Bible verse by verse

[_LittleNipper]

What you seem to misrepresent (as do also many liberals) is that our Founding Fathers wanted nothing but the very best for our country. They fully understood that God's blessings are an intregral part of what protects a nation and keeps it strong and prosperous.

Why has God removed his blessings from the (>90%) Christian nation of the Philippines?

God didn't. Please see: http://peacechurchphilippines.com/2013/ ... s-for-sin/

[_Bazooka]

What you seem to misrepresent (as do also many liberals) is that our Founding Fathers wanted nothing but the very best for our country. They fully understood that God's blessings are an intregral part of what protects a nation and keeps it strong and prosperous.

Why has God removed his blessings from the (>90%) Christian nation of the Philippines?

Nipper, unfortunately you claimed in this very thread that 'Christian' nations prosper more than none Christian nations.
The Philippines is a VERY Christian nation.
The Philippines is not prospering, not by a long way.

So please go one now and redefine what 'prosperity' means when you use that word....

[_LittleNipper]

Why has God removed his blessings from the (>90%) Christian nation of the Philippines?

Nipper, unfortunately you claimed in this very thread that 'Christian' nations prosper more than none Christian nations.
The Philippines is a VERY Christian nation.
The Philippines is not prospering, not by a long way.

So please go one now and redefine what 'prosperity' means when you use that word....

The Christians will prosper as did Job. They will grow in their faith, trust and understanding. All of which is worth more than all the material posessions this world can offer.

[_huckelberry]

In researching my genealogy, I've discovered I have a number of ancestors who, on the eve of the Civil War, were house servants in Missouri. I highly doubt that any of my slave ancestors would have been won over by "appeals to ambiguity" of the sort that you are presenting, here.

Apologist, I can't relate to the phrase "appeals to ambiguity". I find no meaning for it.

I cannot know how your specific ancestors felt about the Bible.Different people think differently. There have been in the United States, from prior to the Civil War to the present, many Americans under the bonds of slavery or whose history carries that burden who have found in the Bible a message of liberation and hope.

In fact the only proof of God the Bible proposes is liberation from slavery. That does not require you to believe I am sure. I just think that what you are not believing is not as one dimensional as in the enthusiasm of criticism you sometimes portray it to be..

I might add that I am sure that the writing of the Bible is limited in its entirety to the knowledge and capablity to understand of the human authors so divine omniscience is not to be found therein.

[_Bazooka]

Nipper, unfortunately you claimed in this very thread that 'Christian' nations prosper more than none Christian nations.
The Philippines is a VERY Christian nation.
The Philippines is not prospering, not by a long way.

So please go one now and redefine what 'prosperity' means when you use that word....

The Christians will prosper as did Job. They will grow in their faith, trust and understanding. All of which is worth more than all the material posessions this world can offer.

Not according to a senior figure in the LDS Church....

Keith B. McMullin, who for 37 years served within the Mormon leadership and now heads a church-owned holding company, Deseret Management Corp. (DMC), an umbrella organization for many of the church’s for-profit businesses. “We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.”

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... make-money

However, that's his view not mine.

Nipper, to explore your comments further let me ask this.

Job (/ˈdʒoʊb/; Hebrew: אִיּוֹב, Modern Iyyov Tiberian ʾIyyôḇ) is the central character of the Book of Job in the Bible. The story is also related in the Quran. Job (Arabic: أيّوب, Ayyūb‎) is considered a prophet in Islam and in rabbinical literature Iyov (אִיּוֹב). is called one of the prophets of the Gentiles.[1]
In the Book of Job he is presented as a family man who lives a good and prosperous life, but is eventually beset with horrendous disasters that take away all he has, including his family, his health, and his property. Job struggles to understand his situation and begins a long search for the right path that will get him out of his extremely difficult situation. Against all odds, with God's help, Job is restored to a semblance of his earlier existence.

Do you think the Christians in the Philippines needed the trial of this devastation for their faith, trust and understanding to grow?

[_Gunnar]

So we are to believe that it is "ironic" that religion would flourish in an environment that encourages the free exercise of religion?
The actual irony is that atheism is still not the popular choice even when people are free to choose it....wait....that is not ironic either.

I don't think that the founding fathers of the USA intended to either discourage or encourage religious belief--certainly not any one particular religion. What they intended to discourage (in fact, prohibit) was giving preference to any one religion over another, and persecuting or denying or curtailing the rights of anyone merely because they did not belong to some particular religion, even those who rejected all religions. This was a freedom found almost nowhere else in the world at the time our nation was founded.

This meant there was (in theory, at least) no governmental or official restraint on what one chose to believe. In effect, this did encourage people to freely choose their own religion and even invent or start new religions if they wanted. Thus the USA became a fertile breeding ground for new religious belief systems, Mormonism itself being a prime example. The Declaration of Independence does indeed mention a Creator, but Thomas Jefferson, who penned that noteworthy document, was a Deist (as were other prominent "founding fathers") who emphatically did not believe in the Christian God that intervened in human affairs and listened to and answered the prayers of mankind, and he did not regard the Bible or any other holy scripture to be the infallible word of God. The U.S. Constitution, on the other hand, is a strictly secular document that does not mention religion except to prohibit the establishment of any official state religion, and guarantee the freedom to believe or not believe any religion as one chooses.

This is why I maintain that this nation's government is indeed inherently secular in nature, and that this very secularism, more than any other single thing, is what guarantees religious freedom for all. That is why I find it ironic that religious fundamentalists complain about and denounce secularism. I often suspect that the real reason many religious conservatives object to that secularism is that they resent not having the power and authority to impose their own religious beliefs on others, in violation of the religious freedoms guaranteed by that constitution.

Incidentally, the enormous proliferation of numerous, mutually contradictory belief systems in this country that resulted (at least in part) from its guarantees of religious freedom is ironclad proof of the inherent unreliability of the religious/spiritual approach to discerning truth.

[_subgenius]

So we are to believe that it is "ironic" that religion would flourish in an environment that encourages the free exercise of religion?
The actual irony is that atheism is still not the popular choice even when people are free to choose it....wait....that is not ironic either.

I don't think that the founding fathers of the USA intended to either discourage or encourage religious belief--certainly not any one particular religion. What they intended to discourage (in fact, prohibit) was giving preference to any one religion over another, and persecuting or denying or curtailing the rights of anyone merely because they did not belong to some particular religion, even those who rejected all religions. This was a freedom found almost nowhere else in the world at the time our nation was founded.

This meant there was (in theory, at least) no governmental or official restraint on what one chose to believe. In effect, this did encourage people to freely choose their own religion and even invent or start new religions if they wanted. Thus the USA became a fertile breeding ground for new religious belief systems, Mormonism itself being a prime example. The Declaration of Independence does indeed mention a Creator, but Thomas Jefferson, who penned that noteworthy document, was a Deist (as were other prominent "founding fathers") who emphatically did not believe in the Christian God that intervened in human affairs and listened to and answered the prayers of mankind, and he did not regard the Bible or any other holy scripture to be the infallible word of God. The U.S. Constitution, on the other hand, is a strictly secular document that does not mention religion except to prohibit the establishment of any official state religion, and guarantee the freedom to believe or not believe any religion as one chooses.

again, where is the irony in that?

This is why I maintain that this nation's government is indeed inherently secular in nature, and that this very secularism, more than any other single thing, is what guarantees religious freedom for all. That is why I find it ironic that religious fundamentalists complain about and denounce secularism. I often suspect that the real reason many religious conservatives object to that secularism is that they resent not having the power and authority to impose their own religious beliefs on others, in violation of the religious freedoms guaranteed by that constitution.

you can maintain whatever you like, but the facts contradict your opinion.

while i can agree that our Government was never intended to "impose" a specific religion upon the people (for obvious contextual reasons), i do not see any evidence that the government was intended to be free from religion in general.

For example - the friezes at the Supreme Court Building (in fact Moses is the most widely distributed statue in D.C.), the undeniable language in the DoI, statues of saints in the capitol bldg, the Library of Congress has etched the words from the book of Proverbs on its walls ("Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom and with all thy getting get understanding") and etched at the US Capitol main entrance - "faith, hope, love and clemency."...and so on....and while the Supreme Court bldg shows a diverse collection of religious figures, the rest of D.C. heavily favors Christian imagery and text.
So, while there is present the obvious secular context of government, there is also an undeniable presence of the Christian roots from which this country was founded....and from which its government was organized...even the simple notion of being "created equal" and "freedom" are attributed to God.

Incidentally, the enormous proliferation of numerous, mutually contradictory belief systems in this country that resulted (at least in part) from its guarantees of religious freedom is ironclad proof of the inherent unreliability of the religious/spiritual approach to discerning truth.

Actually it is not "ironclad proof" of anything.....it could just as well be that among these seemingly contradictory systems only one is true and the others are not.
"we hold these truths to be self-evident".....hmmmm

[_Gunnar]

Actually it is not "ironclad proof" of anything.....it could just as well be that among these seemingly contradictory systems only one is true and the others are not'

Sorry, but that makes not the slightest bit of sense. Even if one of these contradictory systems really is true, the unreliability of the religious approach is still established beyond all reasonable doubt, and the more of these mutually contradictory systems there are, the stronger is the proof of the unreliability of that approach. What you are saying is like arguing that playing the lottery is a reliable source of income because once in millions of tries, someone might win the jackpot! That you still can't understand or admit this is a source of endless amusement to me that I chuckle about almost daily! What makes it all the more ridiculous is that you have no way of demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that anyone has ever actually "won the jackpot" by that means!

[_LittleNipper]

Actually it is not "ironclad proof" of anything.....it could just as well be that among these seemingly contradictory systems only one is true and the others are not'

Sorry, but that makes not the slightest bit of sense. Even if one of these contradictory systems really is true, the unreliability of the religious approach is still established beyond all reasonable doubt, and the more of these mutually contradictory systems there are, the stronger is the proof of the unreliability of that approach. What you are saying is like arguing that playing the lottery is a reliable source of income because once in millions of tries, someone might win the jackpot! That you still can't understand or admit this is a source of endless amusement to me that I chuckle about almost daily! What makes it all the more ridiculous is that you have no way of demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that anyone has ever actually "won the jackpot" by that means!

This is why the one true "religion" is all about a personal relationship with a Heavenly Father through Jesus Christ. Ritualism is confusing and can be misleading; however, a close friend is a friend indeed.

[_LittleNipper]

Deuteronomy 34:1-12 So Moses climbed into Mt. Nebo from the Moab plain fronting Jericho. Moses is shown the Promised Land by God. There Moses died at 120 still a strong individual, and was buried by God where no man will find him. Joshua son of Nun is full of the spirit of wisdom, for Moses had laid his hands upon him, and the sons of Israel hearken unto him as they did Moses. Yet, there has not risen a prophet any more in Israel like Moses, whom Jehovah knew face to face, regarding all the signs and the wonders and the strength Moses dispensed.
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)


1 And Moses goeth up from the plains of Moab unto mount Nebo, the top of Pisgah, which [is] on the front of Jericho, and Jehovah sheweth him all the land -- Gilead unto Dan,

2 and all Naphtali, and the land of Ephraim, and Manasseh, and all the land of Judah unto the further sea,

3 and the south, and the circuit of the valley of Jericho, the city of palms, unto Zoar.

4 And Jehovah saith unto him, `This [is] the land which I have sworn to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, saying, To thy seed I give it; I have caused thee to see with thine eyes, and thither thou dost not pass over.'

5 And Moses, servant of the Lord, dieth there, in the land of Moab, according to the command of Jehovah;

6 and He burieth him in a valley in the land of Moab, over-against Beth-Peor, and no man hath known his burying place unto this day.

7 And Moses [is] a son of a hundred and twenty years when he dieth; his eye hath not become dim, nor hath his moisture fled.

8 And the sons of Israel bewail Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days; and the days of weeping [and] mourning for Moses are completed.

9 And Joshua son of Nun is full of the spirit of wisdom, for Moses had laid his hands upon him, and the sons of Israel hearken unto him, and do as Jehovah commanded Moses.

10 And there hath not arisen a prophet any more in Israel like Moses, whom Jehovah hath known face unto face,

11 in reference to all the signs and the wonders which Jehovah sent him to do in the land of Egypt, to Pharaoh, and to all his servants, and to all his land,

12 and in reference to all the strong hand, and to all the great fear which Moses did before the eyes of all Israel.