RonD1120 58
Recommended Posts
Quote
Is it true or false that the Ten Commandments are posted at the U.S. Supreme Court?
Billvon got to this first, so to add to his reply (which was entirely correct):
The wall right above where the Supreme Court judges sit is the east wall, on which is displayed a frieze designed by sculptor Adolph A. Weinman. The frieze features two male figures who represent the Majesty of Law and the Power of Government, flanked on the left side by a group of figures representing Wisdom, and on the right side by a group of figures representing Justice:
In a letter on file in the archives of the Supreme Court, Adolph Weinman, the designer of this frieze, states that the tablet visible between the two central male figures, engraved with the Roman numerals I through X, represents not the Ten Commandments but the first "ten amendments to the Constitution known as the 'Bill of Rights.'"
The friezes which adorn the north and south walls of the courtroom in the Supreme Court building (also designed by Adolph Weinman) depict a procession of 18 great lawgivers: Menes, Hammurabi, Moses, Solomon, Lycurgus, Solon, Draco, Confucius and Octavian (south wall); Justinian, Mohammed, Charlemagne, King John, Louis IX, Hugo Grotius, Sir William Blackstone, John Marshall and Napoleon (north wall):
According to the Office of the Curator of the Supreme Court of the United States, these figures were selected as a representation of secular law:
Weinman's training emphasized a correlation between the sculptural subject and the function of the building and, because of this, [architect Cass] Gilbert relied on him to choose the subjects and figures that best reflected the function of the Supreme Court building. Faithful to classical sources, Weinman designed for the Courtroom friezes a procession of "great lawgivers of history," from many civilizations, to portray the development of secular law.
Moses is not given any special emphasis in this depiction: his figure is not larger than the others, nor does it appear in a dominant position. Also, the writing on the tablet carried by Moses in this frieze includes portions of commandments 6 through 10 (in Hebrew), specifically chosen because they are not inherently religious. (Commandments 6 through 10 proscribe murder, adultery, theft, perjury, and covetousness.)
-source, snopes
In addition, It is HIGHLY unlikely that a court that would make the following ruling if they have the text of the commandments posted in their courtroom:
McCREARY COUNTY, KENTUCKY v. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF KENTUCKY, the court stated:
"[the commandments] proclaim the existence of a monotheistic god (no other gods), regulate details of religious obligation (no graven images, sabbath breaking, or vain oath swearing), and unmistakably rest even the universally accepted prohibitions (as against murder, theft, etc.) on the sanction of the divinity proclaimed at the text’s beginning. Displaying that text is thus different from symbolic representation, like tablets with 10 roman numerals, which could be seen as alluding to a general notion of law, not a sectarian conception of faith. Where the text is set out, the insistence of the religious message is hard to avoid in the absence of a context plausibly suggesting a message going beyond an excuse to promote the religious point of view. The display in Stone had no such context, and the Counties’ solo exhibit here did nothing more to counter the sectarian implication than the Stone postings. The reasonable observer could only think that the Counties meant to emphasize and celebrate the Commandments’ religious message.
"Nor does the Court hold that a sacred text can never be integrated constitutionally into a governmental display on law or history. Its own courtroom frieze depicts Moses holding tablets exhibiting a portion of the secularly phrased Commandments; in the company of 17 other lawgivers, most of them secular figures, there is no risk that Moses would strike an observer as evidence that the National Government was violating religious neutrality."
billvon 2,400
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>Sociopathy is a female disorder? Hmmm!
Nope, but Nightingale is a female, and you initially asked her. But if you prefer:
"A sociopath cannot balance what's best for themself and what's best for others."
Nope, but Nightingale is a female, and you initially asked her. But if you prefer:
"A sociopath cannot balance what's best for themself and what's best for others."
jakee 1,255
QuoteQuoteYou've just made 3 statements about the relationship of knowledge and wisdom.
QuoteKnowledge applied with consistent outcome creates wisdom.
Wisdom is non-tangible and the Bible teaches that it is the attribute of God and exists eternally.
Knowledge always has its origin in the reprobate human mind. It is of the flesh and in opposition to wisdom,
Explain how each of these three statements is not a complete contradiction of the other two.
See post #192, rynodigsmusic provides a good explanation.
No, it doesn't. Ryno's post may be (yet another) general rambling about the nature of wisdom, but it is not an answer to the specific question I asked you about your contradictory statements.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?
QuoteQuote
Wisdom is the ability to optimally (effectively and efficiently) apply perceptions and knowledge and so produce the desired results.
how can too much knowledge be a detriment? unless you mean, the more knowledge we aquire and apply, the less we believe in the supernatural.
I believe the assumption that knowledge is neutral, neither good or bad, is false.
Wisdom is positive and morally good.
Knowledge always has its origin in the reprobate human mind. It is of the flesh and in opposition to wisdom, which is from God.
i believe the assumption that knowledge is either good or bad, is false.
wisdom can be positive and morally good.
you base your definitions of knowlege and wisdom from religious point of view. i base my definitions of knowledge and wisdom from scientific point of view.
Born ok 1st time.
rhaig 0
Quote>Sociopathy is a female disorder? Hmmm!
Nope, but Nightingale is a female, and you initially asked her. But if you prefer:
"A sociopath cannot balance what's best for themself and what's best for others."
I was corrected in an english class some number of years ago on a sentence much like that. My prof explained that while it was admirable to us a gender neutral pronoun, it was plural and referring to a singular. At the time (english is a living language and I don't know the standard now) the male pronoun was the accepted default gender. Or one could refer to "himself or herself". Or in your sentence, pluralize the subject.
I'm not a grammar nazi. Far from it. I just hate when we modify our speech patterns from the norm so that we don't offend someone's sensibilities.
--
Rob
Rob
RonD1120 58
QuoteQuoteQuote
That's why I suggested you ask Jehova Witnesses, not try to explain something to them.
Oh I did. It starts with, do you accept Jesus Christ of Nazareth as the Son of God? Followed by, do you believe in the Holy Trinity? That is usually enough to get them dancing around the Old Testament and avoiding the New Testament.
Why shouldn't I believe in Zeus, Minerva, Vulcan and Neptune? The US Capitol has a nice fresco showing George Washington, Ben Franklin et al. in their company, right under the dome.
As I state over and over and over, you can believe anything you want. It is your choice. I share personal belief and testimony. Take it or leave it; it's all the same to me. I am only held responsible for sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, not the outcome of your's or other's decisions.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
RonD1120 58
QuoteUsing knowledge of "reprobate human mind " we have doubled life expectancy and improved quailty of life on almost any measure you care to name.
Perhaps you can tell us if you would be happy for the applicaitons of modern knowledge to be removed form you and your loved ones. No modern medicine, no sanitation, no skydiving, no internet etc etc?
I am very satisfied with human inventions. However, none of these inventions lead to the path of or guarantee eternal life in Christ.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
billvon 2,400
> I just hate when we modify our speech patterns from the norm so that we
> don't offend someone's sensibilities.
Yep. Unfortunately it's a really big deal to some people.
> don't offend someone's sensibilities.
Yep. Unfortunately it's a really big deal to some people.
RonD1120 58
QuoteQuote
Is it true or false that the Ten Commandments are posted at the U.S. Supreme Court?
Billvon got to this first, so to add to his reply (which was entirely correct):
The wall right above where the Supreme Court judges sit is the east wall, on which is displayed a frieze designed by sculptor Adolph A. Weinman. The frieze features two male figures who represent the Majesty of Law and the Power of Government, flanked on the left side by a group of figures representing Wisdom, and on the right side by a group of figures representing Justice:
In a letter on file in the archives of the Supreme Court, Adolph Weinman, the designer of this frieze, states that the tablet visible between the two central male figures, engraved with the Roman numerals I through X, represents not the Ten Commandments but the first "ten amendments to the Constitution known as the 'Bill of Rights.'"
The friezes which adorn the north and south walls of the courtroom in the Supreme Court building (also designed by Adolph Weinman) depict a procession of 18 great lawgivers: Menes, Hammurabi, Moses, Solomon, Lycurgus, Solon, Draco, Confucius and Octavian (south wall); Justinian, Mohammed, Charlemagne, King John, Louis IX, Hugo Grotius, Sir William Blackstone, John Marshall and Napoleon (north wall):
According to the Office of the Curator of the Supreme Court of the United States, these figures were selected as a representation of secular law:
Weinman's training emphasized a correlation between the sculptural subject and the function of the building and, because of this, [architect Cass] Gilbert relied on him to choose the subjects and figures that best reflected the function of the Supreme Court building. Faithful to classical sources, Weinman designed for the Courtroom friezes a procession of "great lawgivers of history," from many civilizations, to portray the development of secular law.
Moses is not given any special emphasis in this depiction: his figure is not larger than the others, nor does it appear in a dominant position. Also, the writing on the tablet carried by Moses in this frieze includes portions of commandments 6 through 10 (in Hebrew), specifically chosen because they are not inherently religious. (Commandments 6 through 10 proscribe murder, adultery, theft, perjury, and covetousness.)
-source, snopes
In addition, It is HIGHLY unlikely that a court that would make the following ruling if they have the text of the commandments posted in their courtroom:
McCREARY COUNTY, KENTUCKY v. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF KENTUCKY, the court stated:
"[the commandments] proclaim the existence of a monotheistic god (no other gods), regulate details of religious obligation (no graven images, sabbath breaking, or vain oath swearing), and unmistakably rest even the universally accepted prohibitions (as against murder, theft, etc.) on the sanction of the divinity proclaimed at the text’s beginning. Displaying that text is thus different from symbolic representation, like tablets with 10 roman numerals, which could be seen as alluding to a general notion of law, not a sectarian conception of faith. Where the text is set out, the insistence of the religious message is hard to avoid in the absence of a context plausibly suggesting a message going beyond an excuse to promote the religious point of view. The display in Stone had no such context, and the Counties’ solo exhibit here did nothing more to counter the sectarian implication than the Stone postings. The reasonable observer could only think that the Counties meant to emphasize and celebrate the Commandments’ religious message.
"Nor does the Court hold that a sacred text can never be integrated constitutionally into a governmental display on law or history. Its own courtroom frieze depicts Moses holding tablets exhibiting a portion of the secularly phrased Commandments; in the company of 17 other lawgivers, most of them secular figures, there is no risk that Moses would strike an observer as evidence that the National Government was violating religious neutrality."
How about this reference?
http://ten-commandments.us/ten_commandments/publicdisplay.phtml
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
A fact would not exist without the human knowledge of proof. Truth on the otherhand exists whether man does or not. A man can be given 1000 facts and still have no wisdom.
Some things do not need to be proven to be true... Look at the theory of evolution. It's an absolute rock in some peoples view. But they don't have "the basic problem".
Some things do not need to be proven to be true... Look at the theory of evolution. It's an absolute rock in some peoples view. But they don't have "the basic problem".
"We didn't start the fire"
RonD1120 58
QuoteQuoteQuote
Wisdom is the ability to optimally (effectively and efficiently) apply perceptions and knowledge and so produce the desired results.
how can too much knowledge be a detriment? unless you mean, the more knowledge we aquire and apply, the less we believe in the supernatural.
I believe the assumption that knowledge is neutral, neither good or bad, is false.
Wisdom is positive and morally good.
Knowledge always has its origin in the reprobate human mind. It is of the flesh and in opposition to wisdom, which is from God.
i believe the assumption that knowledge is either good or bad, is false.
wisdom can be positive and morally good.
you base your definitions of knowlege and wisdom from religious point of view. i base my definitions of knowledge and wisdom from scientific point of view.
See my post #199.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
As you can see in the SC case I quoted, the court specifically differentiates between spelling out the commandments and a portrayal of a tablet with roman numerals on it (which, BTW is inaccurate, as Roman numerals originated with the Etruscans around 400 BCE, and while there's a large variation in estimations of the approximate time of Moses, they're somewhere around Exodus, 17th to 13th centuries BCE, well predating roman numerals).
The portrayal of the tablet can be interpreted as symbolic of one of many forms of law, and in fact, in the link you sent, Moses holding the tablets is standing next to Confucius and Solon, surrounded by figures representing a variety of legal themes. According to the sculptor, the three main figures were meant to represent three great civilizations that have influenced the development of our laws and was not meant to be any kind of religious commentary.
The sculptor of the art that sits directly behind the court has specifically stated that the numbers on those tablets represent the ten amendments in the bill of rights, not the ten commandments. This tablet motif is continued in the architecture of the court, and is probably intended to remind the justices that the constitution is of utmost importance in that room.
The portrayal of the tablet can be interpreted as symbolic of one of many forms of law, and in fact, in the link you sent, Moses holding the tablets is standing next to Confucius and Solon, surrounded by figures representing a variety of legal themes. According to the sculptor, the three main figures were meant to represent three great civilizations that have influenced the development of our laws and was not meant to be any kind of religious commentary.
The sculptor of the art that sits directly behind the court has specifically stated that the numbers on those tablets represent the ten amendments in the bill of rights, not the ten commandments. This tablet motif is continued in the architecture of the court, and is probably intended to remind the justices that the constitution is of utmost importance in that room.
do you mean this?
"I operate in the fields of spirituality and psychology"
so? then you agree. you base your definitions of knowlege and wisdom from religious point of view. i base my definitions of knowledge and wisdom from scientific point of view.
"I operate in the fields of spirituality and psychology"
so? then you agree. you base your definitions of knowlege and wisdom from religious point of view. i base my definitions of knowledge and wisdom from scientific point of view.
Born ok 1st time.
quade 3
QuoteA fact would not exist without the human knowledge of proof. Truth on the otherhand exists whether man does or not. A man can be given 1000 facts and still have no wisdom.
Some things do not need to be proven to be true... Look at the theory of evolution. It's an absolute rock in some peoples view. But they don't have "the basic problem".
More meaningless mumbo jumbo.
Again, facts are independent of any outside observer. They simply are. The speed of light IS 186,000 miles per second. It doesn't matter who in the universe measures it. Water IS H2O. It doesn't matter if humans exist or not. These are facts.
"Truth", on the other hand, is a state of judgement about a fact.
If I say "Water is H2O" and we both agree on the meaning of the symbology then we can both agree that statement is true or not.
BTW, it's still a "fact" even if you personally don't believe it's the "truth."
You probably should leave the words "fact" and "truth" out of any discussion with regards to god.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
Quote
Oh I did. It starts with, do you accept Jesus Christ of Nazareth as the Son of God? Followed by, do you believe in the Holy Trinity?
Did you ask them why YOU are mistaken and represent a cult?
* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *
Quote
Again, facts are independent of any outside observer. They simply are. The speed of light IS 186,000 miles per second. It doesn't matter who in the universe measures it.
Actually, it would. Miles per second is your frame of reference.
QuoteWater IS H2O. It doesn't matter if humans exist or not. These are facts.
True, but there are different ways of looking at the same fact. Is water H2O or is it 9 protons and 9 neutrons? Is it neutrons and protons or quarks?
I understand what you're saying. Just because there's nobody around to hear it, doesn't mean the falling tree is silent. I'm just making the point that so-called facts are always changing. Maybe we're just using the term "fact" incorrectly. "Facts," as we use the term on a daily basis, are all relative. It's whatever the lastest science experiment said was true. 120 years ago Thompson explained the atom as a raisin bun. 70 years ago it was fact that black people were intellectually inferior to white people. 10 years ago it was fact that gravity is just a force between two objects. I hope you get my point.
Quote"Truth", on the other hand, is a state of judgement about a fact.
I kind of think about it the other way around. Facts are what we label our understanding of the world. The truth may be, and often is, something entirely different.
QuoteIf I say "Water is H2O" and we both agree on the meaning of the symbology then we can both agree that statement is true or not.
I would argue that depends on who you're talking to. Yes, it is H2O... but is that all there is? If I asked you if gravity was the force between two masses, would you agree? Would a string theorist agree on the same level?
QuoteBTW, it's still a "fact" even if you personally don't believe it's the "truth."
It's a fact based on what we know right now. The truth maybe different.
QuoteYou probably should leave the words "fact" and "truth" out of any discussion with regards to god.
Why? Because humans have been so great at explaining everthing so far?
--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.
QuoteI am very satisfied with human inventions. However, none of these inventions lead to the path of or guarantee eternal life in Christ.
So when you get sick why do you go to the doctor and try to extend your life with human invetions?
Why religios people don't accept their illness as God's will and let themselves die? They have eternal life waiting for them anyway right?
Are you serious??? What is the solid evidence for eternal life if you accept Jesus?
The Egyptians thought the mummification is the way, the Muslims think if you accept Allah (same God as yours though…) and follow the teachings of Mohamed.
The Bible is NOT evidence! The Bible is written by humans. Its current content was manipulated by political interest and a lot lost in transition. Furthermore most of the Biblical events were misunderstood the described “Godly Miracles” are nothing else but the lack real understanding of nature and science. But you can also google the “Cargo Gods” when a tribe in the Pacific started to worship for “Cargo”. U.S. troops stationed on their island during WWII and received supplies from the sky (parachute drops). War ended, troops left, indigenous people wanted more beneficial cargo. So they built mock radios with bamboo antennas to simulate the same circumstances before a cargo plane showed up over head delivering goodies. They had some lack of true understanding too…
You can test out “the lack of understanding” on your own DZ when spectators making statements about skydiving without knowing or understanding anything about it.
People debate stupid things whether the camera guy fell away or they “went back up” when the parachute opened. …and those people experienced a skydive at least once already but they have no clue what so ever anyway.
Is there any other evidence than the Bible for eternal life if someone accepts Jesus?
Can it be really checked and confirmed from multiple angles? Is there any feed-back?
I tell you now science is actually lot closer to eternal life (more like a very long life) than any religious idea. Our Solar system isn’t eternal neither the Universe.
Of course religion is against everything which can challenge its authority.
A few centuries ago autopsy was a crime punished by death (burning of course).
Now stem cell and other genetic researches are the big “NO-NOs”. The out coming results of these can make simple humans a powerful “Creator just like “God”
Back to the very beginning of this thread….
If we don’t separate politics from religion can we include every existing belief system in our legislation system? How a new bill would be fair if that would only satisfy Christians and Jews but not the Devil worshippers? The “In God We Trust” on the Dollar bills is quiet insulting and discriminating for Atheist (since they don’t),Native Americans (they were here first, they’re pagans, most of them killed by Christians), and for other countless non “single god” believer citizens.
Did theocracy (when it was really a law) really work in Europe in the past? Does theocracy work in the Middle-East countries?
People WAKE UP! Keep your non-sense believes at home or in your church! Do NOT to try to impose them on others and definitely DO NOT to try control politics and science with religion!
Can a pagan Goddess be a truth equally as much as God (the Christian version)???
Please a simple YES/NO answer.
Please a simple YES/NO answer.
quade 3
QuoteQuote
Again, facts are independent of any outside observer. They simply are. The speed of light IS 186,000 miles per second. It doesn't matter who in the universe measures it.
Actually, it would. Miles per second is your frame of reference.
Speed of light is independent of frame of reference; both in Einstein's use of the phrase and your use to mean "units of measure."
Facts don't change. "Truth" about facts change. When some people thought the world was flat was the truth, the fact the world was actually round didn't change. Their agreement over the "truth" of the facts had to change, but the facts themselves didn't change at all.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
You are not going to like this. I do not beleive you are right at all. Your trying to make something fit your disbeleif is all. For all I know you have never thought about the difference between wisdom and knowledge at all before.
So let me get this straight. I beleive a fact exists because we do, you do not. Fair enough. I beleive that truth belongs to wisdom, not human knowledge you do not. Fair enough. Where I get a little confused is how your telling me to leave facts and truth out of Discussions about God, where you are free to use them in regards to the theory of evolution? How about one of you brilliant scientific and political minds explain the deeper mysteries of life for all of us who only use mumbo jumbo when we think and speak?
So arrogant is the human mind without humbleness. It's no wonder life has not shared all it's mystery with us yet... We're clearly not ready. Beleive what you want, but don't pretend to have the answers so much that you would even resort to arrogance. I have a sound mind, as imperfect as it is, this is your conflict not mine. But it should be known in regards to wisdom and knowledge, I don't beleive what your saying is true.
The biggest example I gave is still that a man can have all the knowledge in the whole world and still have no wisdom. This example differintiates the two at least enough for further exploration in the open mind.
So let me get this straight. I beleive a fact exists because we do, you do not. Fair enough. I beleive that truth belongs to wisdom, not human knowledge you do not. Fair enough. Where I get a little confused is how your telling me to leave facts and truth out of Discussions about God, where you are free to use them in regards to the theory of evolution? How about one of you brilliant scientific and political minds explain the deeper mysteries of life for all of us who only use mumbo jumbo when we think and speak?
So arrogant is the human mind without humbleness. It's no wonder life has not shared all it's mystery with us yet... We're clearly not ready. Beleive what you want, but don't pretend to have the answers so much that you would even resort to arrogance. I have a sound mind, as imperfect as it is, this is your conflict not mine. But it should be known in regards to wisdom and knowledge, I don't beleive what your saying is true.
The biggest example I gave is still that a man can have all the knowledge in the whole world and still have no wisdom. This example differintiates the two at least enough for further exploration in the open mind.
"We didn't start the fire"
RonD1120 58
QuoteAs you can see in the SC case I quoted, the court specifically differentiates between spelling out the commandments and a portrayal of a tablet with roman numerals on it (which, BTW is inaccurate, as Roman numerals originated with the Etruscans around 400 BCE, and while there's a large variation in estimations of the approximate time of Moses, they're somewhere around Exodus, 17th to 13th centuries BCE, well predating roman numerals).
The portrayal of the tablet can be interpreted as symbolic of one of many forms of law, and in fact, in the link you sent, Moses holding the tablets is standing next to Confucius and Solon, surrounded by figures representing a variety of legal themes. According to the sculptor, the three main figures were meant to represent three great civilizations that have influenced the development of our laws and was not meant to be any kind of religious commentary.
The sculptor of the art that sits directly behind the court has specifically stated that the numbers on those tablets represent the ten amendments in the bill of rights, not the ten commandments. This tablet motif is continued in the architecture of the court, and is probably intended to remind the justices that the constitution is of utmost importance in that room.
Your position is well stated. I cannot dispute it. I can say this, all of my life I have defined the symbols of the two tablets with the Roman numerals I - X as representative of the Ten Commandments of the Holy Bible. All my life I have seen a constant wearing away of our Christian heritage. America is not growing stronger; we are getting weaker.
So, I can assume the the symbol at the USSC is nothing more than a shopping list reminder for the Chief Justice. However, it does not do much to inspire confidence in the high court. The reality is, the court is not so much for the benefit of the citizens as it is the grand arena for attorneys.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
RonD1120 58
Quotedo you mean this?
"I operate in the fields of spirituality and psychology"
so? then you agree. you base your definitions of knowlege and wisdom from religious point of view. i base my definitions of knowledge and wisdom from scientific point of view.
I am not fond of the terms religion or religious but, for the purpose of this discussion, yes, I agree with your point.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.
"facts don't change, truths about facts change"
swap truth with fact in this sentence and then I agree.
Truth doesn't change, facts do. It was known as a fact that the world was flat, the truth has always been there. Facts must be proven, truth, clearly does not. Whether or not I proved the world was round with facts would not at all change the truth, which was there before it was proven by the mind of man.
swap truth with fact in this sentence and then I agree.
Truth doesn't change, facts do. It was known as a fact that the world was flat, the truth has always been there. Facts must be proven, truth, clearly does not. Whether or not I proved the world was round with facts would not at all change the truth, which was there before it was proven by the mind of man.
"We didn't start the fire"
See post #192, rynodigsmusic provides a good explanation.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites