The Bible Is Not a Public Policy Manual

[AnimatedDirt]

Paul clearly established a demarcation between Christians judging matters within the community of believers (allowed) and matters outside the community of believers (not allowed). At the very least, this suggests that Christians who think they can impose what they perceive as "biblical values" on secular society are -- more often than not -- wrong. There's simply no way to translate the Bible into concrete public policy, at least not without a considerable degree of ambiguity.

The Bible Is Not a Public Policy Manual

What if more churches held this thinking?  I know the church I attend does while many more do the opposite. 

[Gawen]

John 18:36:
Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world...

I really wish more Christians would adhere to that and keep to themselves.

[Crow]

I would have to agree with the writer of the article. There are many elements in the bible that I wish the followers of said book(s) would follow - such as the part about public displays of worship (can't remember the exact quote or where it is but maybe Gawen or AD can help) - but its not up to me (and certainly don't want that to be the case) or anyone else to impose what other people believe or think.

[Guardian85]

I would have to agree with the writer of the article. There are many elements in the bible that I wish the followers of said book(s) would follow - such as the part about public displays of worship (can't remember the exact quote or where it is but maybe Gawen or AD can help) - but its not up to me (and certainly don't want that to be the case) or anyone else to impose what other people believe or think.

Matthew 6:5? Or somewhere close, anyway.

[Sandra Craft]

What if more churches held this thinking? 

My guess is about 90% of the contention between Xtians and non-Xtians would disappear overnight.

[Too Few Lions]

What if more churches held this thinking? 

My guess is about 90% of the contention between Xtians and non-Xtians would disappear overnight.

definite, let's just hope Rick Santorum's read the article. I thought the article itself was very selective in its use of scripture, but I agree with the sentiment.

[Sweetdeath]

What if more churches held this thinking? 

My guess is about 90% of the contention between Xtians and non-Xtians would disappear overnight.

Yeah, wouldn't that be nice? Ah, but a dream for now.

[Stevil]

Yes, if Christians looked inwards e.g. used their beliefs as a guide on how to live their own lives rather than outwards as a guide on how to judge or control others, then I would have absolutely no problems with them.

We have "St Matthew's in the City" every now and then they put up some pretty awesome billboard, ones I can even appreciate. But then other churches, especially Catholic ones, get all irate and tear them down or throw paint over them, or protest and publicly pray (as if they are scared that the wrath of god will come down on them just for being in the vicinity of "St Matthew's in the City"). These protesters do themselves no favors whatsoever.

Take care of your own house, don't be distracted by what's going on next door!

[fester30]

I don't know that it's fair to ask people to lay down their deeply-held beliefs, agree or disagree, in cases of politics and public policy, as long as people are, at the heart, attempting to do what they feel is best for the country.  It may be a somewhat weak argument, but there are members of Congress that are using other books written by Ayn Rand as their guide to setting public policy.  There are people who use outdated Economics books for the same reason.  These books appeared to be valid decades ago, and many people still believe in them.

Even though I feel I am superior to others (lol), I don't feel my superior intellect and beliefs should be disallowed from being considered in public policy.  I hate that the Bible has given some bigots ammunition for establishing legal discrimination, but I actually think some level of discrimination perhaps would have existed without the Bible.  Religion is just one convenient way for leaders to get followers to go with them into wars whose real purpose are competition for resources or one crazy man's quest for power.  I think a lot of the racism and segregation in the South occurred due to competition for jobs and resources, and some biblical passages were used to justify it.

It doesn't take a Bible to come up with bad ideas.

[AnimatedDirt]

Yes, if Christians looked inwards e.g. used their beliefs as a guide on how to live their own lives rather than outwards as a guide on how to judge or control others, then I would have absolutely no problems with them.

We Christians are not perfect...not even close.  Our human minds tell us to share our "higher" morals and that it would be best if the world followed these (I think it would be).  The problem is that we take the Great Commission (Matthew 28:16-20) out of order.  We take the last of the "go and do" and put it first.  The Great Commission does not tell us to go out and make everyone bend to God's law, the world does not and CANNOT do so.  (Romans 8:5-7).  Instead it says make disciples and baptize...First you make a follower of Christ, then teach them to follow that which Christ says...not the other way around. 

[Stevil]

Instead it says make disciples and baptize...First you make a follower of Christ, then teach them to follow that which Christ says...not the other way around. 

My motto is, Unless it harms you, live and let live.
I have no interest in turning a person towards atheism and I dislike evangelism hence I do not give to Christian charities because their charitable efforts always come with evangelism.

[AnimatedDirt]

Instead it says make disciples and baptize...First you make a follower of Christ, then teach them to follow that which Christ says...not the other way around. 

My motto is, Unless it harms you, live and let live.
I have no interest in turning a person towards atheism and I dislike evangelism hence I do not give to Christian charities because their charitable efforts always come with evangelism.

The cliche' rings true for the Christian...that if God is, then something better than this world awaits us, therefore we share this in the realization that all can gain.  If the Christian is wrong...then nothing was gained OR lost as religion is then simply a sociocultural by-product in the evolution of man.

I can certainly understand why you wouldn't give to Christian charities, however if Atheism is true, wouldn't it be in the best interest of Man that Atheism evangelize?

[Guardian85]

The cliche' rings true for the Christian...that if God is, then something better than this world awaits us, therefore we share this in the realization that all can gain.  If the Christian is wrong...then nothing was gained OR lost as religion is then simply a sociocultural by-product in the evolution of man.

Interesting rewording of Pasqual's Wager.

I can certainly understand why you wouldn't give to Christian charities, however if Atheism is true, wouldn't it be in the best interest of Man that Atheism evangelize?

From your wording it sounds like you are still thinking that atheism is a religion. it is not.
Atheism wouldn't even be an -ism if it wasn't for religions prevalence in society. Without religion to compare itself with, the consept of being atheist would be meaningless. If religion was stamp collecting, would you go around saying you were a non-stamp collector?
Atheists don't evangelize because "atheism" doesn't have a doctrine or canon to proseletyze. Other then for the most part common sense and logical thinking.
Atheism wouldn't even be an -ism if it wasn't for religions prevalence in society. Without religion to compare itself with, the conspt of being atheist would be meaningless. If religion was stamp collecting, would you go around saying you were a non-stamp collector?

[AnimatedDirt]

The cliche' rings true for the Christian...that if God is, then something better than this world awaits us, therefore we share this in the realization that all can gain.  If the Christian is wrong...then nothing was gained OR lost as religion is then simply a sociocultural by-product in the evolution of man.

Interesting rewording of Pasqual's Wager.

Thank you?  (unintentional)

I can certainly understand why you wouldn't give to Christian charities, however if Atheism is true, wouldn't it be in the best interest of Man that Atheism evangelize?

From your wording it sounds like you are still thinking that atheism is a religion. it is not.
Atheism wouldn't even be an -ism if it wasn't for religions prevalence in society. Without religion to compare itself with, the consept of being atheist would be meaningless. If religion was stamp collecting, would you go around saying you were a non-stamp collector?
Atheists don't evangelize because "atheism" doesn't have a doctrine or canon to proseletyze. Other then for the most part common sense and logical thinking.
Atheism wouldn't even be an -ism if it wasn't for religions prevalence in society. Without religion to compare itself with, the conspt of being atheist would be meaningless. If religion was stamp collecting, would you go around saying you were a non-stamp collector?

Heh...me trying to argue that Atheism is a religion?  Whatever I believe on the matter is of no real consequence.  I'm simply stating/asking that if religion is wrong, then it would seem that the promotion of Atheism would be in the best interest of Man.  It was a question to the Atheist.

I see a doctrine of sorts...that being Free Thinking, Common Sense, Logical Thinking, Scientific evidence...all these things can be a tool(s) for working towards a better society without religion.  Just asking.

[Stevil]

The cliche' rings true for the Christian...that if God is, then something better than this world awaits us, therefore we share this in the realization that all can gain.  If the Christian is wrong...then nothing was gained OR lost as religion is then simply a sociocultural by-product in the evolution of man.

I can certainly understand why you wouldn't give to Christian charities, however if Atheism is true, wouldn't it be in the best interest of Man that Atheism evangelize?

At the moment, I am quite keen to promote tolerance, acceptance and appreciation for diversity. To promote an ideal that law ought to be used to make us and our society safe rather than moral.
I think my message is appropriate for religious and non religious alike.