...
ok
So who did the Church plagiarize? Are you saying that the Magna Carta doesn't represent the views of the Church (and therefore the Bible) at the time it was written given the first and last points relate directly with how the King should deal with the Church, that is separation of Church and State?
Quoting: newtome Of course it is plagiarism. Anyone with a shallow knowledge of ancient religions can verify that all Abrahamic religions are nothing but a compilation of many different religions, including moral code. The bible itself is plagiarism, so many of the stories in there are almost exact copies of ancient ones, ie Gilgamesh(which by itself is again a copy). Oral tradition distorted it along time little by little but the essence is there. Church, religion, bible, this is all a huge waste of time.
As for the Magna Carta, indeed it contains biblical precepts. What you CANNOT assume is that without religion there would be no moral. And just for the record, morality is a social construct. Moral to one society might be completely immoral to another and vice-versa.
Excellent, then you agree that Western law and governance is built on the basis of Christian values as contained in the Bible.
Yes it might have come from elsewhere but nonetheless it is still true to say that.
No, they aren't. And once again, you've changed your position.
You said:
Christian values come from the teaching of Christ, Jesus, not believing the Bible or divinity.You criticized me for conflating 'Christian values' with the Bible, the church and religion, yet you're doing it now that it suits you. You said Christian values come from the teachings of Jesus.
Well, then the politics of the Magna Carta are not Christian values. Jesus said nothing about fair taxation or democracy. Christians existed for nearly 2000 years before the Magna Carta. The church was silent on slavery for nearly 2000 years until attitudes towards it changed.
If these are Christian values, why did it take nearly 2000 years for them to be implemented? You think it's possible that there were other factors involved? By your own logic, just because Christians come up with an idea centuries after Jesus, that idea is not automatically a 'Christian value.'
Was it 'Christian values' at work when Christians were burning witches at the stake? Imprisoning Galileo and killing scientists for heresy? What makes you think you can just pick and choose which ideas are Christian values?
Now you are just flailing around like a man looking for something when he realizes all is lost.
Christian values do come from the teachings of Christ. You CAN believe and follow them without being part of a Church or believing in His divinity or believing everything in the Bible.
HOWEVER, the Church is based on the teachings of Christ and his teachings are documented in the Bible so all are true but all are not required, any one will suffice.
So the Church wrote the Magna Carta but it is not Christian values? Are you seriously going to try and run with that argument?
It took nearly 2000 years because of circumstances. Try reading why the Magna Carta came about. If you want to believe that Bishops writing a document, that is filled with references to the Church (separation of Church and State) and God, has nothing to do with Christian values then good for you.
YES, you are right, both sides of EVERY argument can be found in the Bible and the Church. That is how slavery was abolished, various Church groups fought using the Bible to show slavery was wrong while other groups fought using the Bible to keep it. Those wanting abolition won using the Bible. Look up the history.
In America, during Independence, many of the Founding Fathers were fighting to not only abolish slavery but include those words in the Declaration, they lost (they included Jefferson and Franklin who were both slave owners). Eventually the Puritans won the fight for abolition, using the Bible.
So Christian values are all screwed up, never said they weren't, but they are still Christian values and it is good for everyone that the Church and Christians eventually took the good parts and not the bad.
Nothing I have typed above is inconsistent with anything I have typed before, look back and read my responses carefully.
