Wednesday, November 05, 2008

Confused


By looking at the results from Tuesday's election I want to pose a question that has dogged me for a long time.

It is obvious that Christians can disagree with many things within the church. I believe there are folks that believe in tongues, infant baptism, and other various issues that I don't agree with but are saved. I am not the final arbiter, God is. But there are issues that are not up for debate. Those issue include, but are not limited to, faith alone, Christ alone, in scripture alone. Most Christians would probably agree.

I also agree that outside the church, as it relates to politics, the same maxim still applies.

We, as Christians, can disagree over the issue of taxes, war, spending, healthcare and other issues. From a scriptural point of view I cannot see where Christians can politically support a candidate who supports abortion, homosexual rights/marriage, and the disdain toward Israel.

How can a Christian support someone who does support things that are contrary to scripture?

I welcome your response. Please try to stay on topic.

90 comments:

Louis and Vivian said...

I spoke to a "Christian" woman today. She voted for Obama. She agreed that all that Obama stands for is evil in God's sight, "BUT" she said, "the economy is in such bad shape and we need change"

In other words, "I will worship and obey God, as long as my pocketbook is healthy."

The god of most Christians, (so called) is not the God of the Bible, but the god of the mighty dollar.

Still, there are others, who really are born again, who voted for Obama. Why? Because they know so little about the word of God, that they are easily deceived.
No doubt, those who voted for Obama will be really offended at me for claiming that they only did so because of their ignorance of the word of God, but as the scriptures say, "a rebuke from a friend, is better than kisses from the enemy"
So my dear Christian brothers and sisters, please take into consideration that perhaps I am right.
I don't say these things because I wish to offend you or put you down, but I say them out of concern for the fact that one day you will stand before your God, and explain why you voted to support murder, homosexuality, and theft.
For every man will give an account for what he has done.

Dead Theologians said...

louis and vivian,

This is a great comment. I wholeheartedly agree.

I just wish someone would attempt to answer it.

This issue is not really about party or color. It IS about obeying what you know to be right according to the Word of God.

Thanks for stopping by.
DT

Geo. brown said...

A very good comment by Louis and Vivian! Notice they put Christian in quotation marks. The word Christian has many meanings to many people so a lot of times you'll hear the term TRUE Christian. Ok I'm getting off base here!

The simple answer to the question is I doubt they are Christians at all and their salvation may be in question also.

I do not make it a habit of going around saying I am a Christian. I am a sinner trusting in the blood and broken body of our Lord Jesus to rescue me from a very sinful nature and world.

Even with my limited biblical knowledge I know how bad it is, how worse it will get and who will be victorious in the end. Praise be to God the Father through Jesus Christ His son! Amen.

The last sentence in Louis and Vivian's post says it all for all.

May God bless,

Geo.

Dead Theologians said...

Geo,

Nice to have you stopping by.

I think the big issue is that many people (Christians included) think that you can believe one thing but practice another. Of course this is foolish and hypocritical but it still goes on.

And then you hit the nail with the issue of what a Christian IS!

I suppose in many circles if you love your mother, fried chicken and don't cheat on your taxes and wife you must be a Christian.

Sad.

DT

sbrogden said...

I worked as an election judge this week and had a conversation with a sister in Christ who shared this concern. No born again child of God can reconcile voting for abortion and homo-"marriage" with His Truth.

I do not lump in with those issues the "shunning of Israel" by the USA. The Lord has already shunned the nation of Israel and we must proclaim Christ to them as well.

Dead Theologians said...

sbrogden,

Thanks for the comment.

>>Lord has already shunned the nation of Israel and we must proclaim Christ to them as well.

There is no doubt that we must share Christ but I still cannot ignore Gen. 12.1-3.

They are still a special people.

DT

sbrogden said...

No one should ignore Gen 12 - or any other Scripture. I believe it's a false position (espoused by Dispensationalists) to think the nation of Israel is still special and waiting for the fulfillment of the Promise. The Promise to Abraham was fulfilled, some believe in Gen 15 and others by the first coming of the Lord Jesus.

The veil has been torn, a new covenant has been established, and God's chosen people are those who are in Christ. He is no respecter of persons and there are none who have any standing before Him, apart from being in Christ.

jazzact13 said...

Concerning the topic of Israel, read Roman 9-11. Even after acknowledging that Israel was wrong, he still referred to them as God's people when he asked "Has God forsaken his people whom He forknew? By no means!" and says that a day is coming when "all Israel will be saved", in a context when it cannot mean anything but the nation of Israel as a whole.

sbrogden said...

I don't care to get into a lengthy debate about Dispensationalism. I consider it false, many think it truth. Not much convincing either side in a virtual setting.

Christ is above all and sovereign and will return to claim His chosen ones - in this we agree, even if we don't agree on how many times He comes again.

Dead Theologians said...

sbrogden,

>>I don't care to get into a lengthy debate about Dispensationalism. I consider it false

Who brought up Dispensationalism?

It is obvious that you consider it false just as I consider Preterism and Replacement Theology false and riddled with holes.

DT

sbrogden said...

Declaring national Israel to be special before God strikes me as dispensationalism. Which, by the way, is a much better defined term than preterism or replacement theology - both of which have many variations. But dispsationalism is founded on the notion that national Israel is the "apple of God's eye" and the church is merely a pause in His grand plan for that nation.

Anonymous said...

In regards to the abortion question, what will happen if abortion is overturned? Will abortion 100% be gone from American society? Will our oversexed views in culture be fixed?

These issues you suggest are only things that Christians can be against. What are Christians for if they are against abortion, against homosexuals, against Israel?

How does supporting one candidate over another make me a Christian at all?

I would think that Christians should be defined by what they are for.

Are abortion, homosexual rights, and disdain toward Israel not idolatrous (sp?) views, elevating these above others. What about the poor, what about racial equality, what about education? Don't those matter in the same light?

sbrogden said...

Voting one way or another does not make one a Christian. It may reveal your condition as an idolater or a disciple of Christ.

No where in Scripture are governments commanded to have social welfare programs. Christians are told to care for the poor, especially within the brotherhood of Christ.

We should not err in projecting Christian duties onto government.

Anonymous said...

I am a Christian from the southern part of Ohio. While I cannot understand the choice that my brothers and sisters in Christ made at the polls, it is our responsibility now to support President-Elect Obama. We need to do this through praying for him and his family.

Dead Theologians said...

Anonymous,

>>These issues you suggest are only things that Christians can be against. What are Christians for if they are against abortion, against homosexuals, against Israel?

>>How does supporting one candidate over another make me a Christian at all?

>>I would think that Christians should be defined by what they are for.

This is not what my post is about. Please stay on topic.

>>Are abortion, homosexual rights, and disdain toward Israel not idolatrous (sp?) views, elevating these above others. What about the poor, what about racial equality, what about education? Don't those matter in the same light?

Sounds like an EMERGENT ALERT to me.

Can you honestly say that education and racial equality are on the same page as murdering the unborn and homosexuality?

Again, we can disagree on some issues that are not pertinent to our salvation. We can also disagree on issues that will be worked out in sanctification. We cannot give on issues that are forbidden in scripture.

DT

lyn said...

We must get back to being about our Father's business, proclaiming the truth and living holy lives, and praying 'thy will be done'. This election had no choice, both candidates are lost sinners in desperate need of prayer. America has proven, however, who her god is, by not trusting in the one true God and voting for an empty promise of 'change' because the economy has most running scared. The shedding of innocent blood has no impact when it comes to the true god in America, money. God seems to be taking away, little by little, what many cherish most, 'stuff', materialism. The religious right scoffed at McCain until they had no other choice. You cannot control a wicked, vile world which is under the sway of the evil one through a political party. If Christians want to have an impact on homosexuality, abortion, greed, and all sins, then let's give lost sinners what they need most of all...the gospel of Jesus Christ. Let's stop trying to control wickedness by enforcing laws that wicked people scoff at {I am not against laws, but we must give the gospel first and foremost in order for the laws to make sense}...and let's remember, this world is NOT our home, our citizenship is in heaven.

Anonymous said...

I see no difference in the country of "America" and the city of Sodom.
Of course the lost will vote for people they feel most comfortable with, like one of themselves professing to be one of His while in their actions denying Him. Professing to be saved while telling others they can be saved other ways. We have always characterized Sodom as being judged almost singularly for the sin of homosexuality...but here is what the Lord says about those people directly:
Ezekiel 16:48-50 (King James Version)

48As I live, saith the Lord GOD, Sodom thy sister hath not done, she nor her daughters, as thou hast done, thou and thy daughters.

49Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.

50And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

All the American so-called "Christians",(like the tow at the top of the last election) repent the Judge is at the door!

Dead Theologians said...

Lyn,

I agree. We were left with no choice really.

I also understand that both are unsaved and will act unsaved.

I am just concerned that the knowledge that the church claims to have seems to disappear when politics come into play.

DT

TMD said...

Hey DT,

Good questions in your post, and I like some of the comments here. I agree. I cannot reconcile in my own mind, a born-again believer standing on the side of evil and injustice. I lay this out unapologetically in my last post on my blog.

In order to embrace evil, one must turn his back to God. I for one cannot do this.

Was McCain the answer, hardly, but he was more right than wrong.

Until Jesus runs, we're stuck. :)

jazzact13 said...

--In regards to the abortion question, what will happen if abortion is overturned? Will abortion 100% be gone from American society? Will our oversexed views in culture be fixed?--

So, by this logic, should we make laws against anything? After all, laws against murder haven't kept people from murdering others. Laws against theft haven't prevented theft 100%.

--These issues you suggest are only things that Christians can be against. What are Christians for if they are against abortion, against homosexuals, against Israel?--

We are for life. We are for the biblical definition of marriage (one man and one woman, monogamous and committed in marriage). We are for Israel--not overlooking their flaws but still seeing them as God's people.

--How does supporting one candidate over another make me a Christian at all?--

Can a Christias truly support someone whose opinions are almost all against what the Bible says?

--I would think that Christians should be defined by what they are for.--

And if you are for the things Obama has said he is for, then what is your point?

--Are abortion, homosexual rights, and disdain toward Israel not idolatrous (sp?) views, elevating these above others.--

No.

--What about the poor, what about racial equality, what about education? Don't those matter in the same light?--

What about them? Do you really think Obama's "spread the wealth" is going to do anything about poverty, except increase it? Do you think that Obama's election is such a triumph over racism, when the race card was played 'ad nauseum' by him and the pro-Obama media? Do you think that education will be better when the liberal revisionists get a hold of it?

T said...

I have enjoyed the discussion on this blog!

There have been some very valid points made and it is always interesting to see how distracted or new age some "Christians" can become.

The bottom line in this election, as in any, is if you are a folower of the sovereign God of the universe you will love his law. In Psalms 119 it talks about streams of water run down my eyes because of those who do not love your law... Christians in this nation should be crying out for this very reason.

Now, if you love the law of God you cannot be willing to abdicate God's law for economic policies.

Voting based on social programs is just another sign of the New Age movement seeping into the modern church. My pastor wrote a blog on this if you are interesed: Voice of Vision Blog

I agree that there are some theological points that Christians may not ever agree on; but the basics of God's law are very clear and shall not be changed by anyone come what may.

It is time for the true Christians to hammer the thesis on the door and say it is time to stand up for God's law.

Dead Theologians said...

TMD,

>>In order to embrace evil, one must turn his back to God. I for one cannot do this.

My sentiments exactly.

How have you been?

Thanks for another great comment.

DT

Dead Theologians said...

jazzact13,

I want to thank you for an excellent post. You could have written the original post because you seem to understand exactly where I was coming from.

Thanks a load.

DT

Dead Theologians said...

t,

I agree. The essentials can NEVER be compromised. It so we will:

1. pronounce judgment on ourselves
2. leave our children's generation with a watered-down poisonous soup that some would call the gospel.

Thanks for the post.

DT

TMD said...

DT,

Things have been going well!

Looks like a lively discussion here.

I see no way a true believer can even begin to justify their vote for Barack Hussein Obama from a biblical perspective.

If you want to say your a Christian who set aside their Christian faith in the voting booth, then ok, at least you're being real, and honest. Like the husband who says he knows it's sin, but he's gonna cheat on his wife anyway.

If you're a Christian, just admit it, you voted with your own personal desires and not God's. We won't roast you, just be honest.

The wallet trumped the bible on election day for almost half the Evangelical population in the US according to Barna.

Anonymous said...

OK, you don't understand how a christian can vote for Obama. Let me answer you by saying that I can't understand how a christian could have voted for McCain.

1) You say as a christian that as christians we can disagree on wars. First off we ought to remember that Christ promoted peace and christians are called to be peaceful. Maybe we can disagree on some wars, christians can disagree to some extent. But christians can not disagree on the war in Iraq. Nobody, abosolutely no christian, can support lying to go to war. This war started with a lie or with a false assumption at best. There were no weapons of mass destruction, the war was based on a lie or a wrong assumption, and when that lie came to light Bush refused to withdraw from Iraq proving to everybody that his mkotivation for this war was not weapons of mass destruction, but trying to establish democracy in a nation that has a history of dictatorship and tribal muslim warfare. A task impossible to achieve that was doomed for failure from day one.

2) No christian should support torture and disrespect of human rights, including ignoring habeas corpus. Guantanamo is something tha no christian should support.

3) Christians can disagree on the economy, social programs and health care. Yet no christian can support spending billions of dollars, or over a trillion right now, in useless foreign wars while bankrupting the US economy.

4)There's consensus and history will prove it that George W Bush was the worst president in US history, or maybe second worst after Buchanan. Christians should face this truth and not lie to themselves. When the history books are written both republicans and democrats will be unanimous on this. Two failed wars that were not required and the highest deficit in US history is Bush's legacy. The man missed it strategically and deserves to be out of power.

5) Both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars did not have God's blessing, this being clear from the results of them.

6)Abortion and homosexual rights are hot button issues. As much as I am against abortion and homosexual rights, let it be clear that the whole free world (canada, australia, europe, Japan) recognizes abortion rights and hommosexual rights to a certain extent. Obama is not out of line with the mainline thinking of the developed world. If a pregnant woman doesn't want to have a baby should society force her to? This is a hot button issue and although I'm opposed to abortion personally (let's say if my wife was facing an unwanted pregnancy), do I have a right to force all women in this country to give birth and raise an unwanted child? Obama has proposed to increase help for families to dissuade them from abortion, as well as promoting adoption of unwanted babies. He doesn't believe that abortion is the right choice for a woman. But he doesn't feel he has a right to force a woman to have babies if she doesn't want to. And homosexual rights, well homosexuals are a minority to begin with, and I'm not a homosexual so it doesn't affect me. I mean I lost respect for people that criticize homosexuals after the Ted Haggard scandal, this hypocrite evangelical leader, was criticizing homosexuals while sleeping with male prostitutes. I'm sick and tired of republican hypocricy. Congratulations Barack Obama on your victory! The United States and the whole world are saying "Yes we can".

7) I'm glad the republican party has sustained a major election loss, they needed it. The party would have to reinvent itself and in particular learn the lessons from Vietnam and the Cold War. And these lessons are invaluable:

a) You do not fight terrorists with a conventional war. Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan have proven this beyond reasonable doubt.

b)The best wars are won without firing a shot. That's how Ronald Reagan won the cold war. The change in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union came from within. The citizens of those countries rebelled.

Anonymous said...

OK, in my last post I wrote extensively why a christian should not vote for McCain.

I do believe though that some christians need to drop the abortion, homosexual, and Israel notions in order to be more comfortable with Obama. I want to address Dead Theologians concerns on this, and by the way I like dead theologians as much as you do. And here are a few tips for christians:

1) Forcus on spreading the gospel. People that hear the gospel and believe are born again. A christian should rejoice when somebody is born of the spirit, and this joy should exceed the joy that comes when somebody is born in the flesh, in sin, from their parents womb.

2) Christians should focus on not committing the sin of engaging in homosexual acts, as well as preaching the gospel to homosexuals. This is a much more biblical approach than trying to reduce the civil rights of homosexuals.

3) Israel, christians need to realize that we are one in Christ. There is no difference between the jew and the gentile. A jew and a gentile that deny the gospel are the same, a jew and a gentile that accept christ are the same.

Sincerely,

Bill

Anonymous said...

OK, here it goes. My third post in a row to prove Obama opposes abortion, every bit as much as a born again believer would.

From http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/06/james_dobson_and_obamas_theory.html

Reporter: For many evangelicals, abortion is a key, if not the key factor in their vote. You voted against banning partial birth abortion and voted against notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. What role do you think the President should play in creating national abortion policies?

Obama: I don't know anybody who is pro-abortion. I think it's very important to start with that premise. I think people recognize what a wrenching, difficult issue it is. I do think that those who diminish the moral elements of the decision aren't expressing the full reality of it. But what I believe is that women do not make these decisions casually, and that they struggle with it fervently with their pastors, with their spouses, with their doctors.

Our goal should be to make abortion less common, that we should be discouraging unwanted pregnancies, that we should encourage adoption wherever possible. There is a range of ways that we can educate our young people about the sacredness of sex and we should not be promoting the sort of casual activities that end up resulting in so many unwanted pregnancies.

Ultimately, women are in the best position to make a decision at the end of the day about these issues. With significant constraints. For example, I think we can legitimately say - the state can legitimately say - that we are prohibiting late-term abortions as long as there's an exception for the mother's health. Those provisions that I voted against typically didn't have those exceptions, which raises profound questions where you might have a mother at great risk. Those are issues that I don't think the government can unilaterally make a decision about. I think they need to be made in consultation with doctors, they have to be prayed upon, or people have to be consulting their conscience on it. I think we have to keep that decision-making with the person themselves.

Anonymous said...

Exodus 21:22 to Exodus 21:24 clearly condemns the loss of life of a fetus. But is it murder? Is it loss of human life? i don't think there's consensus on this passage, some interpret that only if the mother is killed the repayment is life for life (as in murder cases) otherwise it's a fine. Read and comment.

Exodus 21
22If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

23And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

24Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

Thanks

Bill

Dead Theologians said...

Anonymous/Bill,

I really don't know what to say other than...
"Is all of this to say you voted for Obama?"

DT

Anonymous said...

"Is all of this to say you voted for Obama?"
DT

Bill: DT I did not vote for Obama. I live in Edmonton, Canada. So I don't vote in US elections. I wrote just to show you that as perplexed as you are on how a christian could vote for Obama, I am perplexed how a christian could ever vote for McCain. In summary I wrote because you said you couldn't understand how a christian could vote for Obama.

Dead Theologians said...

Bill,

My fault for my assumption.

In regards to your last concern...

In the words of TMD at
http://themaledomain.blogspot.com/2008/11/silence-of-lambs.html

"Was John McCain the answer for America? Hardly, but I'd take my chances with a Patriotic war hero over a naked Marxist any day."

DT

Anonymous said...

DT,
I am also not an american. I am also of the same opinion as Bill. I believe americans voted for Bush twice for the same reason as you listed in your post. And we all saw that a lot of lives were lost due to wrong policies (mainly in Iraq). Is it not the same whether the life is that of an Iraqi or of an unborn child? What about the lies told to the americans and the rest of the world? I could agree with you in many things, if Bush or his supporters, as believers acknowledged their mistakes and showed some kind of remorse. I see the results of the elections as more anti- Bush/McCain than pro- Obama.

dk

Anonymous said...

DT,

Most christians outside the US that would agree theologically with you would disagree on the politics.

The other thing is that christians in the US seem to be betting the house on issues like abortion and homosexual right, which are usually non-issues here in Canada (at least compared to the US). No politician would dare challenge the woman's right to choice, nor are homosexuals part of the political campaign.

My question to american christians is, what if you got it wrong? What if life does not start at conception as far as God's eyes? What if a woman doesn't want to have a baby, and in God's eyes it's immoral to force her to by denying her the right to abortion? This may seem far fetched, but let me tell you that the first christians like Jerome who translated the Latin Vulgate, did not see the fetus as a human person that could be murdered. See Exodus 21:22 to 21:25 from the Douay Rheims version of the bible (which is a translation of the latin vulgate). If somebody killed a fetus, he would have to pay damages as determined by the husband. So when a wanted pregnancy was terminated, God's concern is with the damage the parents suffer (and this is provided the parents wanted the baby), but not the loss of life of the fetus. This is the mosaic law. You guys need to be careful before saying with certainty that abortion is murder, because waht you are saying could very well be like the catholic church saying using contraceptives is sinful. And it could even be worse than the catholic position, since murder is such a serious crime, qualifying abortion as murder when it is not could incite unwarranted hate towards women and doctors that perform abortions.

See how clearly Jerome translated the old testament as to leave no doubt that the abortion or miscarriage of a fetus was not considered loss of human life under the jewish mosaic law.

From http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=2&chapter=21&version=63

Exodus 21:22 to Exodus 21:25
22If men quarrel, and one strike a woman with child, and she miscarry indeed, but live herself: he shall be answerable for so much damage as the woman's husband shall require, and as arbiters shall award. 23But if her death ensue thereupon, he shall render life for life. 24Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,25Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

Thanks

Bill

Dead Theologians said...

Bill,

Please allow me to be frank without taking this as a character jab.

You have bought into the lie. I'm afraid our liberal Canadian friends have got to you. I cannot believe some of the things that you wrote. There seems to be a liberal pragmatism peppered with a little emergent in your writing.

>>if a woman doesn't want to have a baby

Here is the issue. You share from the presupposition that it is all about the woman. It should always start with God.

If a woman does not want to have a baby she should not have sex.

DT

Anonymous said...

"If a woman does not want to have a baby she should not have sex."

Are you talking about married women as well? You believe that the use of contraceptives is unbiblical even in a stable marriage relationship, if the couple chooses to not have kids but have sex?

Thanks

Bill

Anonymous said...

Actually I just read this from the website Republicans for Obama. For me this comes as a shock, I thought it's only roman catholics that opposed contraceptives. I'm wondering what Martin Luther or the apostle Paul would say about this. In First Corinthians chapter 7 Paul makes it very clear that sex within marriage has a very different purpose from reproduction, sex is not for reproduction, but so that the husband and wife not be tempted by Satan and commit adultery. Martin Luther once said, if the wife doesn't perform her marital duties let the maid come. I'm starting to think now right wing american evangelicals are very close to roman catholicism when it comes to sexual behaviour that they consider acceptable.

See Palin's view below:

http://www.republicansforobama.org/?q=node/1995

"In fact, as Palin's cultural views become better known -- she oppose abortion in all cases and opposes the use of birth control pills and condoms even among married couples"

thanks

Bill

Dead Theologians said...

Bill,

I see that red herrings have been thrown into the mix. I really wanted to stay on topic.

It appears that you, just as Obama, support a "woman's right to choose."

This appears to be your lowest common deminator. My lowest CD is that it is unadulterated murder.

DT

Anonymous said...

DT,
Could you please respond to my question, which is murder of Iraqis and also Syrians (recent attack to kill some terrorists), carpet bombing of caves in Afghanistan to possibly kill Bin Laden. Is that less important to un-born (in the real sense) americans?

Do you see no problem in continuing that?

dk

Dead Theologians said...

dk,

This is definitely off topic even though I wanted everyone to stay on topic.

>>Could you please respond to my question, which is murder of Iraqis and also Syrians (recent attack to kill some terrorists), carpet bombing of caves in Afghanistan to possibly kill Bin Laden. Is that less important to un-born (in the real sense) americans?

There is a definite difference in war and murder in the Bible.

DT

Anonymous said...

"There is a definite difference in war and murder in the Bible."

There certainly is. Still you gotta be very careful because Hitler and Stalin and muslim terrorists can use your argument to justify their murders. Because Al Qaeda can easily use your argument by saying that they are at war with America and their bombings in New York were not murders. Careful, what you are saying.

Who is to say that Bush is innocent of the blood of thousands of innocent iraquis that died at the hands of US troops or the tortures in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo?

Interesting during the Rick Warren forum McCain said that evil needs to be fought and defeated. Obama said at the same forum that many times the US committed the worst crimes in the name of fighting evil. McCain showed arrogance (americans are always right and the wars they fight are just wars), Obama showed humility (the US is the problem often times and they should blame themselves and not others).

Bill

Anonymous said...

DT,
I haven't deviated from the topic:
"How can a Christian support someone who does support things that are contrary to scripture?"

I was just pointing out that the decisions/policies of politicians on either side are driven by their desire to achieve power/ remain in power. In that respects, I can't see much difference between Obama and McCain. Lets not pretend that McCain's policies are driven by scriptures.

dk

jazzact13 said...

--Obama: I don't know anybody who is pro-abortion.--

Gee, does he not look in the mirror, ever???

--But what I believe is that women do not make these decisions casually, and that they struggle with it fervently with their pastors, with their spouses, with their doctors.--

Yeah, so they struggle with it. Whoop.

People struggle with many things. Simply struggling with a decision doesn't make it the right decision.

--Ultimately, women are in the best position to make a decision at the end of the day about these issues.--

Yep, women, go out there, and create your own morality. You've come a long way, baby.

jazzact13 said...

--But christians can not disagree on the war in Iraq. Nobody, abosolutely no christian, can support lying to go to war.--

Really? Enlighten us, please, on when President Bush lied to us about the war?

--There were no weapons of mass destruction, the war was based on a lie or a wrong assumption, and when that lie came to light Bush refused to withdraw from Iraq proving to everybody that his mkotivation for this war was not weapons of mass destruction, but trying to establish democracy in a nation that has a history of dictatorship and tribal muslim warfare.--

Oh, yeah, we went in there, took down their government (bad as it was), so we should have just left the whole country in a lurch, without any kind of leadership, leaving them open to Iran and probably others of their neighbors to take over and make a bad situation worse.

Hey, isn't that what liberals have been calling for, anyway?

--No christian should support torture and disrespect of human rights, including ignoring habeas corpus. Guantanamo is something tha no christian should support.--

Ah, this opens up all kinds of questions.

For example, what constitutes torture? What are the limits to which we can go to obtain information that may be useful and may even save the lives of innocents? What rights do non-citizen war criminals have?

--Yet no christian can support spending billions of dollars, or over a trillion right now, in useless foreign wars while bankrupting the US economy.--

The US economy likes has some problems, though they've been compounded by government interference. After all, it wasn't so long ago the economy was doing very well, so a bit of a down time would not have been unexpected; however, the mortgage crisis was caused largely by mismanagement, mostly be liberals, and most of whom suffered few if any consequences to their actions.

--There's consensus and history will prove it that George W Bush was the worst president in US history, or maybe second worst after Buchanan.--

I disagree. I would likely not put him among the greatest, but not among the worst, either. He had strong strengths and weak weaknesses.

--Both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars did not have God's blessing, this being clear from the results of them--

The results being...

Let's see. The surge, which liberals were so far against (remember "General Betray-us"???) has worked. The country still has rough spots, but given that the media here has decided that for them it's no longer an issue, one can think that things are coming along well there.

--As much as I am against abortion and homosexual rights, let it be clear that the whole free world (canada, australia, europe, Japan) recognizes abortion rights and hommosexual rights to a certain extent.--

And that makes it ok, than?

--Obama is not out of line with the mainline thinking of the developed world--

I couldn't care less about "mainline thinking". I care about right and wrong.

--If a pregnant woman doesn't want to have a baby should society force her to?--

Umm...yes.

Does she have to keep the baby? No. There are adoption agencies.

--And homosexual rights, well homosexuals are a minority to begin with, and I'm not a homosexual so it doesn't affect me. I mean I lost respect for people that criticize homosexuals after the Ted Haggard scandal, this hypocrite evangelical leader, was criticizing homosexuals while sleeping with male prostitutes. I'm sick and tired of republican hypocricy.--

Oh, sure, it doesn't effect you, let the laws be what they will.

And oh, yes, those nasty Republican hypocrites. Never mind that Obama lied about why he didn't vote for a born-alive bill. Or that he bailed out of the campaing reform financing plan because he knew he could raise more money outside of it. Never mind that Democratic Louisiana Congressman who was found with stolen funds in his freezer but has been asked by his party to step down.

Yeah, you got a lot nerve, making complaints about a few Republican hypocrites. No doubt they were hypocrites, but check your own side before sounding so disgusted with the other.

--I'm glad the republican party has sustained a major election loss, they needed it. The party would have to reinvent itself and in particular learn the lessons from Vietnam and the Cold War.--

Yes, they need to learn their lessons. They need to dump the RINOs who want to continually dive to center or the left-of center, and compromisers like McCain was.

Anonymous said...

jazzact13 & DT,
I can see that you both are very much against abortion. I can accept that fact. But why do you want a new law to ban abortion? In 2000 years of church history, abortion has not been treated the same way as murder. Why now?
How do you see the doctors who perform abortion? Murderers? The woman who undergoes abortion, a person who conspired for murder? So you would want punishment for all these people? See its not that simple. So why not maintain status quo?

A related question. Adultery is a clear sin, why not campaign for a law against adultery? why worry more about that is not clear when there is something very clear infront of us? I think I know the answer. No politician would support it!!

So if Obama is not sure that there should be a new law for abortion, you shouldn't be that surprised. And it shouldn't be that confusing that someone voted for Obama. Unless you think democrats=non christians and republicans=supposedly christians. There is no such thing.

Hope I have stayed on topic.

dk

Dead Theologians said...

dk,

>>I can see that you both are very much against abortion. I can accept that fact.

As a follower of Christ I can't see how anyone wouldn't be against it.

Abortion is very similiar to what the follower of Baal and Molech did with their children, except their children were already born, just very young.

>>So why not maintain status quo?

Spoken like a true relativistic pragmatist.

>>why not campaign for a law against adultery?

I say bring back the stoning. But, as one long ago preacher said, there sure would be a lot of piles of rocks around this country.

dk, I think liberalism has gotten to you.

Let me ask you a question.

It is clear that Obama is pro-death, pro-choice or whatever you want to call it. If that is the case then why does he want to "cut down on the amount of abortions that are performed" as he said in his Rick Warren interview?

DT

Anonymous said...

DT wrote:
"why not campaign for a law against adultery?
I say bring back the stoning. But, as one long ago preacher said, there sure would be a lot of piles of rocks around this country."

Bill:
DT, I believe you ought to remember what Christ told the people that wanted to stone the adulterous woman. Whoever is without sin let him cast the first stone, and there was nobody to stone the adulteress after Christ said that. And then Christ forgave her sins. Christ did not stone her, he did not condemn her.

If you really feel that you've been forgiven by Jesus and that you don't deserve it, as scripture tells you, you need to forgive others that don't deserve it like adulterers and homosexuals and show kindness. This way you show the gospel written in your heart.

Bill

Anonymous said...

Obama will possibly be one of the best presidents ever while Bush was one of the worst presidents. His popularity just hit another record low and is the lowest ever for any US president, lower than Nixon after Watergate.

Bush has not only increased the number of terrorists and enemies of the US with his policies, he has also alienated his allies. Europeans, canadians, australians, they would have voted more than 4 to 1 for Obama, and they were celebrating Obama's victory. Bush was really disliked by the whole world, I say good riddance. Now with Obama, America will again be respected by the world.

Bill

See below about Obama vs Bush, a winner vs a loser for USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2008-11-10-poll-obama_N.htm

Nearly seven in 10 adults, or 68%, said they have a favorable opinion of President-elect Barack Obama. Almost that many — 65% — said they think the country will be better off four years from now.

"The reception he's getting is unlike anything we've seen in decades," says Andrew Kohut, director of the non-partisan Pew Research Center. "It's a very high set of expectations to live up to. On the upside, it means people are going to be pulling for him."

A lower level of optimism greeted President Bush and former president Bill Clinton when they were first elected. In both cases, slightly more than 50% said they thought the country would be better off in four years.

The Republican president's popularity is about as low as Obama's is high: 68% said they disapprove of how Bush is handling his job.

T said...

Wow, this blog is enough to get your mind working and your blood boiling.

In regards to the discussion on the abortion and adultery issues:
The scripture is clear to bring law to the proud and grace to the humble; this is how Jesus ministered. So, we do forgive but we also correct and stand for what is right.

So, saying that adultery is tolerated so abortion should be is bad logic. The tolerance of one sin is not an excuse for another. The bottom line is we are far too tolerant of many things in this country. Forgiveness does not mean looking the other way; and intolerance is not hate. If you love your brother how can you not call him to repentance and out of the life of slavery to sin and death?

Romans 6:15-16
What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness?

On the political side of things:

Because a leader can bring on a frenzy of excitement does not mean that he can effectively run a nation. There have been many charismatic men that have done horrific things in the past.

Frankly our nation did not become as great as it is by pleasing the other nations of the world. We became this nation because we were not afraid to stand up for what was right and what we believed in. The true sadness is that this lack of fear is disappearing with the liberal politicians of today. They are so busy trying to be politically correct that we have no leaders. A mob without true leadership is a dangerous thing.

Our nation was founded by men of strong Biblical principles and we prospered. Now, our nation has watered down the gospel to include everyone and everything so we can all feel good about our sin, we are no longer prospering. I am not preaching prosperity gospel here, I am simply saying how can God allow a nation to prosper continually if they refuse to follow His laws.

The answer to the current American crisis is not better economic policies or a more likeable president. The answer to the problem is more Jesus and adherence to the laws of God.

Dead Theologians said...

Bill,

I have to say that your liberal hypocrisy is really peering through.

Bush claims to be a follower of Christ. That being the case you have just violated your own post (forgiveness).

You may want to see sin swept under the rug as "oh, we all sin, can't we all just get along" but I'm not. God demands holiness and those that call themself by the name of Christ have to honor Him with their mouths and behavior. If you think it is ok to let someone murder your future children or grandchildren then you need prayer.

This mindset of "going along to get along" and is killing Christianity's witness. We stand for nothing except loving the world and being of the world.

The pragmatic (if it works do it-if it doesn't don't) view is also killing our testimony. We have to copy the world (Rick Warren) to draw them in. Sad, truly sad.

DT

Anonymous said...

DT,
You said "It is clear that Obama is pro-death, pro-choice or whatever you want to call it. If that is the case then why does he want to "cut down on the amount of abortions that are performed" as he said in his Rick Warren interview?"

I believe a person is born when the mother gives birth, not at conception. This is what the whole world more or less believes in. Jesus was born in a 'manger', not when Mary conceived Him. So the new movement that says a foetus should be considered as a human being is something we need more debate and not ready for a law. Otherwise, in the 8 years that Bush was president, he could have pushed for it, couldn't he? As you quoted, Obama is also not in favor of wholesale abortions.

Now the way Bush ruled, was definitely not good for anybody and needed change. I read a book by Paul O'Neill, Bush's secretary of Treasury for a while. It is appalling the way things were done. You may say, Paul was disgruntled for being kicked out, but there are a lot of fact that you just can't ignore. This definitely proves that a person who claims he is a believer is not the one you should be looking for as persident. Because only God knows what is inside him. People can promise anything to get power. If McCain was elected that would mean people don't care what a president does, as long as he supports christianity in word.

dk

T said...

dk,
Here are some scriptures to help you figure out when life begins:

For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother's womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well.
(Psa 139:13-14)

Thus says the LORD who made you, who formed you from the womb and will help you: Fear not, O Jacob my servant, Jeshurun whom I have chosen.
(Isa 44:2)

And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.
(Luk 1:41-44)

Just a couple to get you started. God opens and closes the womb and decides life.

Christopher said...

Rick Warren interview? That gives me a lot of faith that the truth is being proclaimed........

Anonymous said...

t,
Your points are quite valid. But there are others who don't agree with you based on other verses in the Bible (please read the comment from Bill). Now this is not established amoung christians. Why would you then want to enforce it on non-believers? The best thing preachers/teachers of the Gospel can do is preach and practice. Not lobby around to get their views enforced on others, especially non-believers.

dk

Anonymous said...

The fetus was never a person under jewish law. The fact that God designed us well before we were conceived in the womb (before the foundation of the world according to the letter to the Ephesians) doesn't change anything.

If the fetus is a human being and abortion is murder, then I have a question. Is the aborted fetus going to heaven? No theologian ever posed this question, simply because the fetus is a potential human being but not a human being. Chrildren are mentioned in the bible several times, the fetus is not.

Bill

Dead Theologians said...

dk and Bill,

I understand your point now. Since you don't believe that life begins at conception our conversation has no way of coming to a viable conclusion.

Scripture does have to be our ruler for judgment. Human opinions, man's laws or tradition mean nothing when it opposes scripture.

This will lead me to my next post.
DT

T said...

You pose a valid point that, as Christians, the best thing we can do is bring the truth and live the life.

However, if we could start at the same premise that abortion is wrong then how could we not have laws against it. We have laws against stealing, murder, assalt, etc. So, if you did believe abortion is wrong then logically how could you not want to stop it.

T said...

As far as deciding the Biblical legalities of abortion let me pose this to you in response to the Jewish law. When Jesus came he said that according to the law adultry is wrong...but he went on to say that any man that even looks upon a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Jesus set up a higher standard of holiness. So, I would say to you if murder is wrong, and a fetus left alone will become a human life, then killing the baby is wrong.

Just something to think on.
Have enjoyed the lively discussion.

jazzact13 said...

His popularity just hit another record low and is the lowest ever for any US president, lower than Nixon after Watergate.

And, of course, we all know that being popular makes one right.

Bush has not only increased the number of terrorists and enemies of the US with his policies, he has also alienated his allies.

I wonder what stats you have about "increased the number of terrorists". Maybe an al Qaeda census? A show of hands of all those in Hamas? The dancings in the streets when the Towers fell?

Oh, wait, that last happened before the President went into Afghanistan and Iraw. Silly me.

Europeans, canadians, australians, they would have voted more than 4 to 1 for Obama, and they were celebrating Obama's victory.

Last I checked, Europeans, Canadians, Australians, and others didn't get a vote in our election.

Adultery is a clear sin, why not campaign for a law against adultery?

Why not? I'll not go so far as to call for stonings, but certainly the current divorce laws are a mockery. Though I wonder if adultery is really legal in our society, while I know that abortion is.

But last I checked, it's not often adultery ends in the murder of one party, and by definition that is what happens in abortion.

jazzact13 said...

No theologian ever posed this question, simply because the fetus is a potential human being but not a human being.

Potential human beings??? Who have you been listening to, Peter Singer???

jazzact13 said...

Congresswoman Confident Obama Will Support UNFPA Which Supports China's Coercive Abortion Program

During his campaign, Obama said he supports the 1973 Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion in the United States.

He also promised Planned Parenthood that he would sign into law the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), which strikes down all federal and state restrictions on abortion, including the ban on partial-birth abortion, and will establish abortion-on-demand in every state and the U.S. territories.

Obama also has said he supports “comprehensive sex education” in public schools that would include abstinence and information on “safe sex” practices.


We must be a bit careful here, as this woman is merely speculating (though not without reason) about if he will support a group that supports China's abortion policies. Dollars for donuts, though, it's likely he will.

TMD said...

Bill, you wrote:
"The fetus was never a person under jewish law."

Humans existed before the Law. Don't look there for your definition of who's human and who's not.

Remember what the Word said concerning Mary when she was pregnant with Jesus; "Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit." - Matthew 1:18

Jesus was a child in the womb, like ALL of us.

You also asked:
"If the fetus is a human being and abortion is murder, then I have a question. Is the aborted fetus going to heaven?"

This is my opinion now, no one elses commenting. I believe they will go to heaven because I believe the blood of Christ covers their sinful state.

The word of God is clear who will be sent to hell; idolaters, murderers, blasphemers, thieves, drunkards, etc., etc. Unborn fetuses are none of these.

I'm sure some might disagree, but that's my take on it....and God's too! :D

Anonymous said...

t,
"We have laws against stealing, murder, assalt, etc."

The laws of society are normally for maintaining order in society (something that would hurt others). It is best to leave it that way, than try to implement religious laws. See what happens in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries. Do we all not complain that they force others to follow their laws (veil etc)?

If we press for abortion, then what is stopping us from laws against other sins like idolatry etc. We should not forget Jesus said that His kingdom is not of this world. I don't believe God cares much about the laws in this world, all He would care is whether we live according to His wish.

dk

Christopher said...

I don't believe God cares much about the laws in this world, all He would care is whether we live according to His wish.

So you believe that killing unborn babies would fall under that category?

DK, you have on more than one occasion made a fool of yourself here and contradicted yourself. Give it a rest dude. I think your goose is cooked, and you have more important things to do like….hmmmm

Stop quoting cliff notes. Go actually read your bible and get right with God because you will have to face a Holy God on judgment day. You won’t be able to say that any of us made you do or think anything. By your actions on this post I can see that you are an idolatrous, murderer at heart and will be found guilty before God unless you are made righteous through renewing your mind in Jesus Christ. You are in love with your truth, and this idea of God you have invented, and it will buy you prime real estate in the lake of fire.

I will judge you, each one according to his ways, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. Ezekiel 18:30

Christopher said...

BTW, just to clear my mind so I can actually go to sleep.....

When Jesus said His kingdom was not of this world......

.....that is not what he meant.

Put away your pocket jesus and try some exposition. It's refreshing. You might actually understand what the bible really means.

Christopher said...

DT,

I am sorry your post turned into this, and am thankful for the opportunity to speak my mind as I rarely do on these things. Thanks for such an intriguing post.

Everyone,

Bill and DK may be l..iberals. They are also l..ost. They are definitely the lost. Though this has been a good learning ground for conversational apologetics, you can not reason with the intellect of the lost. You will not get anywhere and will end up frustrated yourself. "The wind blows where it will...", so it is not our place to decide who is to be saved and who is not. God has made that sovereign decision. We are only called to bring the Gospel to everyone. When we are dealing with the lost, we must do so in the most biblical manner. Law to the proud, and grace to the humble. Bill and DK are too proud of the idol they have created of this god that does not exist. They pick and choose bible verses to create this euphoric feeling in their mind of spiritual greatness, but what they have created is an image of their best self. It sounds as though they have no moral compass to speak of. They would be willing to go along with "Mainstream Thought" and that is the thoughts of the world, the flesh, and the enemy. Conversation is good, but in the end, we must show them the law, and ultimately how they have broken it. Then and only then do they have a shot at humility. Once humbled by their transgressions, then and only then do they have a shot at the grace we tell them about in the Gospel.

The Gospel will be foolishness to those that don't believe! However, God has written his law on the hearts of men (Romans 2). We are to battle with their conscience, not with their intellect. All we can do is plant that seed and pray that God waters it. If He does, He is righteous. If He doesn't, He is righteous.

Dead Theologians said...

Christopher,

Don't apologize. I have had many posts where the opinions fly.

I have conversed with dk for some time on different issues and needless to say, we've never seen eye to eye.

Hey, I appreciate your posts.

DT

Anonymous said...

DT,
I do agree with you in many things, just that I tend to add comments when I disagree. I must say, I have enjoyed reading many of your other posts. I should have added some positive comments there.

Christopher,
I think you were a bit too quick to pass judgement on me. If you read carefully, you will see that I am not pro- abortion. In your mind I am just a lost soul just because I am not convinced about abortion!! Nice way to judge. I was only talking about making a new law and forcing it on those who don't believe it (say people of other religions). I raised many questions in that regard, which you have chosen not to respond. If you think everyone living in US should follow christian rules, then what is needed is a new law banning citizenship to non-believers.
All I said was christian values must be enforced in personal lives, not in society. I still don't understand why the root cause for abortion in most cases which is adultery/ fornication can be tollerated by you (I am assuming that you haven't campaigned to make it a law). I would be surprised if you can name one person who is doing that now. May be (just a may be) you yourself might need to be jaied for that (for past crimes)!! I can confidently say that as we know that not many "believers" are virgins before marriage. I am not passing judgement on you, but just stating a possibility. If there was a law against adultery/ fornication (which is the case in many counties), there would be fewer abortions. But I can see you are not interested in that law.

More over, the topic of this post was about christians voting for Obama. So I think you have also strayed away from the topic a bit.

dk

Christopher said...

Dk,

Like I said, you can't argue with the intellect of the lost, because they will always come back at you as though you are the one doing something wrong.

The topic WAS Christians voting for Obama, and turned into what it turned into. You need so badly to be right and to make everyone else look like they have something wrong with them.

I never said I tolerate adultery, but you like to put words in peoples mouths to make yourself feel better. If you feel so strongly about that issue then you can help do something about it. I think you have a hidden sin you choose not to let go of, but as long as there is abortion you feel that there are people doing way worse that you.

I maintain, if you still disagree over the issue of abortion after the amazing dialogue that everyone here has had, then Yes, you are still lost, and are not in the Truth.

Keep making up a god that makes you feel better about yourself. Tell me how that works out for you.

Christopher said...

You also like to share 'facts' like most Christians are not virgins, and that most of the world believes this or that.

I used to make up facts about the world too, when I knew deep down in my concience that what I was doing was wrong. But I had to convince myself that not just others, but a vast majority must feel the same way I do.

You not in the truth though, so no one here should feel the need to heed your statistics.

Anonymous said...

Christopher said: "Bill and DK may be l..iberals. They are also l..ost. They are definitely the lost."

Bill says: I trust in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of my sin, in him alone I trust. I believe in his promise that he will give eternal life to everybody who believes in Him, as the only Son of God, who died for the sins of the world and rose on the third for the justification of sinners, for the justification of everybody that believes in him. I do not trust on myself, for I am condemned, and if it weren't for Christ and his resurrection I'd be dead in my sins.

I don't believe that voting for Obama will condemn a christian to hell. Maybe you do and you condemn me to hell for that. But Obama is better than McCain in the eyes of God, then you are in the wrong. And if McCain is better than Obama in the eyes of God (and I doubt it), and if it's sinful to speak favorably of Obama, that I don't know, but I do know that I have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, who will not impute to me my sin, who paid with his blood for all my sins (whether the sin is known and confessed or whether the sin is unknown to me and I'm unable to confess it).

I pray for you Christopher, that God will open your eyes and make you see that the gospel is not about voting for Obama or McCain.

Bill

Christopher said...

I never said it did........

Christopher said...

I find this appropriate:

THERE IS A GENERATION


In his article, “The World’s Second Oldest Religion,” R. J. Rushdoony wrote, “Traditional Christian society as we have known it is on its death bed. Our society is not only secular in life-style and world view, but in thought and philosophy. As society, and for that matter the church, is shedding the garments of longstanding tradition, two alternatives are now open. One is to embrace and live under some form of humanism; the other is to come under the mandates of the Kingdom of God.”

In Proverbs 30:11 – 14, a generation is described. It is a class or kind of people who degenerate towards godlessness. Four descriptions are given:

1. A generation that curses its foundations and rejects Biblical authority. “There is a generation that curses its father, and does not bless its mother,” verse 11. “Curses” means “to despise, to bring into contempt.” “Father” means “the foundation that protects,” and “mother” speaks of “the bond of the family.” It is a generation that rejects basic Judeo-Christian values that have been the foundation of stability and protection. William Penn warned, “If we are not ruled by God, then we will be ruled by tyrants.”

2. A generation that is religious, but not born again. “There is a generation that is pure in its own eyes, yet is not washed from its filthiness,” verse 12. To be “pure in its own eyes” is to develop one’s own personal idea of salvation and believe it to be true, even when it contradicts the Bible. However, the verse continues with “yet is not washed from its filthiness.” “Washed” means “cleansed,” and “filthiness” in the Hebrew means “to evacuate the bowels or to excrete.” This is a generation of people who have convinced themselves they are clean, but their hearts are as filthy as that which belongs in the sewer. “Christians” but not born-again.

3. A generation that becomes a god unto itself. “There is a generation – oh, how lofty are their eyes! And their eyelids are lifted up,” verse 13. “Lofty eyes” and “eyes lifted up” are defined as man exalting himself and becoming his own standard of values, or lack thereof. Amos D. Millard wrote, “Humanism is a system of thought and action which holds that man is capable of self-fulfillment, peace on earth, and right ethical conduct without recourse to God. It is thus a religion which deifies man and dethrones God.”

4. A generation driven by a spirit of violence and devalues human life. “There is a generation whose teeth are like swords, and whose fangs are like knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men,” verse 14. John Paul II said, “Abortion, the deliberate killing of a human being before birth, is never morally acceptable and must always be opposed.” During his reign as king, Manasseh sacrificed his own children to idols and ruthlessly killed people, illustrating that what we believe deep within us has a profound effect on our behavior. Abortion, the ruthless and merciless slaughter of the unborn, is not just another issue, but it is THE ISSUE, because how we value one individual life, determines our view of all of life!

Acts 2:40, “Save yourself from the perverse (crooked) generation.”

Dave Arnold, Pastor, Gulf Coast Worship Center, New Port Richey, Florida

Christopher said...

There dk, now I'm back on topic....

Anonymous said...

"I never said it did........"

Christopher, you did say I am lost. All I pointed out to you is that my salvation depends on Jesus Christ and not on whether I prefer Obama over McCain. My salvation is sure in Jesus Christ and does not depend on your opinion that I am lost. My salvation doesn't depend on my works either but on Jesus work on the cross. Because Jesus rose from the dead and obtained victory over sin my salvation is sure. I hope you got that one, otherwise it is you that doesn't understand the gospel and are lost.

Bill

Bill

T said...

Wow...this is quite the discussion. Everyone is making valid points but perhaps you need a translator.

It is correct that your salvation purely depends on Jesus Christ and nothing else; not works or who you voted for.

However, I think the overall point that was trying to be made is that who you voted for (or back) is an indication of where you stand in your life and on Biblical issues.

There are a great deal of problems with either candidate but at the end of the day all arrows pointing at Obama indicate he stands for many things that are not Biblical.

Let us get past the abortion issue and the gay rights and look at the other policies, behaivors, friends and history. The bottom line is that he keeps company and gains council from those who stand against Biblical principles.

No one is saying McCain was God's elect we are simply implying that stacking all things together he at least keeps company and tends to lean toward Biblical standards.

kwesi said...

Might I ask, which candidate would you suggest. None of the Candidates held to all biblical mandates. James 1 says Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.

Abortion and Gay rights are important issues. They are not the only issues. Taking care of those in need is still a biblical mandate. Some choose to forget that, instead of giving to the poor they judge the poor or those that care for the poor.

It's silly to promote what's most important to you as what must be most important to all. When like Louis and Vivian you dismiss someones Christianity because they care about the economy, you do not promote understanding but display a kind of pride, "holiness" without humility.

Look, at the end of the day Jesus still has the line drawn correctly. If you have never voted for a Candidate that in someway was unpleasing to God, stone on. You certainly did if you voted for the other Candidate.

After you are finished judging fellow Christians who disagree with you, maybe you can follow this mandate of scripture. 1 John 4:20 If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. 21 And this commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother. Calling a broad brush harsh criticism and judgment a friendly rebuke doesn't make it one.


Also are we suggesting that every republican is against abortion and homosexuality. This country has never been run by the president alone and that by design.

If I as a Christian were to judge every politician on their complete obedience to the word of God sadly there would not be one left standing. I likewise would not qualify.

Finally didn't God consistently use sinful men throughout history.

Then Since the bible clearly says in Psalms 75:6 For not from the east or from the west
and not from the wilderness comes lifting up,
7 but it is God who executes judgment, putting down one and lifting up another. Shouldn't we be accepting the will and wisdom of God?

God is still sovereign even when you don't like His choice, right?

Dead Theologians said...

kwesi,

Thanks for your comment.

It is clear that you either did not read my post or that you did not understand what point I was attempting to make.

Since abortion and homosexuality are issues that are clear cut in Scripture those are then foundational issues. Other issues that are in Scripture but are not clearly laid out should be worked through or debated.

DT

kwesi said...

For the record DT, I read all of it. We simply disagree. I think treating all people with Love, dignity and respect is very clearly stated in scripture.

I think judging people based on 2 biblical issues no matter how fundamental they are is very much what the Pharisee would do.

Like I said, we disagree and you know what? That's okay in the body of Chris... which is my point. It doesn't make me non Christian or less Christian.

Last I checked neither of these issues was considered an essential to orthodoxy.

Anonymous said...

Bill to DT:

Sin is sin. the bible says that homosexuals and adulterers won't enter the kingdom of heaven.

But let it be clear that we are all sinners. The guys that looks at a woman with a lustful eye at the mall is sinning just like the homosexual is. The guy that is divorced and remarries commits adultery.

The point is those that oppose homosexual marriage are hypocrites. Why don't you oppose divorce and remarriage as well and campaign against it? Persecuting one group of sinners through the law (the homosexuals) and encouraging the sin of adultery through the current marriage laws (that allow easy divorce and remarriage) is showing partiality, by being graceful and forgiving for one type of sin (adultery) and cracking down on another type of sin (homosexuality).

Bill

Anonymous said...

The point I'm trying to make is that homosexuals and heterosexuals commit sexual sin, and both need Jesus Christ. They are in need of a Saviour, no civil law banning homosexual marriage will help them. Only Jesus.

Bill

Anonymous said...

I don't remember Christ ever uttering a word against homosexuals. I also remember Christ being the most graceful to prostitutes. He made it very clear that prostitutes and tax collectors will enter the kingdom of heaven, ahead of religious leaders. Three women come to my mind, the woman at the well in John's gospel, the adulteress that Christ didn't allow to be stoned (by asking whoever is without sin to cast the first stone), and Mary Magdalene who was a prostitute and she loved so much because so much of her sin is forgiven. Christ had a soft heart for female prostitutes, and yet christians in the US have sanctioned some of the toughest laws against prostitution of any western country. This harsh laws do not reflect the christian spirit.

Prostitutes and homosexuals are the downtrodden in society, rejected, they already suffer enough and there's no need to add to their burden, through laws that limit their rights or criminalize their sexual behaviour.

Anonymous said...

This last post is also mine. forgot to sign it.

Bill

jazzact13 said...

The point is those that oppose homosexual marriage are hypocrites.

Yeah, sure, whatever.

Persecuting one group of sinners through the law (the homosexuals)

They aren't being presecuted through the law, they are simply not being granted special rights.

The point I'm trying to make is that homosexuals and heterosexuals commit sexual sin, and both need Jesus Christ.

Good, glad to hear that.

They are in need of a Saviour, no civil law banning homosexual marriage will help them.

And I would like to once again point out that, using that line of thinking, we may as well do away with all laws.

I don't remember Christ ever uttering a word against homosexuals.

Throwing out all the rest of the Bible say, of course.

I also remember Christ being the most graceful to prostitutes.

Can you show us where he said that being prostitute was ok?

Christ had a soft heart for female prostitutes, and yet christians in the US have sanctioned some of the toughest laws against prostitution of any western country.

So, are you now advocating for the legalizing of prostitution? Maybe have classes in high school on how to be a top-notch hooker?

Dead Theologians said...

jazzact13,

Thanks for all your posts. They have been refreshing.

I have been absolutely stunned at how liberal some of the comments have been.

But, if we are going to sell out the gospel for the social gospel then it all makes sense, huh?

BTW, I see that you play chess. Me to. Maybe we can meet up some day. I am just an average player but do love the game.

DT

jazzact13 said...

DT,

Thanks for your kind words. It's been an interesting discussion.

I'm kind of starting to stop being bowled over by how some people think, because it's become so prevalent.

Some have mocked the idea of the 'slippery slope', but we're again seeing confirmation that that is exactly what they are on. And now it seems like in order to make homosexuality ok, their willing to make prostitution legal.

Chess sounds good. I'm not a master at it, but I enjoy the game.

Anonymous said...

DT: "But, if we are going to sell out the gospel for the social gospel then it all makes sense, huh?"

Bill: No, it does not make sense. I may think legalized prostitution (where they are licensed, tested for STD's etc.) is OK. I may also think that gay marriage is no big deal. That being said I will not sell out the gospel for the social gospel, never. I consider Rick Warren is in apostacy, I consider nonsense Brian McLaren's comment that the substitutionary atonement is child abuse where God the Father abuses God the Son. I may be liberal in some political aspects, I'm no liberal when it comes to the gospel. Just like you I love the Reformation and detest the seeker sensitive, emerging theology.

Bill

jazzact13 said...

A bit ago, something was said about how the church didn't say much about things like abortion until recent times. I remembered reading a thing or two that said otherwise, but at that time didn't have access to them, or had forgotten what they were. I've found one of those sources, though, and want to give a bit from it here.

From "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Bible" by Robert Hutchinson, pp. 191-192
Another way in which human equality and the concept of fundamental human rights were reinforced was through the Christian ban against infanticide and abortion. Infanticide, which tended to be practice, then as now, disproportionately against female babies, was forbidden--as was abortion--precisely because life was viewed as a fundamental human right. In the Didache or "Teaching of the Twelve Apostles"--written in 70 AD and one fo the earliest Christian documents outside the New Testament--Christians are told that "you shall not procure [an] abortion, nor destroy a newborn child" (2:1-2). Many pagan commentators noticed this strange Christian refusal to kill children (a view also shared by Jews).

p. 84
Luther even denounced birth control and abortion long before they became widely practiced.

"How great, therefore, the wickedness of [fallen] human nature is! How many girls there are who prevent conception and kill and expel tender fetuses, although procreation is the work of God! Indeed, some spouses who marry and live together...have various ends in mind, but rarely children."

p. 82
The Jews--almost alone among ancient peoples--abhorred killing children. The Roman historian Tacitus actually condemned the Jews for their inexplicable opposition to infanticide. "It is a crime among them to kill any newly born infant, " he said, adding that they have a strange "passion for propagating their race." (Histories 5.5)

Anonymous said...

DT,

I have never commented on your blog before. This has been an interesting discussion and I am compelled to add my "two cents."

Abortion is murder. Nothing more or less. To me, for a Christian to vote for Obama is unthinkable. Any person who does not believe children have a right to live has no business ruling anything.

I believe four years from now America will be more than hip deep in the blood of our children because Obama is president. I see nothing good in the future for either America or Christians with this baby killing pagan running the nation.

That was my vent. But it is what I really believe.

John

Dead Theologians said...

John,

I am in full agreement with you. As I have said before. I understand that we can disagree on fiscal things but to disagree on these two issues is beyond giving
"liberty."

Thanks for your comment.
DT

LinkWithin

Blog Widget by LinkWithin