Why do Atheists care? Here is one scary reason:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DP. If separation of church and state is a Christian principle, why did it take 1600 years of Christianity for Christians to figure that out? I'm a Christian and I believe in freedom of religion, but it's not inherent in Christianity.

“Render unto Caesar what is due Caesar and unto God what is due God.” (Matthew 22:15-22, Mark 12:14-17 and Luke 20:29-26).

Separation of church and state is definitely part of Christianity. Whether or not the ancient Greeks had it too. (The claim that it can’t exist in Christianity because somebody else had the same thought is a little silly—did the Greeks have a patent on that idea?) Whether or not Europe went through centuries of the “divine right of kings,” and BTW the whole idea of anointing kings is more an OT thing anyway.

You're really focused on one argument about the ancient Greeks that I didn't make (and one I don't really agree with, honestly, I don't think separation of church and state existed in most Greek poleis although the place of religion in Greek society is a place of a lot of scholarly debate), what I'm saying is this, despite the one quote from the synoptic Gospels, essentially no Christians believed in the separation of church and state in a modern sense until the Enlightenment. There's plenty of conflict between the state and the church, but it's largely about who should rule over the other (the Investiture Controversy, the assassination of Thomas Becket, but there's no move to make the government even moderately secular or permit people to practice the religion of their choice until the Enlightenment. You're disclaiming over a thousand years of Christian history.

Also the statement that "BTW the whole idea of anointing kings is more an OT thing anyway" is silly. Old Testament kings were anointed, so were medieval Christian rulers, so are modern Christian kings. Charles will be anointed some time next year as part of his coronation; while he's being anointed, the choir will sing words from Kings. You cannot separate OT anointing of kings from what Christians did, because they explicitly did it imitation of the kings of the Old Testament. They did that for a thousand years and they're still doing it.

[Anonymous]

Please. Nobody here ever said
- the Greeks don’t get credit, or
- the idea is “uniquely” Judeo-Christian.

Great, then we agree it's not uniquely judeo christian. So why say the country was founded on judeo christian values and not the Greeks or any otehrs that may have espoused it?

You made that up. What several of us ARE saying is that (1) nobody has a patent on ideas, and also that (2) the same ideas can arise at different times and in different contexts.

No, you are saying it is a judeo christian value and the country was founded on it. You said nothing about "different times and contexts". Because that renders the "founded on judeo christian values" claim moot. The bible talks a lot about food, too. Is food a judeo christian concept? ("That's ridiculous" you are saying to yourself, and I agree 100%);

Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea, even if it’s not exclusively Christian. Perhaps if you drew a Venn diagram that would help.

The idea of "Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea" when the article linked in the very post of this thread shows a majority supporting an elimination of that very distinction is just not a supportable point.

Also, where is your answer to the point about Thomas Jefferson’s modified New Testament? By your own logic, who “won” that one?

You mean the one where the deist Thomas Jefferson made his own bible which removes all miracles and claims of Jesus' divinity? I didn't repsond to that because it supports my point perfectly. He was not a Christian. He did not believe in the bible Christians believe in. End period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Please. Nobody here ever said
- the Greeks don’t get credit, or
- the idea is “uniquely” Judeo-Christian.

Great, then we agree it's not uniquely judeo christian. So why say the country was founded on judeo christian values and not the Greeks or any otehrs that may have espoused it?

You made that up. What several of us ARE saying is that (1) nobody has a patent on ideas, and also that (2) the same ideas can arise at different times and in different contexts.

No, you are saying it is a judeo christian value and the country was founded on it. You said nothing about "different times and contexts". Because that renders the "founded on judeo christian values" claim moot. The bible talks a lot about food, too. Is food a judeo christian concept? ("That's ridiculous" you are saying to yourself, and I agree 100%);

Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea, even if it’s not exclusively Christian. Perhaps if you drew a Venn diagram that would help.

The idea of "Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea" when the article linked in the very post of this thread shows a majority supporting an elimination of that very distinction is just not a supportable point.

Also, where is your answer to the point about Thomas Jefferson’s modified New Testament? By your own logic, who “won” that one?

You mean the one where the deist Thomas Jefferson made his own bible which removes all miracles and claims of Jesus' divinity? I didn't repsond to that because it supports my point perfectly. He was not a Christian. He did not believe in the bible Christians believe in. End period.

to pp: your points serve to negate and clarify points to readers, but likely don't discourage or inform the person you're responding to at all. They love the discussion as a means to engage and to defend the faith, in their minds at least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Please. Nobody here ever said
- the Greeks don’t get credit, or
- the idea is “uniquely” Judeo-Christian.

Great, then we agree it's not uniquely judeo christian. So why say the country was founded on judeo christian values and not the Greeks or any otehrs that may have espoused it?

You made that up. What several of us ARE saying is that (1) nobody has a patent on ideas, and also that (2) the same ideas can arise at different times and in different contexts.

No, you are saying it is a judeo christian value and the country was founded on it. You said nothing about "different times and contexts". Because that renders the "founded on judeo christian values" claim moot. The bible talks a lot about food, too. Is food a judeo christian concept? ("That's ridiculous" you are saying to yourself, and I agree 100%);

Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea, even if it’s not exclusively Christian. Perhaps if you drew a Venn diagram that would help.

The idea of "Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea" when the article linked in the very post of this thread shows a majority supporting an elimination of that very distinction is just not a supportable point.

Also, where is your answer to the point about Thomas Jefferson’s modified New Testament? By your own logic, who “won” that one?

You mean the one where the deist Thomas Jefferson made his own bible which removes all miracles and claims of Jesus' divinity? I didn't repsond to that because it supports my point perfectly. He was not a Christian. He did not believe in the bible Christians believe in. End period.

It’s hard to know where to start with all these word games. And it’s understandable why people look at this and think, you’re not arguing honestly and who has time for this. Just a few points, then.

It’s hard to believe you’re still trying to argue, essentially, that separation of church and state is NOT a concept in Christianity. All three synoptic gospels include it. It’s a Christian idea, whoever else also espouses it. If I think Trump is a dangerous toddler, but somebody else had that thought in 1994, that doesn’t invalidate my ability to own that thought. This is so simple I wonder if you’re trolling.

Jefferson believed in the rest of the NT after removing the miracles. So, the Sermon in the Mount et cetera. In fact, the idea that something remains is implicit in the whole process of excerpting. Christians have had doctrinal differences since a few decades after Jesus died. That doesn’t mean they’re not Christians. Jefferson was a deist, but he clearly kept things from Christianity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Please. Nobody here ever said
- the Greeks don’t get credit, or
- the idea is “uniquely” Judeo-Christian.

Great, then we agree it's not uniquely judeo christian. So why say the country was founded on judeo christian values and not the Greeks or any otehrs that may have espoused it?

You made that up. What several of us ARE saying is that (1) nobody has a patent on ideas, and also that (2) the same ideas can arise at different times and in different contexts.

No, you are saying it is a judeo christian value and the country was founded on it. You said nothing about "different times and contexts". Because that renders the "founded on judeo christian values" claim moot. The bible talks a lot about food, too. Is food a judeo christian concept? ("That's ridiculous" you are saying to yourself, and I agree 100%);

Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea, even if it’s not exclusively Christian. Perhaps if you drew a Venn diagram that would help.

The idea of "Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea" when the article linked in the very post of this thread shows a majority supporting an elimination of that very distinction is just not a supportable point.

Also, where is your answer to the point about Thomas Jefferson’s modified New Testament? By your own logic, who “won” that one?

You mean the one where the deist Thomas Jefferson made his own bible which removes all miracles and claims of Jesus' divinity? I didn't repsond to that because it supports my point perfectly. He was not a Christian. He did not believe in the bible Christians believe in. End period.

to pp: your points serve to negate and clarify points to readers, but likely don't discourage or inform the person you're responding to at all. They love the discussion as a means to engage and to defend the faith, in their minds at least.

Oh look, atheist #2 is back with more ad hominems and zero substance.

[Anonymous]

After the great Abortion Civil War of 2025, this discussion will be entirely irrelevant. We’ll either be Gilead, or officially a religion-free state or one in which the practice of only certain mainstream religions is permitted. While I’m sensitive to people’s right to live freely and in accordance with their consciences, some groups have confused that right with the right to force others to live by their consciences, and they are going to need to be soundly and firmly put in their place so they can never do it again. In my ideal world, the practice of religion is accommodated, but never privileged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Please. Nobody here ever said
- the Greeks don’t get credit, or
- the idea is “uniquely” Judeo-Christian.

Great, then we agree it's not uniquely judeo christian. So why say the country was founded on judeo christian values and not the Greeks or any otehrs that may have espoused it?

You made that up. What several of us ARE saying is that (1) nobody has a patent on ideas, and also that (2) the same ideas can arise at different times and in different contexts.

No, you are saying it is a judeo christian value and the country was founded on it. You said nothing about "different times and contexts". Because that renders the "founded on judeo christian values" claim moot. The bible talks a lot about food, too. Is food a judeo christian concept? ("That's ridiculous" you are saying to yourself, and I agree 100%);

Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea, even if it’s not exclusively Christian. Perhaps if you drew a Venn diagram that would help.

The idea of "Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea" when the article linked in the very post of this thread shows a majority supporting an elimination of that very distinction is just not a supportable point.

Also, where is your answer to the point about Thomas Jefferson’s modified New Testament? By your own logic, who “won” that one?

You mean the one where the deist Thomas Jefferson made his own bible which removes all miracles and claims of Jesus' divinity? I didn't repsond to that because it supports my point perfectly. He was not a Christian. He did not believe in the bible Christians believe in. End period.

It’s hard to know where to start with all these word games. And it’s understandable why people look at this and think, you’re not arguing honestly and who has time for this. Just a few points, then.

It’s hard to believe you’re still trying to argue, essentially, that separation of church and state is NOT a concept in Christianity. All three synoptic gospels include it. It’s a Christian idea, whoever else also espouses it. If I think Trump is a dangerous toddler, but somebody else had that thought in 1994, that doesn’t invalidate my ability to own that thought. This is so simple I wonder if you’re trolling.

Jefferson believed in the rest of the NT after removing the miracles. So, the Sermon in the Mount et cetera. In fact, the idea that something remains is implicit in the whole process of excerpting. Christians have had doctrinal differences since a few decades after Jesus died. That doesn’t mean they’re not Christians. Jefferson was a deist, but he clearly kept things from Christianity.

So he liked the universal values of being kind to others. The only thing unique in the NT is the mythology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:After the great Abortion Civil War of 2025, this discussion will be entirely irrelevant. We’ll either be Gilead, or officially a religion-free state or one in which the practice of only certain mainstream religions is permitted. While I’m sensitive to people’s right to live freely and in accordance with their consciences, some groups have confused that right with the right to force others to live by their consciences, and they are going to need to be soundly and firmly put in their place so they can never do it again. In my ideal world, the practice of religion is accommodated, but never privileged.

You jest, but given the great lengths that the religious extremists have already gone to control our government I wouldn't be surprised if it comes to that.

[Anonymous]

Regardless of the source, we all believe in separation of church and state.

Therefore, the US is not a "Christian nation".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:After the great Abortion Civil War of 2025, this discussion will be entirely irrelevant. We’ll either be Gilead, or officially a religion-free state or one in which the practice of only certain mainstream religions is permitted. While I’m sensitive to people’s right to live freely and in accordance with their consciences, some groups have confused that right with the right to force others to live by their consciences, and they are going to need to be soundly and firmly put in their place so they can never do it again. In my ideal world, the practice of religion is accommodated, but never privileged.

In mine too -- and the founders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Please. Nobody here ever said
- the Greeks don’t get credit, or
- the idea is “uniquely” Judeo-Christian.

Great, then we agree it's not uniquely judeo christian. So why say the country was founded on judeo christian values and not the Greeks or any otehrs that may have espoused it?

You made that up. What several of us ARE saying is that (1) nobody has a patent on ideas, and also that (2) the same ideas can arise at different times and in different contexts.

No, you are saying it is a judeo christian value and the country was founded on it. You said nothing about "different times and contexts". Because that renders the "founded on judeo christian values" claim moot. The bible talks a lot about food, too. Is food a judeo christian concept? ("That's ridiculous" you are saying to yourself, and I agree 100%);

Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea, even if it’s not exclusively Christian. Perhaps if you drew a Venn diagram that would help.

The idea of "Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea" when the article linked in the very post of this thread shows a majority supporting an elimination of that very distinction is just not a supportable point.

Also, where is your answer to the point about Thomas Jefferson’s modified New Testament? By your own logic, who “won” that one?

You mean the one where the deist Thomas Jefferson made his own bible which removes all miracles and claims of Jesus' divinity? I didn't repsond to that because it supports my point perfectly. He was not a Christian. He did not believe in the bible Christians believe in. End period.

It’s hard to know where to start with all these word games. And it’s understandable why people look at this and think, you’re not arguing honestly and who has time for this. Just a few points, then.

It’s hard to believe you’re still trying to argue, essentially, that separation of church and state is NOT a concept in Christianity. All three synoptic gospels include it. It’s a Christian idea, whoever else also espouses it. If I think Trump is a dangerous toddler, but somebody else had that thought in 1994, that doesn’t invalidate my ability to own that thought. This is so simple I wonder if you’re trolling.

Jefferson believed in the rest of the NT after removing the miracles. So, the Sermon in the Mount et cetera. In fact, the idea that something remains is implicit in the whole process of excerpting. Christians have had doctrinal differences since a few decades after Jesus died. That doesn’t mean they’re not Christians. Jefferson was a deist, but he clearly kept things from Christianity.

So he liked the universal values of being kind to others. The only thing unique in the NT is the mythology.

Goalposts moved

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After the great Abortion Civil War of 2025, this discussion will be entirely irrelevant. We’ll either be Gilead, or officially a religion-free state or one in which the practice of only certain mainstream religions is permitted. While I’m sensitive to people’s right to live freely and in accordance with their consciences, some groups have confused that right with the right to force others to live by their consciences, and they are going to need to be soundly and firmly put in their place so they can never do it again. In my ideal world, the practice of religion is accommodated, but never privileged.

In mine too -- and the founders.

+2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Please. Nobody here ever said
- the Greeks don’t get credit, or
- the idea is “uniquely” Judeo-Christian.

Great, then we agree it's not uniquely judeo christian. So why say the country was founded on judeo christian values and not the Greeks or any otehrs that may have espoused it?

You made that up. What several of us ARE saying is that (1) nobody has a patent on ideas, and also that (2) the same ideas can arise at different times and in different contexts.

No, you are saying it is a judeo christian value and the country was founded on it. You said nothing about "different times and contexts". Because that renders the "founded on judeo christian values" claim moot. The bible talks a lot about food, too. Is food a judeo christian concept? ("That's ridiculous" you are saying to yourself, and I agree 100%);

Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea, even if it’s not exclusively Christian. Perhaps if you drew a Venn diagram that would help.

The idea of "Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea" when the article linked in the very post of this thread shows a majority supporting an elimination of that very distinction is just not a supportable point.

Also, where is your answer to the point about Thomas Jefferson’s modified New Testament? By your own logic, who “won” that one?

You mean the one where the deist Thomas Jefferson made his own bible which removes all miracles and claims of Jesus' divinity? I didn't repsond to that because it supports my point perfectly. He was not a Christian. He did not believe in the bible Christians believe in. End period.

It’s hard to know where to start with all these word games. And it’s understandable why people look at this and think, you’re not arguing honestly and who has time for this. Just a few points, then.

It’s hard to believe you’re still trying to argue, essentially, that separation of church and state is NOT a concept in Christianity. All three synoptic gospels include it. It’s a Christian idea, whoever else also espouses it. If I think Trump is a dangerous toddler, but somebody else had that thought in 1994, that doesn’t invalidate my ability to own that thought. This is so simple I wonder if you’re trolling.

Jefferson believed in the rest of the NT after removing the miracles. So, the Sermon in the Mount et cetera. In fact, the idea that something remains is implicit in the whole process of excerpting. Christians have had doctrinal differences since a few decades after Jesus died. That doesn’t mean they’re not Christians. Jefferson was a deist, but he clearly kept things from Christianity.

So he liked the universal values of being kind to others. The only thing unique in the NT is the mythology.

Goalposts moved

That's a different poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After the great Abortion Civil War of 2025, this discussion will be entirely irrelevant. We’ll either be Gilead, or officially a religion-free state or one in which the practice of only certain mainstream religions is permitted. While I’m sensitive to people’s right to live freely and in accordance with their consciences, some groups have confused that right with the right to force others to live by their consciences, and they are going to need to be soundly and firmly put in their place so they can never do it again. In my ideal world, the practice of religion is accommodated, but never privileged.

You jest, but given the great lengths that the religious extremists have already gone to control our government I wouldn't be surprised if it comes to that.

I don’t jest. The right, largely motivated by the religious factions, is pushing unsound, inhumane, and extremely unpopular policy that has real implications on real people. Not just their bodies, but their pocketbooks too. They know they have nothing to fear at the polls because they’ve locked it down. This will, in the end, be settled by violence which is the last resort when justice fails be just. I am sure of it. And if we are going to be made to suffer for this stupidity, I want to be sure that when we win, it never happens again, even if it means these extreme, anti democratic churches are banned and their followers are forced to sign a loyalty pledge or else be deported.

In seeking to impose a theocracy, they will fall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Please. Nobody here ever said
- the Greeks don’t get credit, or
- the idea is “uniquely” Judeo-Christian.

Great, then we agree it's not uniquely judeo christian. So why say the country was founded on judeo christian values and not the Greeks or any otehrs that may have espoused it?

You made that up. What several of us ARE saying is that (1) nobody has a patent on ideas, and also that (2) the same ideas can arise at different times and in different contexts.

No, you are saying it is a judeo christian value and the country was founded on it. You said nothing about "different times and contexts". Because that renders the "founded on judeo christian values" claim moot. The bible talks a lot about food, too. Is food a judeo christian concept? ("That's ridiculous" you are saying to yourself, and I agree 100%);

Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea, even if it’s not exclusively Christian. Perhaps if you drew a Venn diagram that would help.

The idea of "Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea" when the article linked in the very post of this thread shows a majority supporting an elimination of that very distinction is just not a supportable point.

Also, where is your answer to the point about Thomas Jefferson’s modified New Testament? By your own logic, who “won” that one?

You mean the one where the deist Thomas Jefferson made his own bible which removes all miracles and claims of Jesus' divinity? I didn't repsond to that because it supports my point perfectly. He was not a Christian. He did not believe in the bible Christians believe in. End period.

It’s hard to know where to start with all these word games. And it’s understandable why people look at this and think, you’re not arguing honestly and who has time for this. Just a few points, then.

It’s hard to believe you’re still trying to argue, essentially, that separation of church and state is NOT a concept in Christianity. All three synoptic gospels include it. It’s a Christian idea, whoever else also espouses it. If I think Trump is a dangerous toddler, but somebody else had that thought in 1994, that doesn’t invalidate my ability to own that thought. This is so simple I wonder if you’re trolling.

Jefferson believed in the rest of the NT after removing the miracles. So, the Sermon in the Mount et cetera. In fact, the idea that something remains is implicit in the whole process of excerpting. Christians have had doctrinal differences since a few decades after Jesus died. That doesn’t mean they’re not Christians. Jefferson was a deist, but he clearly kept things from Christianity.

So he liked the universal values of being kind to others. The only thing unique in the NT is the mythology.

Goalposts moved

I’m a different poster so not sure what goalposts you were aiming for but the claim was “he clearly kept things from Christianity”. He didn’t keep anything that was uniquely Christian because the only unique thing in Christianity is the supernatural aspect. And even that is not all that unique.