You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
0 points

The 1st amedment explicitly states otherwise, that our government shall not enforce religion.

I don’t want the Senate to declare that the Pope has legal authority over Americans any more than you do.

But freedom of religion is not freedom from religion. In America, we have the former. Not the latter.

You are either with God or against God. The US is one nation under God.

And a light bulb doesn’t serve anybody which makes it a bad comparison.

It’s a good comparison because I’m trying to make a point about possible states. When you reject God, you embrace Satan, because there are only two possible states. Just like a light-bulb.

Just know going forward I don’t really see free will as something that makes sense.

You don’t need to understand something in order to accept that it’s true, or that it exists.

Did you ever think that maybe god wants us to fix the problem? Have you considered that you might be going against god’s will when you say we should do nothing to prevent further damage to the environment/god’s creation? It seems pretty straightforward to me that if god exists and created us and this planet, that such a god would want us to take good care of the planet.

Once you accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, and you live in a state of perpetual prayer, you will know what God wants from you personally. You will learn that His will often goes against your own, and that it sometimes makes no sense to you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

But freedom of religion is not freedom from religion.

You can’t have one without the other.

It’s a good comparison because I’m trying to make a point about possible states.

And the states you are comparing are inherently a bad comparison because the state of a light bulb is in no way representative of serving, which is an active action.

You don’t need to understand something in order to accept that it’s true, or that it exists.

You know what I meant. The evidence for free will is lacking, therefore I do not believe it exists.

Once you accept Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, and you live in a state of perpetual prayer, you will know what God wants from you personally. You will learn that His will often goes against your own, and that it sometimes makes no sense to you.

That doesn’t answer my question. How do you know that god doesn’t want humans to solve climate change on our own? “Just pray for an answer” doesn’t tell me anything about the methodology of how you came to your current conclusion of “no”.

Did god personally tell you that the answer was no? Is it just a feeling you have? Was it some “sign”?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

[Re: “But freedom of religion is not freedom from religion.”] You can’t have one without the other.

Then how did we always have one without the other until recent times? You’re free to join any church you’d like, regardless of affiliation, provided that you worship the Lord our God. That’s our freedom of religion. If you deny God, you embrace Satan, and until fairly recently that would have meant you’d be locked away in a mental asylum.

And the states you are comparing are inherently a bad comparison because the state of a light bulb is in no way representative of serving, which is an active action.

You’re so fixated on this. If you insist, yes, a light-bulb “serves” its master, where its master is its owner who flips the light-switch on and off. But you’re really missing the point here.

We have two possible states, in which we cling to God or Satan. There is no third option. Satan will insist that neither he nor God exists, and you can choose to believe that lie at your eternal peril.

You know what I meant. The evidence for free will is lacking, therefore I do not believe it exists.

The evidence is within you every time you choose to reject God. Indeed every time you type a character in reply to me, you evidence free will.

That doesn’t answer my question. How do you know that god doesn’t want humans to solve climate change on our own? “Just pray for an answer” doesn’t tell me anything about the methodology of how you came to your current conclusion of “no”.

Did god personally tell you that the answer was no? Is it just a feeling you have? Was it some “sign”?

The entire premise requires us to arrogantly suppose we could possibly control the whole planet, which is contrary to everything God tells us.

Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

James 4:10

Those aren’t just a bunch of archaic random words; they’re instructions for how we are to live. And they are entirely applicable to the climate agenda. When we are humble, we put our trust in God, not ourselves.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Then how did we always have one without the other until recent times?

We haven’t. We have always had both. It has always been the law that you are allowed to practice whatever religion you want, or no religion at all. And it has always been the law that there is a separation between church and state, a prohibition on government to be religious.

If you deny God, you embrace Satan, and until fairly recently that would have meant you’d be locked away in a mental asylum.

Our country has a history of poorly following the constitution, but the law is the law, and the law says we have the freedom to believe or disbelieve.

You’re so fixated on this.

As are you it seems.

If you insist, yes, a light-bulb “serves” its master

A light bulb has no agency to server anything.

We have two possible states, in which we cling to God or Satan.

It’s not just the states I take issue with though. And the states you list are a false dichotomy as evidence by the sports analogy from earlier.

The evidence is within you every time you choose to reject God. Indeed every time you type a character in reply to me, you evidence free will.

Just saying something is evidence doesn’t make it evidence.

“The complete lack of life in the universe outside of our planet is evidence that god doesn’t exist!”

One can say that and be entirely wrong.

The entire premise requires us to arrogantly suppose we could possibly control the whole planet, which is contrary to everything God tells us.

God gave us dominion, what is dominion if not complete control? And again, we definitely have the power to do so because there is mountains of scientific evidence showing that humans are responsible for climate change.

And they are entirely applicable to the climate agenda. When we are humble, we put our trust in God, not ourselves.

That’s all assuming you know god’s plan which is heretical. Unless you know his plans (you don’t) then you should assume the worst case, that god intends for us to deal with the problem on our own.

Responsibility for our own actions should be the default. I don’t mean to be glib but of all people I would have hoped a conservative would understand that.

permalink
report
parent
reply

conservative

!conservative@lemmy.world

Create post

A community to discuss conservative politics and views.

Rules:

  1. No racism or bigotry.

  2. Be civil: disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally insult others.

  3. No spam posting.

  4. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  5. Shitposts and memes are allowed until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.

  6. No trolling.

Community stats

  • 1.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 199

    Posts

  • 2.7K

    Comments