• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Question for Christians...

Would you sacrifice for Christ's sake?

  • Total voters
    9
Ockham said:
Oh my. Freedom of religion ≠"the church and state are to be kept seperate" (you misspelled separate by the way).



National Constitution Center
Click to expand...

So what? The state(the United States of America) was delibrately kept seperate from any kind of church. The individual state churches were irrelevant and were gone a hundred and fifty plus years ago by now.
 
X Factor said:
I actually do very little Christmas spending. My family has all decided a few years ago that the best gift we can give each other is to not have to go Christmas shopping, so we don't do Christmas presents anyway so yes, I really could do what you're calling "a sacrifice for Christ" and it wouldn't be much of a change from what I always do. To me, though, giving money to a church is not the same as a sacrifice for Christ. To me, they are actually not one in the same.
Click to expand...

May I expand that a little?

IMO, giving money to a Church through tithe is not 'charity', it is a tax of sorts. A demand for payment of membership in a particular group.

True charity, is the giving of one's self (time and/or labor) without expecting recognition or recompense. It is doing something for another because it is the right thing to do, not because it will buy you a ticket to 'Heaven'.

Sorry, I borrowed yer soap box for a moment there....
 
ChezC3 said:
If you were called on to boycott Christmas shopping in any and all forms and instead asked that you donate all the money you would normally spend/give to friends, children and family to your parish, Church or churches -- would you?

As with everything else no-one listens until you hit them in the pocketbook.

If governments -- small and large, if corporations, if all the PC police, rejectionists, grinches, scrooges and other people with entirely too much time on their hands want to take Christ out of Christmas (Christ's Mass, there literally is no other reason for the season) than we should take our dollars out of their cash registers and see exactly who has a "happy holiday"...


****The second choice is just "no" For some reason autofill added the additional comments.
Click to expand...

Yes, and you should totally do this. So are you forgoing Christmas shopping and giving to charity instead?
 
Tigerace117 said:
Freedom of religion buddy. That means "the church and state are to be kept seperate".
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. The only thing prohibited by the Constitution, is the establishment of an official state religion. End of story.
 
Ockham said:
If you say so. 2000+ years say you're wrong though, and religions have gone through much tougher things than "the internet".
Click to expand...

We'll see.

I'm not saying religion will die.
Far too many humans need to think there's something much bigger (and better) than their current existence.
Far too many humans need to have an answer for all things that can't be answered.

I'm just postulating (and extrapolating) that it's influence over time is going to continue to diminish.
At the very least you'll see a broader acceptance of far more than just christian ideology.
 
Dragonfly said:
We'll see.

I'm not saying religion will die.
Far too many humans need to think there's something much bigger (and better) than their current existence.
Far too many humans need to have an answer for all things that can't be answered.

I'm just postulating (and extrapolating) that it's influence over time is going to continue to diminish.
At the very least you'll see a broader acceptance of far more than just christian ideology.
Click to expand...

Religion encompasses more than just Christian belief - spiritualism and religion of all religions which are both monotheistic or multi-theistic. My view is there will always be suffering, there will always be human questions of where we come from, why we are here and what does our life mean. The internet doesn't adequately answer those nor will science. The common man/woman have a human need to believe their lives are part of something bigger than themselves and that even in death the life lived has purpose, at least a possibility of a bigger purpose. Nothing but religion provides that. It's why it's lasted so long and will continue to last long after you and I are dust.
 
Ockham said:
The common man/woman have a human need to believe their lives are part of something bigger than themselves and that even in death the life lived has purpose, at least a possibility of a bigger purpose. Nothing but religion provides that. It's why it's lasted so long and will continue to last long after you and I are dust.
Click to expand...

Very true.

However, I think the trend away from organized religion will continue.

People can still be "spiritual" and "religious" without having to conform to, or belong to an organized religion.
So while church attendance is down, I suspect that you're correct in that people are still generally keeping some level of "faith" alive.

So I indeed should caveat my comments with the "organized" part.
 
Dragonfly said:
Very true.

However, I think the trend away from organized religion will continue.

People can still be "spiritual" and "religious" without having to conform to, or belong to an organized religion.
So while church attendance is down, I suspect that you're correct in that people are still generally keeping some level of "faith" alive.

So I indeed should caveat my comments with the "organized" part.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with that. Even with the divine things, man tends to screw things up for their own purposes. I have what would be considered "wicca" in my family history, women who were town healers who knew of herbs when combined would ease people's suffering. Those people are called pharmacists today, but back then the church thought they were witches and killed them. The "organized" is always a double edged sword, yes you get socialization and communal validation of your belief, but at what cost and to who's benefit?
 
Tigerace117 said:
Most people feel that keeping their kids innocent is more important then telling them what amount to little white lies, I guess.
Click to expand...

Can they not be innocent without believing in these lies?
 
countryboy said:
Oh please, they do far more than simply promote " the separation of church and state". Which by the way, is nowhere to be found in the Constitution or Declaration of Independence.
Click to expand...

Nope. But it's a phase from Thomas Jefferson which explains the reasoning behind the Establishment Clause.

Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists (June 1998) - Library of Congress Information Bulletin

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
countryboy said:
Oh please, they do far more than simply promote " the separation of church and state". Which by the way, is nowhere to be found in the Constitution or Declaration of Independence.
Click to expand...

Oh, please. It's utterly irrelevant that that phrase isn't found in either one.

It's well established in case law and doesn't need to be in any of our foundational sources.
 
My #1 riposte when someone asks me to give for a cause: "Do I owe you?" I have learned to give to charity on my terms. The month of December, for me, consistently brings back many good memories and generally provides opportunities for new ones. In 1989 I married a Reformed Jew... at the time calling myself "an avowed Free Spirit". We agreed my wife could raise our children in the Jewish faith.... sigh. Our two daughters, now 23 and 27, every year of their childhood, reaped significant material benefits during December... with my mother their #1 benefactor. I smile in memory! My mother gave up the Ghost (oh how Christian of me to use that expression... grin) on Mother's Day this year. I like to think she has gone on to a better place... more grinning. My dad, in his 80s, patiently waits most years during December for Congress to pass something known as QCD, so he can make a tax deductible 4-figure donation to his favorite charity. This time of year you can count on me to make a little more effort at all things involving Grace, Honor, Humor and Love! To each their own. God Bless you and yours!
 
ChezC3 said:
If you were called on to boycott Christmas shopping in any and all forms and instead asked that you donate all the money you would normally spend/give to friends, children and family to your parish, Church or churches -- would you?

As with everything else no-one listens until you hit them in the pocketbook.

If governments -- small and large, if corporations, if all the PC police, rejectionists, grinches, scrooges and other people with entirely too much time on their hands want to take Christ out of Christmas (Christ's Mass, there literally is no other reason for the season) than we should take our dollars out of their cash registers and see exactly who has a "happy holiday"...


****The second choice is just "no" For some reason autofill added the additional comments.
Click to expand...

No. If you had offerred giving the money to a group other than a church, my answer could have been, "Yes." I don't see the Church mega buildings and monuments as representative of a charitable group. The rich churces keep the money. They become bankers. I'm not condemning all churches, just most of them.
 
TheGoverness said:
The Non-Existent War on Christmas begins once again.
Click to expand...

I believe it was Yoda that said....

The shroud of the dark side has fallen. Begun the Christmas War has.

YodanJesus.jpg
 
Pozessed said:
I don't understand why many Christians deceive their children with the existence of Santa, the Easter Bunny, etc. It is a Biblical commandment not to lie, and these Biblical practitioners incorporate lying into their Biblical traditions.
Click to expand...

It's to prepare them for the bigger lie: Jesus saves.
 
For the Religious Right, it's never enough. Saying "Merry Christmas" instead of "Happy Holidays" would not be enough.

No, enough would be a theocracy right here in the United States, pure and simple. And with the makeup of our incoming administration, that can't be ruled out.

(Inb4 a response of "Quit being so dramatic.")
 
It is truly amazing how threatening the words "Happy Holidays" can be to some.

Sad really.
 
X Factor said:
Ok, I have to ask, what is it about a thread directed to Christians that attracts comments from non Christians? Do you just want everyone to know just how much you don't believe, lest you be mistaken for one of us rat bastards?
Click to expand...

Well if you were accused of bigotry and discrimination aganist someone's religious beliefs because you attempt to be inclusive wouldn't you want your voice to be heard on the matter?
 
TheGoverness said:
The Non-Existent War on Christmas begins once again.
Click to expand...
Your denial is as bad as the terminology used.

The terminology is used to give a name specifically to the effects the Progressive/liberal PC ideology of non-offense and/or inclusivity has on the traditional celebration of Christmas.

Is it an actual war? No. But perhaps it is more of a sign to those who oppose those effects that it should be fought just a vehemently as a war.
But the effects of that ideology which the term is being used to describe, do exist.

Removing the traditional "Merry Christmas" greeting and/or replacing it with "Happy Holidays".
Removal of Manger Scenes or inclusion of others.
Removal of Christmas from schools ...​


I hope you are not going to deny that the above list of things haven't been happening because of the pushed Progressive/liberal ideology of inclusivity and non-offense?
 
TheGoverness said:
It's difficult for me to fathom because that isn't even going on in the first place.

Nobody's trying to take the Christ out of Christmas or whatever.
Click to expand...

Shhhhhhhhh.......

Let the 'tards gnash their teeth and beat their chests over this non-issue. They're fun to watch!

Merry Christmas Governess!
 
ChezC3 said:
If you were called on to boycott Christmas shopping in any and all forms and instead asked that you donate all the money you would normally spend/give to friends, children and family to your parish, Church or churches -- would you?

As with everything else no-one listens until you hit them in the pocketbook.

If governments -- small and large, if corporations, if all the PC police, rejectionists, grinches, scrooges and other people with entirely too much time on their hands want to take Christ out of Christmas (Christ's Mass, there literally is no other reason for the season) than we should take our dollars out of their cash registers and see exactly who has a "happy holiday"...


****The second choice is just "no" For some reason autofill added the additional comments.
Click to expand...


Probably not, because I've rarely ever seen a boycott change anything. It would kind of depend on who was "calling for" it, the exact why and what specific thing it was supposed to accomplish, and what the odds of success looked like.


I don't exactly do a lot of Christmas shopping anyway.
 
Excon said:
Removing the traditional "Merry Christmas" greeting and/or replacing it with "Happy Holidays".
Removal of Manger Scenes or inclusion of others.
Removal of Christmas from schools ...​


I hope you are not going to deny that the above list of things haven't been happening because of the pushed Progressive/liberal ideology of inclusivity and non-offense?
Click to expand...

The phrase 'Happy Holidays' has been around for a VERY long time, (from my research, it's been around for over a hundred years). This isn't something that's recent.

Plus, I go to plenty of places where people say "Merry Christmas" all the ****ing time. Same with "Happy Holidays".

And when it comes to Nativity scenes, if they are displayed in government-owned property (like a city hall for example) then of course they would be removed because it is in violation of the Establishment Clause.

When it comes to churches or even your own front yard however, nobody's preventing you from displaying nativity scenes there.

And Christmas isn't being removed from schools.

In fact, the only instances that I know of where there really is sort of a "War on Christmas", is in countries with backwards fundamentalist Islamic policies (Ex: Somalia).

That's all I have to say. Since I know how this conversations gonna go if this continues, I'm gonna just leave it at that and give you the last word.

Happy Holidays! :2wave:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom