Message from @bittergrapefruit
Discord ID: 687106952412790786
"And we have an imperative to vote when offered, and to get involved in charities and such."
I agree with this, as I stated above.
what is Anglican?
Even the Easterns were clear on this @bittergrapefruit
```“Would heretics dare to come to the very seat of Peter whence apostolic faith is derived and whither no errors can come?" (Epistulae 59 (55), 14, [256 AD]).```
And I never said that if we do have the opportunity to govern that we shouldn't base it on Christian morality, I simply do not think that Christians have to do this in the same way that they have to love one another.
Anglican is a schism from the Catholic church, under the Church of England
Honestly, not debate is needed.
I’ve begun to prefer simply just ignoring the denominational differences on the right, so long as they are semi-Christian.
I’d prefer they be high-church, ideally.
What is the right without Christ
But we don’t need to divide the Christian Right, since it’s weak enough already. As it’s best we don’t include Volkish tards.
And what is a Christian without the church
You could be right and support Christian morality without being a Christian
Well, the right without Christ is what it mostly is right now.
Faith is a blessing
Generally speaking it makes a god out of freemasonry.
Or worse Judaism, lol
@Oboe everything we ought to do is out of love, that's not a critique of what I say
All without faith is sin
I don’t even really care about right or left economically.
I think Judaism could function within the right, but actually Judaism, not the practices of the sick race cult that’s entranced the world we live in
So long as they are traditional, order-driven, they are on the right track.
ill take a NazBol any day before some libertarian
Economic politics is a sin of capitalism
Technically, you can’t have NazBol, you can have Nationalist Socialism
Since Bolshevism’s root ideologies are internationalism and worker’s revolutions and anarchism.
@Eoppa My point is that a Christian's primary duty is to spread the word of truth and live in faith and that so long as we live to these ends we are fulfilling what Christ expects of us.
This is a classic Motte and Bailey
So even if Christians are not working towards having a state, as long as they fulfill the great commission and are remaining faithful, they are doing well.
```I disagree that we have any imperative to establish a state```
You are defending something much weaker than what you claimed
How so?
We have a moral obligation still. There is a hierarchy of charity, but that is a red herring.
We have certain responsibilities as Christians, establishing a state is not one.
Except that is heresy
And until you debate me on Catholicism this is true
We have a moral obligation only if God is not enforcing His will through what ever state exists already
We have a moral obligation at all times to govern based on Christs principles.
The state doesn't stop at the president, the Father, the localities, etc
That is assuming a Christian is in power and I would agree
Assuming a non Christian is in power it's still true
So how do you intend to explain to an atheist king why he should adhere to the bible?