State vs Religion

Okay.

So he's misinterpreted or perhaps on purpose.

Must admit I've never actually read the whole bible.

 

Often the case with these sorts of things.

 

Judging by his comments neither has Folau. I'm always amused by "Christians" who are happy to go along with the fire and brimstone conveniently forgetting that Christ's central message was about love and understanding. I don't think any of the gospels make reference to homosexuality.

 

That probably refers to the 12 unelected bishops who sit in the House of Lords, and a Monarch who is head of the Church in England.

As the HoL doesn't frame legislation, and the Monarch has no real political power, in reality the clergy's influence on law making is minimal.

 

So is this wrong then?

2 Peter 2:4-5 "For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment."

Luke 12:5 "But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him."

Mark 9:47 "And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell."

Matthew 23:33 "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?"

https://www.allaboutworldview.org/is-hell-mentioned-in-the-bible-faq.htm

 

Iran and Britain reserve places for clergy. The y get an automatic say in writing of law.

Not sure of figures now but in Britain think its 26 Protestant bishops

In both countries they are unelected

 

I can't find the exact clip, but Jim Jeffries does a great monologue called something like "why would the devil punish you?"

He argues we only know about the devil from the bible, as the devil never bothered writing a book. Among other things he asks why would the devil punish you for doing bad things? Isn't that what he's supposed to want?

 

Isn't it 26 unelected Protestant bishops?

 

He has the right to believe whatever he wants. He broke his contract by repeatedly promoting discrimination, though.
Public figures have to consider what they choose to say wisely. He didn't.

 

Muh sovrinty! Democrasy!

 

Aye maybe but it's out in the open in both (assuming so with Iran in that). But look at how much influence there is with religious groups and individuals in say U.S. and Israel and India which isn't out in the open. Consider lobbyists in certain countries as well. And then there's legislation which is taken directly from religion in the middle-east Arab countries.

 

I bet this dickhead Rugby player would go into meltdown if somebody targeted whatever his religion is.

To answer the OP... No. Religion does not come before the state so to use religion as his defence and excuse for his vile outburst, doesn't wash.

 

I personally don't see a difference tbh.

India for example has largely British law (old some of it)

Sure the religious lot are shown in media etc in certain countries to be instrumental in some aspects but this tends to ignore the influence of religion in British law making. You only have to look at the mass turn outs from bishops etc when deciding equality laws etc. Their influence is huge imho

 

Apparently he's a member of a fellowship of the Assemblies of God. They sound delightful

 

It's not just about law-making, it's about religion impacting on prejudicial actions for the benefit of one religious group over another. India is one such example as well as the other countries mentioned.

They're not just shown in the media, they have direct access to political parties, regimes and leaders.

Btw I'm not saying that being out in the open should be ignored, just that you can't judge one as worse simply because you can see it openly.

 

I knew someone would be along to google references to hell in the Bible.

Well done, you found four.

I would contend that in each of those instances, the word is used for dramatic effect, and that an eternity of torment, used to threaten illiterate peasants in the Middle Ages, has no place in contemporary Christian doctrine.

 

26 Lords Spiritual, from the Anglican communion (CoE); but I don’t think they all sit in the HoL. Not sure tbh.

 

Yeah I get you mate. I don't agree with it

I'm from Pakistan ways and the way the country is portrayed is having a huge Islamic input from the clergy. The truth is it couldn't be further from the truth and they have less say than here imho

There is enough evidence to prove that with goings on, but living here you wouldn't know or hear it

 

They do. They're going to be replaced by the EU with 26 imams, though.

 

Didn't rev William want to incorporate shariah law into proceedings?