Non believers - I don't blame you

@suzianne said
Take a look at the preamble to the US Constitution sometime.

You have a point please make it.

@kellyjay said
So you assume we can find some good people to run the government as it should be, not as it is being run now, and that solves our problem?

That's the plan, and it's a damned sight better than "I don't care if the president lies, because everybody lies."

@suzianne said
That's the plan, and it's a damned sight better than "I don't care if the president lies, because everybody lies."

What in the world are you talking about?

@kellyjay said
Why do we have to be forced to do what is right by the government?

I think we can both agree that the government is morally obliged to provide at least some basic safety net for those segments of society evaluated and deemed by democratic mechanisms to need it, right? So this takes investment and spending. And this investment and spending is funded by society. This means the moral obligations of our elected representatives are also the moral obligations of the members of society they represent. On that much, we can agree, surely?

@kellyjay said
Why would we need the government to do that, to force us into something by law? Why not just take care of those you can now, because you can and should? Why do we have to be forced to do what is right by the government?

Isn't the Kingdom of God a government?

@fmf said
I think we can both agree that the government is morally obliged to provide at least some basic safety net for those segments of society evaluated and deemed by democratic mechanisms to need it, right? So this takes investment and spending. And this investment and spending is funded by society. This means the moral obligations of our elected representatives are also the moral obligations of the members of society they represent. On that much, we can agree, surely?

I think you're giving him a little too much credit.

I agree; apparently he, like whodey, doesn't. They're both American conservatives, which should surprise no one.

@kellyjay said
You have a point please make it.

I think you perfectly understand my point.

Read the Preamble, then read what you posted. You tell me which one reads more closely to the Sermon on the Mount. Clearly, we have an obligation to our fellow humans that your post denies.

We need laws which "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the genral Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty" because individuals will NOT do this on their own, especially in a country like ours, which is now more selfish and more self-centered than ever.

@suzianne said
I think you're giving him a little too much credit.

The ironic leading question was lost on you, then.

@kellyjay said
What in the world are you talking about?

She’s talking about lies, dishonesty, like you are being in pretending you don’t know what she’s talking about.

@fmf said
The ironic leading question was lost on you, then.

Alright, apparently I'll have to start reading irony into every post you write.

Your irony is usually obvious, even if not intended as such. This time it looked like you were giving him the benefit of the doubt, which I suppose is ironic all on its own.

@caesar-salad said
Isn't the Kingdom of God a government?

Yes, not one that we vote into office those we want over us. That Kingdom we must be accepted into it by the ruler.

@suzianne said
I think you perfectly understand my point.

Read the Preamble, then read what you posted. You tell me which one reads more closely to the Sermon on the Mount. Clearly, we have an obligation to our fellow humans that your post denies.

We need laws which "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the genral Welfare, and se ...[text shortened]... own, especially in a country like ours, which is now more selfish and more self-centered than ever.

No, I didn't, I was speaking to another form of government being better, by addressing the point that if we changed what type of government over us, that would not change the fact that people are still going to be in charge. Our government is supposed to have checks and balances in it, and they are eroding, and now we get what we got, one run by parties for the parties, not the country, not different branches of government with checks and balances, just those desiring power. Our judicial branch takes sides now instead of concerns over laws, it is unraveling from the inside, and I doubt it will last too many more elections to tell you the truth. When laws are only applied for some and not others, at some point there will be a revote and possibly not just at the poles.

@mchill

Christians, I know this is going to rub you the wrong way, but as a Christian, I cannot blame non believers for thinking the way they do, especially the way some believers and their organizations behave. i.e.

Do you think the first century Christians didn't have religious hypocrisy, religious turf struggles, idolatry, and charlatans to deal with? Thank God it didn't stop some men and women to becoming disciples of Jesus.

Nothing absolutely new about reasons surrounding us to not believe in God.
The Gospels show plenty of discouraging reasons to forget the whole matter of God in the scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, cheating lawyers, tax collectors, etc. ... PLENTY of reasons to say "Phewy" to the Son of God.

@suzianne said
Your irony is usually obvious, even if not intended as such.

Actually, it seems to me you get confused about the intentended meaning of something that's obviously ironic.

Maybe you have the same understanding of "ironic" as Annalise Morissette does.

Anyway, do you now understand what I said to KellyJay and how it fits into the context of the many things he has said on this forum that are related to politics and government?

@sonship said
Do you think the first century Christians didn't have religious hypocrisy, religious turf struggles, idolatry, and charlatans to deal with?

Do you see your tireless and tetchy regurgitation of stuff from your cult, along with your cult's branding of Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant churches as "Satanic organizations", as being part of a Christian "turf struggle" that you are playing a role in?