RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
But when John rebuked Herod the tetrarch because of his marriage to Herodias, his brother's wife, and all the other evil things he had done,
What Should the State do about Heresy? (Poll)
- Thread starter Parakaleo
- Start date
- Status
But when John rebuked Herod the tetrarch because of his marriage to Herodias, his brother's wife, and all the other evil things he had done,
D
Deleted member 6112
Guest
You have already admitted that laws which "tolerate non-Christian viewpoints," that is, that protect sin, do not please God. I don't know how you can still hold that governments can justly sanction sin.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
Should the state allow public p0rnography?
Andrew P.C.
Puritan Board Junior
“He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.” Matt. 12:30
Love for God necessitates intolerance and hatred for idolatry.
I do not see other religions being granted by state religious freedom to exercise their religion in same way as murder/rape/abortion etc! Ban those activities, by all means.
Yes, on an individual basis, but God does not command that for any government not set up as a Theocracy.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
Why not? It's a victimless crime (so-called). And my religion, the Religion of Great Dionysius, demands it.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
Red herring
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
Why?
Andrew P.C.
Puritan Board Junior
All men are bound to the moral law. Individuals are governing authorities or are part of a collective. Thus governing authorities are bound to the moral Law.
D
Deleted member 6112
Guest
So it is okay to allow individuals to sin against God, so long as they are not sinning against their fellow man?
How so? God has not yet put all kingdoms under the feet of Christ, so he does allow for states to allow for religious freedoms, worshipping other gods so called.
A religion may demand murdering others, but the state can make that murder.
we are sin all the time still while alive here though, and my main point is still that I see no scripture to indicate that God demands all nations to have its citizens to not have religious freedoms other than Christians.
It is never OK to have anyone sin against God, but there is no current government that is set up to have those doing sin period be jailed/executed.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
Why won't the state respect my religious rights? Sounds like of like imposing Christian morality on me.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
We've already gone over your confusion on the term allow. So we are back at square one. God allowed Hitler. Implied conclusion: we were wrong to oppose Hitler.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
You are talking about what currently is the case. We are talking about what is morally binding.
Ed Walsh
Puritan Board Graduate
Not sure what you mean??? We punish murderers, thieves, liars (perjurers), etc. And, what we can't do now we may have the opportunity to do someday. We can plan for the future. Can't we?
But still, I may have missed your point.
Ask Mr. Religion
Flatly Unflappable
Then no "right" is conferred.
Ask Mr. Religion
Flatly Unflappable
What is the purpose of the first commandment if not to demand that the One, true, God be worshipped above all other gods?
That there exist numerable violations of the command does not abrogate the command.
David, I think rather than just peppering the thread with questions and rejoinders, you should take the time to lay out a more complete summary of what you have been arguing in this thread. This will help us better understand your reasoning processes and position. Do that. More than a brief paragraph, too. Give us something tangible to work with or, at least point to some other reference that you believe captures what you have been saying in this thread.
The OP was stating what should the givernment do about heresy, and my answer would be that the government if under a Theocracy/Theonomy king of government should indeed enforce the law of the Lord, and to have the scriptures as having the final authority in the land. But, in this present age, under our republic, we have to allow for religious freedoms and so others can freely worship false gods.
I have no problem agreeing with what should be done, but do not see that being what will be done.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Assessor
Let's say a Christian gets elected. Does he still have to condone false gods?
Ask Mr. Religion
Flatly Unflappable
David,
By your terse response, it is obvious you did not take my request for a more full-throated explanation of your position seriously. Was I not plain enough in stating what I was requesting? Brother, I would rather be edified by a treatment from you at length explaining what you are claiming versus being provoked by your short quips.
You continue to assert we have to do this or that, to allow others to do this or that. When pressed, you even state that God "allows" it, thus it is a God-given right. It is not. You are wrong on an epic level. When you make a declarative, "we have to allow for religious freedoms and so others can freely worship false gods", you need to tease out your underlying "why" of such a statement.
Until that happens, you are going to be met with what you are being met with in this thread: more questions, more hypotheticals, What about this scenario?, etc. I would ask that you stop chatting with us, and start discussing with us.
I think I asked that question a while ago, but I got no reply. This conversation has stalled because one party is not going further than making unsupported claims, such as that a "republic" (undefined as it is) is somehow required to violate the First Commandment and permit the violations of other Commandments.
Define Condone, as he needs to make sure religious freedoms are enforced, being the chief agent to do that in the USA.
In our type of Government, a Republic, our constitution grants "God given" rights to all of its citizens, and these include religious freedoms.
The right to worship false/other gods in not being given to them directly by God in this case, but the basis for those religious freedoms derive form the US Constitution itself.
Are you saying also that a President can outlaw any other religion except Christianity then? If so, can he also outlaw any church whose understanding of Christianity differs from how reformed and Baptist see as being correct Christian doctrines and practices?
Last edited:
My concern with this topic is that I have not yet seen scriptures that would indicate that a president , or any other political leader in our type of government is required by God to demand to have the Law of God as the law of the land. Would we be better off it it were, yes, but our Constitution set up would not allow for that to happen.
- Status
Similar threads
