check. Christian theology dictates that God is all loving and all powerful. Using even a modicum of logic, statements like these directly contrast with the most basic tenets of Christianity. Going by Huckabee's (and others') words, either... 1) God is omnipotent, but remains vengeful. That is, he kills children out of spite. 2) God is loving, but ultimately toothless. His power ceases to exist because we decided to "remove" him from schools. This. What Huckabee said is not based in Christian reality.
Gene Frenkle Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? - Epicurus [341-270 B.C.]
Adam Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 That's a cop out. I believe in a higher power but it's the ultimate in man's arrogance to assume that we could ever "remove God" from ANYTHING. How could someone who doesn't believe in a higher power, believe that the higher power has been removed. That made the kind of sense that doesn't.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? - Epicurus [341-270 B.C.] "God works in mysterious ways" - Those in denial of the above
Adam Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 "God works in mysterious ways" - Those in denial of the above Some people say "Foley is God"
B-Man Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 2 Corinthians 11:14-15 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.
Adam Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 2 Corinthians 11:14-15 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. The Sabres were better off without him!
Rob's House Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 The "arming teachers" argument may be perfectly reasonable & sensible depending on what is meant by it. Allowing teachers with concealed carry permits, possibly subject to such requirements as completion of a supplemental safety course & background check, to permissibly carry a secured & concealed weapon might not be a bad idea. If you're talking about a general policy of arming teachers I'd say that's just as retarded as the concept of a "gun-free school zone."
Adam Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 The "arming teachers" argument may be perfectly reasonable & sensible depending on what is meant by it. Allowing teachers with concealed carry permits, possibly subject to such requirements as completion of a supplemental safety course & background check, to permissibly carry a secured & concealed weapon might not be a bad idea. If you're talking about a general policy of arming teachers I'd say that's just as retarded as the concept of a "gun-free school zone." Completely agreed- if anyone thinks that an untrained person can handle a gun in a pressure-packed situation, they are crazy. All for the training!
Rob's House Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 "God works in mysterious ways" - Those in denial of the above "Some of God's greatest gifts are unanswered prayers." -Garth Brooks
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? - Epicurus [341-270 B.C.] The problem with this quote stems from the fact that it is written by someone who does not believe in God in the first place, and therefore contains a hidden assumption that because God doesn't remove all evil in this world, He is unwilling to do so at all. The complete removal of evil comes with eternal life in Heaven. God is, in fact, willing and able to remove evil, but the manner in which He does so is not to simply quash it in this world, but rather to offer us eternal life in a perfect place. In short, that quote is just an arrogant attempt to place human limitations on God. We, as humans, cannot possibly know what things look like from God's perspective. One thing that we do know, given that He created us with free will, is that God wants us to live our own lives. If God were to remove all evil, Good would be largely irrelevant. We would not love God of our own accord, but because no other possibility existed. In summation: If you want to not believe, just don't believe. You don't need to justify it. Conversely, we don't need to justify our belief to you either.
LeviF Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 (edited) Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? - Epicurus [341-270 B.C.] The problem with this terribly simplistic version of the "problem of evil" is that it is extremely vulnerable to the free will defense. It also assumes that there is a meaningful relationship between God and evil. I know several jews who would have issues with that. Edited December 19, 2012 by LeviF91
Gene Frenkle Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 The problem with this terribly simplistic version of the "problem of evil" is that it is extremely vulnerable to the free will defense. It also assumes that there is a meaningful relationship between God and evil. I know several jews who would have issues with that. How can free will exist if god is omniscient?
Adam Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 How can free will exist if god is omniscient? Nobody knows the answer to all those questions, that's why faith is based on the gs that can't be proven. If that faith leads a person to happiness, then more power to them.
Gene Frenkle Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 The problem with this quote stems from the fact that it is written by someone who does not believe in God in the first place, and therefore contains a hidden assumption that because God doesn't remove all evil in this world, He is unwilling to do so at all. The complete removal of evil comes with eternal life in Heaven. God is, in fact, willing and able to remove evil, but the manner in which He does so is not to simply quash it in this world, but rather to offer us eternal life in a perfect place. In short, that quote is just an arrogant attempt to place human limitations on God. We, as humans, cannot possibly know what things look like from God's perspective. One thing that we do know, given that He created us with free will, is that God wants us to live our own lives. If God were to remove all evil, Good would be largely irrelevant. We would not love God of our own accord, but because no other possibility existed. In summation: If you want to not believe, just don't believe. You don't need to justify it. Conversely, we don't need to justify our belief to you either. So the problem is that the guy didn't believe in god and that god is mysterious? Nice argument. If you want to believe, feel free to do so, but there's not need to justify it using fluffy BS and nonsensical arguments. Recognize belief for what it is and just believe. Nobody knows the answer to all those questions, that's why faith is based on the gs that can't be proven. If that faith leads a person to happiness, then more power to them. Ya, it doesn't matter much to me, but the argument is interesting. These questions are something we're not allowed to talk about?
Adam Posted December 20, 2012 Posted December 20, 2012 The problem with this quote stems from the fact that it is written by someone who does not believe in God in the first place, and therefore contains a hidden assumption that because God doesn't remove all evil in this world, He is unwilling to do so at all. The complete removal of evil comes with eternal life in Heaven. God is, in fact, willing and able to remove evil, but the manner in which He does so is not to simply quash it in this world, but rather to offer us eternal life in a perfect place. In short, that quote is just an arrogant attempt to place human limitations on God. We, as humans, cannot possibly know what things look like from God's perspective. One thing that we do know, given that He created us with free will, is that God wants us to live our own lives. If God were to remove all evil, Good would be largely irrelevant. We would not love God of our own accord, but because no other possibility existed. In summation: If you want to not believe, just don't believe. You don't need to justify it. Conversely, we don't need to justify our belief to you either. Some people are taught to lead good lives, so they will get to heaven. Will that path lead to heaven? It comes across as having a predetermined and selfish reason to do something good, instead of being altruistic. Not trying to be a pain with that question, but it is food for thought and some interesting conversation. Way do you think? So the problem is that the guy didn't believe in god and that god is mysterious? Nice argument. If you want to believe, feel free to do so, but there's not need to justify it using fluffy BS and nonsensical arguments. Recognize belief for what it is and just believe. Ya, it doesn't matter much to me, but the argument is interesting. These questions are something we're not allowed to talk about? quite the contrary. When discussed in a civil manner, I find talking about the roots of religious philosophy to be extremely intriguing.
Gene Frenkle Posted December 20, 2012 Posted December 20, 2012 Some people are taught to lead good lives, so they will get to heaven. Will that path lead to heaven? It comes across as having a predetermined and selfish reason to do something good, instead of being altruistic. Not trying to be a pain with that question, but it is food for thought and some interesting conversation. Way do you think? I'd say an atheist or agnostic who leads a decent, moral life is a better human being than a Christian who does so to gain an eternal reward.
B-Man Posted December 20, 2012 Posted December 20, 2012 I'd say an atheist or agnostic who leads a decent, moral life is a better human being than a Christian who does so to gain an eternal reward. lol..........judging by the reply above, tgreg99 is right "Idiots Abound"...................... .
Recommended Posts