Freedom of Speech

[JudgeNot]

I also understand no person is a "Judeo Christian" as you state Graham is, above. He is Christian. There is no "Judeo-Christian" religion. You could say he follows the "Judeo Christian tradition", although there is considerable room for opinion there, but you cannot accurately claim he is Judeo-Christian.

Forgive me for confusing you.  

I can guarantee it will not happen again as a result of a direct reply to one of your posts.

Did I actually confuse you, or did you know all along what my meaning was, but chose to argue semantics because that’s the only thing you could find from my post to argue about? Never mind - I know what the answer is.

[Soldier4Christ]

You seem to have come here to argue on any such points as you can in support of those that are anti-Christian.

I beg to differ:

I fail to see how inaccuracies in points of law are Christian. I wrote a post on the First Amendment as regards Freedom of Speech. I fail to see how the First Amendment is anti-Christian.

"Voilating rights" is a legal term, not a matter of opinion. Ergo, whether it is the law or not is far from moot - it is central.

Do you call everyone with whom you have a dispute about legal terms "anti-Christian"?

Again you are twisting my words to get your own meaning. You brought up my post in another thread and started disecting it with points of the law when my post was not about a violation of the law. And all this in support of organizations that are anti-Christian.

[TWalker]

JudgeNot: Not only did you not at any time confuse me, I never even responded to your post. I responded to, and quoted, Pastor Roger's post.

[TWalker]

You seem to have come here to argue on any such points as you can in support of those that are anti-Christian.

I beg to differ:

I fail to see how inaccuracies in points of law are Christian. I wrote a post on the First Amendment as regards Freedom of Speech. I fail to see how the First Amendment is anti-Christian.

"Voilating rights" is a legal term, not a matter of opinion. Ergo, whether it is the law or not is far from moot - it is central.

Do you call everyone with whom you have a dispute about legal terms "anti-Christian"?

Again you are twisting my words to get your own meaning. You brought up my post in another thread and started disecting it with points of the law when my post was not about a violation of the law. And all this in support of organizations that are anti-Christian.

The Constitution of the United States is Anti-Christian? What are you talking about? What other thread? How am I twisting your words? Are you being deliberately obtuse? I am not being sarcastic here, I am honestly asking for clarification.

[Soldier4Christ]

You are indeed a confused person. Let me simplify it for you.

You made a comment in this thread about my post in another thread on CAIR and Michael Graham. You seemingly support the actions of CAIR (an anti-Christian organization) in this with the use of the Constitution when my post had nothing to do with whether they were breaking the law or not.

I hope that is clear enough for you?

[JudgeNot]

JudgeNot: Not only did you not at any time confuse me, I never even responded to your post. I responded to, and quoted, Pastor Roger's post.

Well, shut my mouth.

I was certain I typed

Oh – except for being Judeo-Christian

In the first post I mistakenly made in this thread.  

So you were simply using words from my post to reply to PR.

I understand.  You're not confused.

[TWalker]

You made a comment in this thread about my post in another thread on CAIR and Michael Graham. You seemingly support the actions of CAIR (an anti-Christian organization) in this with the use of the Constitution when my post had nothing to do with whether they were breaking the law or not.

I hope that is clear enough for you?

Yes, I made a comment in this thread and included a brief quote from a post you made in another thread. You said "You brought up my post in another thread " when apparantly you  meant "You brought up my post from another thread " so thanks for clarifying that.

You're misunderstanding or imagining things if you think that anything I have said anywhere supports CAIR in any way whatsoever. Re-read my posts. What I am supporting is the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and that's what I started this thread about. How you mis-read any of my posts so incredibly badly that you somehow got out of them that I support CAIR is something only you can explain.

[TWalker]

JudgeNot: Not only did you not at any time confuse me, I never even responded to your post. I responded to, and quoted, Pastor Roger's post.

Well, shut my mouth.

I was certain I typed

Oh – except for being Judeo-Christian

In the first post I mistakenly made in this thread.  

So you were simply using words from my post to reply to PR.

I understand.  You're not confused.

Oh sorry I was thinking that was from Pastor Roger!
In that case, allow me to correct myself:
No, you didn't confuse me (although I missed who the author was, apologies!)

There is no such religion as "Judeo-Christian" ergo there is no such thing as being Judeo-Christian.

[TWalker]

And there is no such thing as a "Judeo-Christian" unless you are speaking of Messianic Jews, who are by definition not Christian. I am well aware it is almost as popular a buzz-word as Neo-Nazi or Girly Man, but it is an oxymoron and has no intrinsic logical meaning.

Then how come the the Christian Bible includes the sacred Hebrew Text (Old Testament), and Christains use the Messianic prophecies of the OT to demonstrate Jesus is Messiah?

You are referring to the concept of a "Judeo-Christian tradition" whereas if you read the post carefully you will see that JudgeNot (not Pastor Roger as I erroneously stated earlier, apologies to both!) referred to being Judeo-Christian. I responded saying that there is no such thing as a "Judeo-Christian". We are talking about a person, not a concept or tradition. One can say I am a Christian, or I am a Baptist, or I am a woman, but one cannot say I am a Judeo-Christian because its not a religion.

[nChrist]

Phil121 Said:

Sounds to me like a bunch of legal hair-splitting, and perhaps even some veiled anti-semetism....


I think the whole concept of "Religion" is stupid at times anyhow. I believe Jesus Christ is Messiah, the Salavation for all Mankind's sins. So what "religion" does that make me? Without the context of Jewish Scripture, the concept of "Messiah" is meaningless. In fact, without the the Jewish concept of "Christ", my belief is meaningless.

Hello Phil121,

I think that you are correct. However, I would remove the term "legal". It's an argument in semantics in my opinion, especially when dealing with the completely valid term of "Judeo-Christian".

Judeo-Christian most commonly refers to a belief system or foundational principles with the Holy Bible as the source. So, there are no myths or inaccuracies associated with this term. As an example, the foundation of America is Judeo-Christian because it was heavily influenced by the Holy Bible.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Colossians 2:9-10 NASB  For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form, and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority;

[TWalker]

Sounds to me like a bunch of legal hair-splitting, and perhaps even some veiled anti-semetism....

legal no, hair-splitting I'll grant you - but I'd prefer to be precise and accurate rather than have misunderstandings. They are too common as it is.

Anti-semetic? Definately not!

[Soldier4Christ]

Merriam-Webster online dictionary:

Main Entry: Ju·deo-Chris·tian
Pronunciation: jü-"dA-O-'kris-ch&n, -'krish- also "jü-dE-O- or jü-"dE-O-
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin Judaeus Jew -- more at JEW
: having historical roots in both Judaism and Christianity    

Hmmm .....  sounds like that description fits me and the Holy Bible.

[TWalker]

OK...legalistic hair splitting.

And I'm not so sure saying Christianity isn't a "Judeo-Christian" isn't veiled anti-semetism.

Denying the Christain religion has its roots in Judiaism is a step in the same direction. After all, Jesus was a Jew.

Its grammatical hair-splitting, and the whole point of it was to try to prevent this kind of misunderstanding.

I did not say Christianity isn't part of a  "Judeo-Christian" tradition.

I did not deny the Christain religion has its roots in Judiaism.

I said a person, singular, cannot be a "Judeo-Christian"

[nChrist]

TWalker,

As an individual, which term below best describes your personal belief system, morals, and values?

a.  Atheist or Agnostic
b.  Satanist
c.  Wiccan
d.  Islamic
e.  Buddhist
f.  Judeo-Christian

[TWalker]

Well, since you left out "Christian" I guess I'll have to say none of the above.

I almost didn't reply to this. Since you called me and my husband stooges and recruiters for the ACLU, and since your own rules state that "You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing..." and you have never said in any way that you are willing to make peace, I was waiting patiently for you to realize your hypocrisy and offer the olive branch.


Luke 5:
   22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

   23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;

   24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.