God is fore all people so WHY are you all so against him. Is it rebelion, pride, or ignorance. God loves each one of you and is waiting to help you acheave your destiny in Christ. To be the best you that is possible. He sent his son, his word, spoken in to existance to pay the price for your guilt. What each individual does with Gods Word either justifys or condems the individual. God does not have grandchildren only sons and daughters
Ps God hates SIN so do not confuse him as the source of SIN. God is good.

I for one have nothing against God if it exists. What I am against is the Christian Blasphemers (along with the Jews and Muslims) who claim to be able to interpret God's law for me and tell me that God wants me to do. I am certain that if God wants me to do anything it can ask for itself.
This is what true Blasphemy is about. Claiming to be able to be Gods spokesperson when God has nothing to do with it.

dear davey,
Jesus, God the Son, I am, The word put it this way ; Put God first and love one another remembering he takes responsibility for
your future. But if you choose to do it your way you are responcible for your choice. never confuse religion with christianity for the religious people of his day crusified him. I read a funny the other day. After the roman soldier stabbed Jesus im the heart letting out
the blood and the water he was revived with a few herbs

A book just drawn to my attention contains the following text. Britain's Royal Throne by Thomas Foster [D.Litt.]

Historically and symbolically the British Throne is a Christian Throne. It clearly identifies itself with the Word of God and honours Jesus Christ in a way that no other Throne has ever done. It acknowledges God's Son as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. It acclaims Him as Saviour and Redeemer of the world. It respects the Bible as the word of God. This alone should be sufficient reason for every Christian to support our Monarchy System and all that it stands for. The Sceptre of Righteousness, with the balance between Justice and Mercy is the spirit of Christ's Kingdom on earth.

The honouring of Jesus Christ by our present Throne is no accident; it is part of the David Covenant, God promised David a literal Throne that would exist in every generation and continue as long as the Sun, Moon and Stars exist. He said that the Throne would be given to Jesus Christ, which means it had to become a Christian Throne, governing a people under the New Covenant.

The New Covenant talked about here in this text, comes out of the New Testament, and is fully represented by documentation in the Text Books, in use until 1970 in New South Wales. In that year the Parliament of New South Wales decided to repeal the Constitution, ( of Australia) and make a Brave New World, for New South Wales by selectively declaring the Imperial Acts the Judges in New South Wales could take into account, in administering the law in this State. They did NOT declare the Australian Constitution to be one of those laws. Queensland did the same in 1984, and Victoria in 1980. Consequently the property rights of everyone guaranteed by the existence of God’s throne have been abolished. One poster chastises me for believing in Christianity. To not believe is to put your hand in your neighbour’s pocket and steal from him or her. Christianity is of enormous practical utility

I'd forgotten that you were on this thread too, PtB.

>>Historically and symbolically the British Throne is a Christian Throne. It clearly identifies itself with the Word of God<<

"Identifies with" is clearly correct. The Queen is head of the Church of England. However, that is as far as it goes.

If you read any history, you might have noticed that over the years, the divine right of kings (notice that "divine bit - that's the giveaway) has gradually morphed into a parliamentary democracy, with the Queen as a figurehead. The fact that she does have powers to refuse legislation presented to her merely acts as a check-and-balance on the framing of those laws. If she were to invoke "God" as the arbiter, those powers would simply be taken away from her, and the country become a republic. Charles I had a go, and look what happened to him.

The connections that you make between religion and government are tenuous at best. I suggest that you ponder a little on what was going through your mind when you wrote this:

>>Every government of every description acts as a church. Almost every government has a constitution. Under Mao in Red China it was the little Red Book.<<

PtB, have you actually read Mao's little red book?

Imagine being a constitutional lawyer using this as your baseline:

"...the contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie is resolved by the method of socialist revolution; the contradiction between the great masses of the people and the feudal system is resolved by the method of democratic revolution; the contradiction between the colonies and imperialism is resolved by the method of national revolutionary war; the contradiction between the working class and the peasant class in socialist society is resolved by the method of collectivization and mechanization in agriculture; contradiction within the Communist Party is resolved by the method of criticism and self-criticism; the contradiction between society and nature is resolved by the method of developing the productive forces"

Your baseline assumptions are too far out of whack to sustain an arguable position, I'm afraid.

"Historically and symbolically the British Throne is a Christian Throne. It clearly identifies itself with the Word of God." - pTb

From the perspective of the Throne of St Peter that is untrue. The Vicar of Christ, Pope Paul III, withdrew Henry VIII's religious title, "Defender of the Faith". A secular parliament let him and his heirs keep it. Usurping the Pope would not have been seen as a Christian act by the other superpower of the time, Spain. Henry was excommunicated (1538) for not following the Word of the Christian God.

Elizabeth I did have some input into the drafting of the Church of England's 39 Articles of Faith, which she cut from 42. Her namesake EIIR would not be allowed to exercise such powers today.