I'm baffled by the American Evangelical Christian Right.

[Edgarcito]

12 minutes ago, webmdave said:

 

There is no freedom inside religion, only slavery in one form or another. There is no such thing as having freedom to violate the laws of physics. No human can levitate, or fly, or breathe underwater. Our physical or mental  limitations are not constraints. Constraints are bonds put on us by others. Constraints are social/political bonds. Could be ropes and chains, or rules of decorum, etc. We may seek to obtain freedom from those types of things. We may also achieve freedom of or freedom  from religion. We can also be constrained by religion or constrained from free expression of religion. Once again, constraints are placed on us by others. Limitations are just part of the realities of nature. 

 

Is English a second language for you?  

 

 

Oxford English Dictionary: 

 

I. The state or fact of being free from servitude, constraint, inhibition, etc.; liberty.

 

 

 

 

 

 

All these years I had imagined you brighter.  Climate may also constrain.  And it doesn’t matter bc we don’t have the complete definitions anyhow.  We are “slaves” to our existence constrained by nature.  Might check ALL the definition entries next time.. 

[walterpthefirst]

1 minute ago, Edgarcito said:

All these years I had imagined you brighter.  Climate may also constrain.  And it doesn’t matter bc we don’t have the complete definitions anyhow.  We are “slaves” to our existence constrained by nature.  Might check ALL the definition entries next time.. 

 

According to the Bible our existence was, is and always will be constrained by God.

 

As per Romans 11 : 32.

 

 

But you won't go there, will you, Ed?

 

Which is why you'll discuss dictionary definitions of slavery and freedom, but not what the Bible says about them.

 

 

Your enslavement by religion is showing.  

 

 

[Edgarcito]

4 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

According to the Bible our existence was, is and always will be constrained by God.

 

As per Romans 11 : 32.

 

 

But you won't go there, will you, Ed?

 

Which is why you'll discuss dictionary definitions of slavery and freedom, but not what the Bible says about them.

 

 

Your enslavement by religion is showing.  

 

 

Right, we either exist as a function of nature … where Captain Dave errantly says that’s not part of the discussion or we are placed/created as a function of God… constrained or “enslaved” either way.  What part of this do y’all not comprehend.  

[webmdave]

6 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

All these years I had imagined you brighter.  

 

An ad hominem. Cute.  

 

Words mean what they mean. Look em up. Learn something. 

[Edgarcito]

2 minutes ago, webmdave said:

 

An ad hominem. Cute.  

 

Words mean what they mean. Look em up. Learn something. 

I was respectful at first sir… you were not.  I did.  Constrain has at least 3 entries.. two of which you missed.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

46 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

No, that's what the Bible says.

 

We were born into slavery by god's design then bought out of that particular kind of slavery by him sacrificing himself to himself on the cross.

 

However, by buying us in this way he makes us into slaves of a different kind - not slaves to sin or disobedience, but slaves to Him.

 

So, to answer your question, there is no practical or philosophical difference here.

 

Slavery is slavery.

 

 

 

 

So then, according to the bible, "freedom" is slavery.  I seem to recall another book that made a similar proclamation.  It might address your political befuddlement; but, be mindful, big brother is always watching.

[webmdave]

6 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

I was respectful at first sir… you were not.  I did.  Constrain has at least 3 entries.. two of which you missed.

 

con·strain /kənˈstrān/ verb compel or force (someone) to follow a particular course of action. "children are constrained to work in the way the book dictates" Similar: compel force coerce drive impel oblige prevail on require press push pressure pressurize urge bully dragoon browbeat railroad bulldoze steamroller hustle twist someone's arm strong-arm lean on put the screws on severely restrict the scope, extent, or activity of. "agricultural development is considerably constrained by climate" Similar: restrict limit curb check restrain regulate contain hold back keep down archaic bring about (something) by compulsion. "Calypso in her caves constrained his stay"

 

Anyway, I didn't miss anything, but you are missing the point. 

 

And, what happened to turning the other cheek? 

 

Very Christian of you. And very cute indeed. 

[Edgarcito]

2 minutes ago, webmdave said:

 

con·strain /kənˈstrān/ verb compel or force (someone) to follow a particular course of action. "children are constrained to work in the way the book dictates" Similar: compel force coerce drive impel oblige prevail on require press push pressure pressurize urge bully dragoon browbeat railroad bulldoze steamroller hustle twist someone's arm strong-arm lean on put the screws on severely restrict the scope, extent, or activity of. "agricultural development is considerably constrained by climate" Similar: restrict limit curb check restrain regulate contain hold back keep down archaic bring about (something) by compulsion. "Calypso in her caves constrained his stay"

 

Anyway, I didn't miss anything, but you are missing the point. 

 

And, what happened to turning the other cheek? 

 

Very Christian of you. And very cute indeed. 

Dave, do you want to talk about “freedom and immoral” and consider my input or not… without your prejudice.  Speak now please sir.  

[webmdave]

I recently had a Christian rebuke me for disagreeing with him and he told me, "I will not throw my pearls before swine, not that you are a swine." I was amused that he assumed his words were pearls. What he was spewing more resembled rabbit pellets. 

 

Not sure why that came to mind. 

 

Next... 

[webmdave]

2 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Dave, do you want to talk about “freedom and immoral” and consider my input or not… without your prejudice.  Speak now please sir.  

 

Probably should define "immoral" then, don't you think? 

[Edgarcito]

2 minutes ago, webmdave said:

I recently had a Christian rebuke me for disagreeing with him and he told me, "I will not throw my pearls before swine, not that you are a swine." I was amused that he assumed his words were pearls. What he was spewing more resembled rabbit pellets. 

 

Not sure why that came to mind. 

 

Next... 

I’m not understanding why you can’t just talk across rather than assuming I’m in some fundamental funk from 15 years ago.  

[webmdave]

Just now, Edgarcito said:

I’m not understanding why you can’t just talk across rather than assuming I’m in some fundamental funk from 15 years ago.

 

Now you're telepathic. How cool. 

 

Seriously. Is English your second language? If so, that would make some things easier to overlook. 

[Edgarcito]

2 minutes ago, webmdave said:

 

Probably should define "immoral" then, don't you think? 

Sure as I said before iI believe it deals with ideas/actions that support life vs. death.  I believe history creates perhaps a sinusoidal back and forth across those ideals that legislate humanity…. a moral to immoral pendulum essentially.   And that we are ignorant of an absolute understanding.

[Edgarcito]

4 minutes ago, webmdave said:

 

Now you're telepathic. How cool. 

 

Seriously. Is English your second language? If so, that would make some things easier to overlook. 

Just how you’re coming across.. 

[webmdave]

8 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

I believe it deals with ideas/actions that support life vs. death.  I believe history creates perhaps a sinusoidal back and forth across those ideals that legislate humanity…. a moral to immoral pendulum essentially.   And that we are ignorant of an absolute understanding.

 

And so your definitions for the words moral and immoral are what? 

 

And, what is your first language, if I might ask? 

 

[Edgarcito]

3 minutes ago, webmdave said:

 

And so your definitions for the words moral and immoral are what? 

 

And, what is your first language, if I might ask? 

 

Maybe some other time señor…

[webmdave]

6 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Maybe some other time señor…

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

So, 3 pages in and we still have defined neither "freedom" nor "immoral".  Perhaps it would be easier to define "American," no?

[Edgarcito]

2 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

So, 3 pages in and we still have defined neither "freedom" nor "immoral".  Perhaps it would be easier to define "American," no?

Which makes my initial point…

[webmdave]

14 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Which makes my initial point

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

8 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Which makes my initial point…

Your point being that word salad is not a proper definition?  I don't think anybody was disagreeing with that.

[walterpthefirst]

8 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Right, we either exist as a function of nature … where Captain Dave errantly says that’s not part of the discussion or we are placed/created as a function of God… constrained or “enslaved” either way.  What part of this do y’all not comprehend.  

 

You can't get out of it by blaming nature for the constraints placed upon us, Ed.

 

According to your religion, who created nature?

 

See? 

 

The blame ends back up at the door of your god, even though you tried to dodge that conclusion.

 

This was a bare-faced attempt to deflect the blame.

 

Indicating that you knew where the blame lay.

 

Just as the Bible says.

 

Which is why you won't discuss what it says.

 

 

[Dsred19]

Back to the original discussion…..

Knowing a few of these Evangelical Christian nationalists, their definition of freedom is THEIR freedom to oppress and discriminate against anyone they don’t agree with. The “freedom” to outlaw same-sex marriage, abortion, and the “freedom” to deny people who aren’t just like them services and business, and the “freedom” to dictate what can be taught in our schools. These people have been convinced they are being persecuted by the “radical left”. There is no persecution of Christians. They are just being held to task for their outdated beliefs and  behavior and they don’t like it.

[★ Citsonga ★]

7 minutes ago, Dsred19 said:

Back to the original discussion…..

Knowing a few of these Evangelical Christian nationalists, their definition of freedom is THEIR freedom to oppress and discriminate against anyone they don’t agree with.

 

Exactly. They don't really believe in freedom for all. They just want the "freedom" for them to cram their views down everyone else's throats.

 

From my perspective, everyone should be free to do whatever they want as long as they are not harming others.

 

Christian nationalists don't care if they harm others, as log as they get their own way. 

[☆ pantheory ☆]

On 10/10/2024 at 3:26 PM, walterpthefirst said:

Next month Americans decide who will be their next president.  I won’t get into the politics or personalities involved, but as a foreigner looking in from the outside, I find myself baffled by the beliefs and expectations of many millions of Right-leaning evangelical Christians in the U.S.  The millions who will no doubt play a pivotal role in saying who will sit in the White House for the next four years.

 

The beliefs I wish to focus on are both religious and political in nature.  Here are some of them.

 

·        A deep-seated belief in personal rights, freedoms, and liberties

·        A deep-seated belief in the authority of the Bible

·        A deep-seated belief in family values

 

If the three beliefs listed above can be called positive ones, then on the flip side of the same evangelical Christian coin there are what could be called negative beliefs.

 

*        A deep-seated mistrust of centralized authority and government

*       A complete rejection of autocracy or absolute rule

*       An abhorrence of anything that would unnecessarily constrain personal freedom against the wishes of the individual 

        

But when it comes to what these Christians expect to find in heaven, do they really believe that these dearly-held Earthly freedoms will be respected and upheld there?  That heaven will be a place where they can freely can speak their mind, can freely hold their own opinions and where they are free to live as they choose?  The answers to all of these questions depend on what the Bible has to say about freedom. 

 

When Jesus speaks about freedom in the gospels and the apostles Paul, James, John and Peter also speak of it in the epistles what they are referring to is FREEDOM FROM SIN.  Not religious or political freedom.  Not freedom of choice, freedom of association or the freedom to do and think what you choose.  Here is an example.

 

Romans 8 : 18 – 21

¹⁸ I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. ¹⁹ For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. ²⁰ For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope ²¹ that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.

 

This is about freedom from sin and nothing else.  This freedom comes about by being assimilated into the collective (the Body of Christ) and having your thoughts and feelings conformed into the thoughts and feelings of Jesus Christ.

 

Romans 8 : 29

For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 

 

In the Star Trek universe humanoid races would rather die than be assimilated and conformed into the Borg collective, losing their individuality, and becoming like-thinking drones.  Ok, that's fiction.  But in reality American Christians seem to be willing to trade in their personal freedom and individuality for the future promise of losing these things and being conformed into the mental, spiritual, and moral likeness of Jesus.  One body in Christ.

 

Do they really fail to understand that the personal freedoms and liberties that they hold so dear in this life will be meaningless in heaven?

 

In heaven there is only one opinion that counts - God’s.  Only one moral viewpoint that counts – God’s.  Only one judgement that counts – God’s.  Nobody, not angels or men, have the right or the freedom to hold any other opinion, viewpoint, or judgment than God’s.  This is absolute and autocratic rule by an all-powerful, all-knowing authority, the ultimate opposite of the individual, personal freedoms, and liberties that American Christians hold so dear.

 

According to scripture, there is even a worked example of how God treats those who dare to disagree with him.  Long ago one angel tried to exercise his personal freedom to differ with God and look at how well that turned out.

 

As I said at the start, I am baffled by why so many American Christians haven’t figured out, by reading the Bible, that their deeply-cherished earthly freedoms will not be honoured or upheld in heaven.  Why they seem to want to throw all of their personal freedoms away, in favour of becoming a Jesus clone and living forever as a same-thinking drone dedicated to bowing and scraping at the feet of the ultimate absolute autocrat.

 

So, perhaps the American members of this forum could explain this mystery to me?

 

 

Thank you,

 

 

Walter.

 

Politics, and one's take on them are not only a matter of opinion, there is no correct answer if every independent thinker has there own opinion concerning what the US should look like, laws, constitution, etc.

 

So my answer is simply my opinion. Remember in our rule book, that arguments over politics are an out-of-bounds area, not allowed.

 

So my answers are simply my opinion.

 

"A deep-seated belief in personal rights, freedoms, and liberties

·        A deep-seated belief in the authority of the Bible

·        A deep-seated belief in family values"

 

1. Both major US political parties believe in your first statement above. 

 

2.  Yes, most Americans believe in the Bible, but not when it comes to politics. Men make the laws. Yes, certain right-wing fundamentalists would like the Christian Bible to play a major role in the laws of the land, but their percentages are small.

 

I would guess that 85% of Americans believe in the separation of church and state.

 

3. Yes, I believe that both major political parties have a deep-seated belief in family values.

 

As to your second assertion of negative beliefs, I believe these assertions apply somewhat to all countries and peoples, not just the US.

 

 " A deep-seated mistrust of centralized authority and government

*       A complete rejection of autocracy or absolute rule

*       An abhorrence of anything that would unnecessarily constrain personal freedom against the wishes of the individual"

 

1. In the US, right-wing politics is more for state's rights and less for centralized Federal control.

 

2. Yes, both parties would agree that autocracy or a dictatorship would be totally unacceptable.

 

3. "An abhorrence of anything that would unnecessarily constrain personal freedom against the wishes of the individual"

 

Here the word "unnecessarily" can have many different interpretations.

 

Neither US political party ascribes to anarchy, and both agree to a country controlled by laws. Acceptable personal freedoms are defined by the Bill of Rights.

 

Religious people of many faiths make a lot of noise but few have the power to mold the government, an exception would be religion-first leaders like the Iatola Komani of Iran.

 

If there is no heaven or hell then all religious beliefs of that person, right or wrong, will all disappear upon their death.

 

And I see no mystery at all. All the religions of the world are no more than BS, no mystery. Bad decisions can easily be made from beliefs in something that isn't real, or doesn't exist.

 

Mixing religion with politics is always a mistake, big or small IMO.

 

Like when putting into the US Pledge of Allegiance during the McCarthy era, "One nation under God." and "in God we Trust" put on US coins.