Tony Spell has church in spite of the ban

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Good grief, ndavid loves him some Big Brother!

They say pressure cooking brings out the hidden flavors. Looks like the saying is correct.

Originally Posted by n david

There you go again. Calling names and posting smears.

You claimed a while back that you don't associate those who disagree with you with evil people or regimes. And yet just the other day you called Scott a communist and now you're attempting to smear me.

If you can contribute nothing more than to LIE and SMEAR then don't respond to my posts.

Well, nDavid, I can’t believe you would accuse Esaias of calling people who disagree with him communists and statists and socialists etc.. I’ve gotta take up for him. He would never falsely accuse the brethren. That’s what everyone else does.

And if he does, he means it in a good Christian way, of course. Like this response to one of my posts . . .

Esaias:“But anyway, the post was pretty good, until you ruined it with the insane final little bit where you seemed to be channeling the average "progressive" pinko commie,”

Did you notice how he complemented my post, before he observed that I was channeling a “pinko commie”? Excuse me, a ‘progressive “ pinko commie”’. I’m sure that he meant it as a term of endearment though. At least I took it as such.

You know, sometimes I call my boys knuckle heads. It’s just a term of endearment though. It’s all in how ya say it.

[shag]

Is that anything like, boy that guy sure is an idiot, bless his sweet loving heart

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by shag

Is that anything like, boy that guy sure is an idiot, bless his sweet loving heart

Yes, they are very similar.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by n david

Did you read the verses you posted? There is no comparison between that passage and what's happening now.

What did the high priest and council command? Pretty important part you intentionally didn't put in bold...

Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name?

Please post where any government official has prohibited church services and told Pastors they cannot preach Jesus any more.

Just one.

I'll wait.

Likely a very long time since there are none.

nd - since you wish to continue the discussion...
So, in your view prohibiting church services is ok?
I fully believe that the government has overstepped their bounds in prohibiting church services.
As the First Amendment says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

What part of prohibiting the free exercise thereof is not understood?

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

nd - since you wish to continue the discussion...
So, in your view prohibiting church services is ok?
I fully believe that the government has overstepped their bounds in prohibiting church services.
As the First Amendment says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

What part of prohibiting the free exercise thereof is not understood?

I totally agree with you, on a strictly legal basis. If we have separation of church and state, and that separation is complete, how does the state make a law, limiting the church from assembly?

It would seem ludicrous for the church to make a law that limits the authority of the church, wouldn’t it?

It should be just as ridiculous for the state to make a law regarding the church. Otherwise we don’t truly have separation of church and state. We just pretend to.

[Scott Pitta]

There are plenty of laws that impact churches. Laws that must be obeyed. We just don't think about it often.

Septic system laws and fire extinguisher laws come to mind. Tax laws for employees come to mind. Background checks for volunteers come to mind. Lots of little laws.

Does this violate the separation of church and state ? No.

Not meeting together in groups during a pandemic is reasonable. It has nothing to do with doctrine. It is a public health issue. It is a safety issue, like having the correct number of exits and fire signs in a church building.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

There are plenty of laws that impact churches. Laws that must be obeyed. We just don't think about it often.

Septic system laws and fire extinguisher laws come to mind. Tax laws for employees come to mind. Background checks for volunteers come to mind. Lots of little laws.

Does this violate the separation of church and state ? No.

Not meeting together in groups during a pandemic is reasonable. It has nothing to do with doctrine. It is a public health issue. It is a safety issue, like having the correct number of exits and fire signs in a church building.

Can a church legally perform animal sacrifice?

Building codes concern how a building is built. A church is not a building. For instance, a church can meet in a store front building. The building is regulated by the state. Even if it is a church building.

This is another example of how the definition of the church is important. The church is not a building. It is a people. The building is regulated for safety and health by the government. The right of the church to assemble is not.

Once again, I am not addressing whether it is wise or prudent to assemble to worship, in the building, owned, borrowed or rented by the church. I happen to believe I shouldn’t. But it is unconstitutional for the government to prohibit me from assembling with others, to worship.

[n david]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

nd - since you wish to continue the discussion...
So, in your view prohibiting church services is ok?
I fully believe that the government has overstepped their bounds in prohibiting church services.
As the First Amendment says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

What part of prohibiting the free exercise thereof is not understood?

If a state or the feds prohibited church services, I would be against it and upset, too.

But they haven’t done that. Not a single Gov nor the POTUS has prohibited church services.

Spell can hold services all day, every day. But the law says for public safety it should be limited to a certain size.

[diakonos]

Yet we can shop with 1,000 other people sharing the same oxygen. Sure.

[n david]

Originally Posted by diakonos

Yet we can shop with 1,000 other people sharing the same oxygen. Sure.

What store are you in with 1,000 people?