Brother Augustine

vraph

Pigeon
This has deep roots in early modern secularizing thinkers like Bacon and Locke. In A Letter concerning Toleration (1689), Locke argued that the state should tolerate religious differences (even including Jews, and I think Muslims), with two exceptions - atheists (you can't trust them to be good citizens because they don't believe God will punish them for treachery) and Catholics (you can't trust them to be good citizens because their first loyalty is to a foreign potentate, i.e. the pope).

My philosophy surrounding religious difference is that in order to gain the right to toleration you must give some form of loyalty test. If the Vatican assures loyalty somehow, you may tolerate Catholics.

Secularism to me is not no religion whatsoever, it is no established religion.
 

SlickyBoy

Hummingbird
Locke argued that the state should tolerate religious differences (even including Jews, and I think Muslims), with two exceptions - atheists (you can't trust them to be good citizens because they don't believe God will punish them for treachery) and Catholics (you can't trust them to be good citizens because their first loyalty is to a foreign potentate, i.e. the pope).
Substitute YKW and Israel in that last bit and you might have me convinced.
 

Viktor Zeegelaar

Ostrich
Orthodox Inquirer
I stumbled upon Kenneth Copeland and Joel Osteen as I researched speaking in tongues, which made me think of Brother Augustine's stream on Copeland. I'm quite gobsmacked at the moment actually, I didn't knew Christian ''denominations'' like this existed. Denominations in brackets, as it's entrepreneurs who have chosen religion as their field and those with a tendency towards religion as their target market. I've never seen a scam/charlatan so easily and straightaway. How deep have we fallen if these people gain millions of followers?
 
Top