SCOTUS ABORTS 1ST AMENDMENT.

[TomMcC]

Drop me a line sometime. I will quickly dissuade you of that mistaken notion.

No need...I've read "Bondage of the Will", it's about as Calvinistic as it gets. Generally speaking modern people tend to use "Calvinism" to describe the doctrines of grace in a generic way. In the days of Luther and Calvin themselves, they didn't really use these terms. Even though Calvin and Luther were maybe a generation apart, their doctrine on the inability of men to "choose" to be saved were quite similar.

[TomMcC]

Do we though? I did not know that there was anything in the Bible requiring Christians to gather in specific locations. Can you point me to the chapter or verse?

I’m not trying to be inflammatory, just seeking to better understand religion. Christianity seems to be more lax than most religions on the how and where one must worship.

Besides the huge issue of the "free exercise clause" of the 1st amendment of the Constitution being a direct violation of the 1st and 2nd Commandment of God, the denial of the various governments to allow Christians to gather in even small groups would violate scriptures like Hebrews 10-24-25, "24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: 25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching." There are other scriptures like in Acts that talk about "When you gather to break bread on the first day of the week" indicating an assumption that the brethren met on the 1st day of the week (Sunday) to worship. It's true that the NT doesn't teach that the brethren are to meet in a specific place, church buildings being a convenient place to meet, sometimes in the past the brethren met in fields because the government of the day took away their churches and was trying to kill them. Nevertheless they were to meet together by the command of God. There is also a direct conflict because our governments denying the ability of the churches to do the Lord's supper.

[The_War_Wagon]

No need...I've read "Bondage of the Will", it's about as Calvinistic as it gets. Generally speaking modern people tend to use "Calvinism" to describe the doctrines of grace in a generic way. In the days of Luther and Calvin themselves, they didn't really use these terms. Even though Calvin and Luther were maybe a generation apart, their doctrine on the inability of men to "choose" to be saved were quite similar.

Calvinists are becoming MORE Lutheran?! Maybe there's hope for you YET...

[TomMcC]

Calvinists are becoming MORE Lutheran?! Maybe there's hope for you YET...

I don't think Calvin and Luther differed that much on soteriology back then. So, if you want to say the Reformed of the day were more like Luther, I'm OK with that. They did have a huge difference concerning the Lord's supper though. Luther didn't consider Zwingli (who predated Calvin) to be a brother over the issue. Having read the Lutheran (MS) confession of faith, I would have to say that we in the Reformed camp would have a serious disagreement with their soteriology today. We don't believe you can lose your salvation. I personally think that part of the MS doctrine is incoherent and not much different than Arminianism.

[Evel Baldgui]

I went to services just because the .gov said I couldn't, we had a nice small service of about 15 people. No bother from LE. Then again, it wasn't a 100+ megachurch service either.

[jpmuscle]

Decisions like this just further push the court into irreverence. It’s the same rationale that permits 2A infringement as a public safety issue.

As such, ignore it and live your lives.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jsbhike]

Michigan was apparently ok with the gay sex club being open until the exposure of the duplicity started stacking up about a week ago.

https://www.lansingcitypulse.com/sto...olations,14460

[SteyrAUG]

Our constitution died when the Patriot Act passed.

Oh, probably long before that. And as unnecessary as the Patriot Act is I'm not 100% certain it violates the Constitution. It probably is a 4th amendment violation but I'd have to look at it closer to be sure.