Friday, May 1, 2009
100 Days Of Change.....
A fellow Christian blogger DJ Black Adam has asked me on several occasions if I think Jesus would have been more pleased with McCain than Obama. My first instinct is to give a resounding heck yeah, but that would be awfully sophomoric and provincial of me because who really knows what is in the heart of a man? The best you can do is make a decision based on their respective voting records and stump speeches. Based on that alone, I am having an awfully difficult time reconciling how a person of faith (in the Lord Jesus Christ that is) could have cast a vote for Barack Obama.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
86 comments:
Same here CBW, if you look at scripture concerning gay marriage and abortion, the Bible is pretty clear on these fundamental principles of morality. I am extremely disillusioned with black America and and its inability to rise above racial politics and the past. This mans ascension was meant pave the way for some-type of quasi-messianic revolution that will never come. I maintain that 90%+ black folk voted for this individual because he is black, sorry, half black and liberal whites to assuage some perceived guilt. Blacks will pay for this disobedience, unfortunately Gods wrath will also fall on the just and we will suffer as a result of the foolish.
[quote]A fellow Christian blogger DJ Black Adam has asked me on several occasions if I think Jesus would have been more pleased with McCain than Obama. [/quote]
CBW:
My response would be more in line with focus on the masses and their condition after being exposed to competing theories of will-of-man-ism and conservationalism.
The first trap is to focus the argument upon either men. Both are flawed and in debating about them you only serve to stir up people's provincialism in this "politics as a team sport" society we live in.
It is my opinion that too many Christians pervert the notion of "serve the poor" and "judge not lest ye be judged" into a basic perversion of God's will. While there is no doubt that it is righteous to help those who are in need so that they won't suffer this is not what we are seeing.
It is my view that the overriding tenant in this evaluation is the notion that "God created man in his own image". Thus to put forth a dogma in which a person believe that he has moved "closer to God" based on the length of his soup line that wraps around the corner.
At least MY GOD would ask "what have you done to show these people the way to their full potential, just as I have created them?"
To see a man show up for 3 squares and get a warm feeling in your stomach that you helped him live another day and yet fail to note the 5th of Jack Daniels in his back pocket as he sips upon it morning noon and night lest you be JUDGMENTAL is, in my view a perversion of God's will.
You had a chance to confront the man about the bondage that has him away from his family, away from gainful employment and dependent upon your ability to ladle soup into his cup that you gave to him.
The damage of this dogma will be noted on the day that the soup kitchen shuts down and those who have become thankful consumers of all that they hand out for several years and have never developed any skills to make the food distribution a TRANSACTION of something of value flowing both ways.
Thus I would do an inspection of where our nation is going in regard to the element of God's will that would have us become fully developed human beings.
We are moving into a "Will Of Man" period in our existence as a people. Many of the social and cultural tenants that were settled and MANAGED through to the next generation will be reopened for abstract and theoretical debate.
Those who operate as "conservators" of that which has brought our society forth for thousands of years will have to JUSTIFY THEIR POSITIONS while the "Will Of Man-ers" will defend their positions based on RIGHTS and POPULAR WILL.
I do not believe that there will be any magical point at which the Earth will explode and all will be reset. Instead just as the natural environment of the Earth reacts to disruptive forces upon it and then goes into a long period of "icing" so is the case with the culture of man be pushed to the point where it destroys itself from its own excesses only to regenerate.
We will first LOSE the concept of the FUNCTION of our culture and then those who live beyond this point will have to construct a new one and defend it vigorously lest the same destruction return.
I think it's funny how conservatives corner the market on morality and God. If there was truly a God don't you think he'll be appalled at the hypocrisy of of the message of love most conservative Christians speak while they themselves push hate?
I'd like to think that if there were a God that he'd be a tad bit upset at the level of idolatry you folks have created with political identity and ideology.
I guess next I'm gonna hear is that God was a Republican. This is exactly what is wrong with religious fundamentalism and its marriage with politics in my opinion.
LOL
Rippa,
ON POINT.
I can certainly understand how a Christian would not bother voting for either obama or mccain but one thing is indisputable...No truly regenerate Christian should ever vote for someone like Obama....he simply holds to many anti christ positions....that is a no brainer...
Of course, if we could ever find a true conservative to run for our high office, then I will gladly support them...
The democrats are so radically left now, there simply is no option for a Christian there to support....and that is a shame to be sure.....
I cannot think of anything in Obama's ideology that one could construe as being biblical???
From the record spending of money we do not have to his gruesome support for abortion and the gay agenda.....
It is funny how this man has been able to hoodwink so many people...even people in the church.....
I can't imagine what the anti christ is going to be like???
Rippa~ You write "I think it's funny how conservatives corner the market on morality and God. If there was truly a God don't you think he'll be appalled at the hypocrisy of of the message of love most conservative Christians speak while they themselves push hate?"I am an unapologetic believer in the Lord Jesus Christ and my faith informs my world view to include my politic. That being said I do not posit that all conservative or all republican are moral nor do I posit that all liberals or all democrats are immoral. Liberal leftist like to hurl that accusation but it is far from true. However, as I stated in the post I have a difficult time reconciling how a committed person of faith (democrat or republican) could cast a vote for Barack Obama. Correct me if I'm wrong but I deduce from your comment that you are at best an agnostic so I don't hold you to the same standard as I would hold a professing christian. Why wouldn't you vote for Obama? God may or may not exist as far as you are concerned so how could His principles matter to you? But for Christians this isn't the case.
I'm not sure how it is that conservatives "push hate". Unless you consider it "hateful" that we believe marriage is a sacred rite (or at least its should be) a divine convenant between man, woman and God and not a civil right. Is it hateful to decrie the murder of the unborn, and believe God's word and that life begins at conception? If you don't believe these things...it's cool with me that's your perogative but why demonize people who have enough conviction to stand on their faith? You liberals are so not "liberal".
You also write:"I'd like to think that if there were a God that he'd be a tad bit upset level of idolatry you folks have created with political identity and ideology"
Rippa, that's laughable in light of the fact that black folks hold on to indentity politics for dear life and the DNC counts on that to garner and maintain power. But that being said I agree with you that those who are overly zealous on the right (or left) to the point of idolatry are pissing God off.
I'm sorry, maybe I should have asked you why would "God" be upset with you for voting for Obama?
I mean, he has yet to start a war sanctioned by "God" causing the loss of life and displacement of millions all based on a convenient lie for political expediency...
no?
You see, while you worry about the life of an unborn. The nihilistic agenda of the neoconservative movement through militarism has been in effect. But I'm guessing the fact that "those people" are of another faith makes it right with "God" and yourself...
no?
But since I never asked...
why would it be un-Godly or un-Christianlike, to vote for Barack Obama?
Rippa~ It is not possible to answer your question about why it is "unChristianlike" to have cast a vote for Barack Obama without addressing that he is by far the most pro-abortion President that we have ever had in history. He not only supports the goals of Planned Parenthood 100%, but he, unlike other pro-abortion politicians such as Kennedy, Clinton, Pelosi, even supports infanticide As a state senator, he opposed the Infant Born Alive Protection Act which protects babies who are mistakenly born alive after unsuccessful abortions. These babies are just left in hospital utility rooms to die which can take many hours. They are not fed or cared for in any way. Just left alone on a table…to die. He also believes partial birth abortion is a “legitimate medical procedure”. I find it truly incredulous that as a loving father Barack Obama opposes parental notification of minor girls before they have an abortion. He also told Planned Parenthood that “the first thing I’d do as president“ would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, which will overturn every local, state, and federal abortion law passed in the past 35 years. So the issue for isn't one of "choice" because abortions are legal but he is overturning state laws regarding abortions! Essentially those Christians who voted for Obama said ‘God, I believe some of your Word, but this guy promises change, so I will toss out what your Word clearly says about the homosexuality and the shedding of innocent blood because I am putting my hope and trust in this beautifully austere debonaire man instead of You because "Lawd" he's black and our time has come!'
I find it curiously however Rippa that you would lay all of the culpability for war on the shoulders of Neoconservatives when in fact it is congress who decides whether or not our nation engages in war. So I have compiled a list of democratic warmongers who have sanctioned war against "those" people:
"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Democrat Senators Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." – Clinton Secretary of State Madeline Albright, 1998
"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" – Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." –Democrat Sen Tom Daschle in 1998
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." – Democrat Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
Let me be clear,I am not pro-life. I am pro-innocent life. If someone threatens me or my family with bodily harm, I will gladly pop a cap in their behind or head I wouldn't care. If someone rapes and murders a defenseless child, I'll gladly inject the poison into your veins. If someone masterminds a plot to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings killing thousands, I will wholeheartly support any neoconservative or democrat member of Congress instructing our military to engage in bloody war with you. You see Rippa precisely because life is so precious to God, He decreed its preservation and protection by calling for the punishment of anyone who murders a bearer of His image:
Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will require it. And from every man, from every man's brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man. (Genesis 9:5-6)
@CBW, CF and all other Righties who "can't understand why" Christians voted for Barack and imply, infer and if not, out right state that the RIGHT has more reason for the votes of Christians than the LEFT:
This is bigger then "feeding the poor". The GOP are no better or worse than the Democrats. Neither has moral authority over the other, sure the GOP gives lip service to being against abortion, yet for all the time they had influence, since Gingrich, all they did was use that as an excuse to not give aid to foreign nations, a way to forward their cold hearted and clearly ANTICHRIST policy of NOT aiding the widow OR the orphan.
That may be a little thing to you, it is expressed throughout scripture, as a VERY big thing to God. Minimize it at YOUR OWN RISK.
The LEFT and the RIGHT are both ideologies of MEN, each has their principles that line up with the Gospel of the Kingdom NEITHER line up enough with the Gospel of the Kingdom to demand that a CHRISTIAN support them.
All the right has done, is Jedi-mind tricked Christians into supporting their hypocrisy.
Further, you all do a disservice to the Gospel to making it simply about who "says" they are against abortion and / or gay marriage, while conveniently ignoring the fact that before you call the WORLD out on anything, you needs be call those who CLAIM TO SHARE your faith, to HOLD ITS PRINCIPLES and not turn people away from the Gospel by their lipservice followed by ACTIONS contrary to the message of the Gospel of the Kingdom of God.
And I heard a PREACHER say: "# And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." Matthew 7:3-5
Guess you Christian Reich or RIGHT wingers missed that lesson in Sunday school....
It is ONE THING to choose the "RIGHT's" candidate based on your personal convictions, QUITE define anyone elses Christianty predicated on the FACT you choose your flawed human ideology over the other.
Oh Rippa,
You hit the nail on the head.
What baffles me is that it seems the reasoning some folks are conservative is not based upon fiscal policy, actual view points, but clearly just religion.
You can be liberal and still love God. You can be faithless and still be a righteous and moral person. I would like to think I am a good person not because "God Told Me". I would hope most people's reasoning for being loving and compassionate go beyond that. You can be religious and be the most cruelest harshest of human beings.
From the record spending of money we do not have to his gruesome support for abortion and the gay agenda.....Yes he has made a massive push to support abortion and the gay agenda. That is major sarcasm. Obama is trying to fix the economy, the flawed education system, and everything else under the sun that your so called religious brethren (W. Bush) jacked up.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I deduce from your comment that you are at best an agnostic so I don't hold you to the same standard as I would hold a professing christian. Of course not non believers are beneath you. I love has you act as an ambassador of God, but yet, aren't you like everyone else a sinner? Isn't that what Jesus died on the Cross for? Why would we use sinners to spread the word of the all knowing and all wonderful God? It's like getting pedophiles to speak in schools to children about why what they do is bad.
I also find it strange that you don't want us to assume conservatives are all the same, while you make gross assumptions about liberals.
y. He not only supports the goals of Planned Parenthood 100%, but he, unlike other pro-abortion politicians such as Kennedy, Clinton, Pelosi, even supports infanticide As a state senator, he opposed the Infant Born Alive Protection Act which protects babies who are mistakenly born alive after unsuccessful abortions. These babies are just left in hospital utility rooms to die which can take many hours. They are not fed or cared for in any way. Just left alone on a table…to die. He also believes partial birth abortion is a “legitimate medical procedure”.
So you read everything you believe? I will say this, as a woman who just recently lost her baby girl at 20 weeks gestation, this Born-Alive Infants Protection Act does not protect babies. The majority of partial birth abortions are not for a teenager to get rid of a healthy viable child, but to terminate a pregnancy in which the child has died or would cause harm or death to the mother.
At 20 weeks my child, no matter how much I loved her and treated her as the person she was, she wouldn't live. She couldn't live, my womb could not contain her. Call me a murderer, a child killer, or so be it, to see the suffering I caused her for being born to early, I couldn't do that to another person. She suffered, and to keep her alive any longer than necessary would have been the cruelest most unforgiving thing I could have done. I gave her as much love and comfort as I could for the 15 minutes of life she had. Your act would want me to make her suffer as long as possible. She had zero chance of survival, why make her suffer? My hospital gave her comfort care to ease her suffering, they didn't extend it.If that is murder, so be it.
By the way I didn't induce labor, my pregnancy ended as a result of incompetent cervix, which means I went into labor on my own.
That act is to take a stand for religion, not the babies.
DJ Black Adam,"Guess you Christian Reich or RIGHT wingers missed that lesson in Sunday school....
It is ONE THING to choose the "RIGHT's" candidate based on your personal convictions, QUITE define anyone elses Christianty predicated on the FACT you choose your flawed human ideology over the other."So it looks like you asked the question just so you could berate CW for answering it.
Classy.
CW,You know, you could just erase DJBA's comment, based on his 'insolent tone' - he probably wouldn't kick up a big fuss, given that it's SOP over @ his place.
- MuscleDaddy
"You voted for Obama, how could you call yourself a christian!??"
I just love it when Cristians pontificate about who's a "real" Cristian. Christians are soooo tolerant! LOL!
Sorry, but merely saying you don't want to show your provincialism doesn't mean you're demonstrating it -- in spades.
Thankfully, this is not a theocratic society. We have long ago shook off the shackles of religious fundamentalism.
THANK YOU! LOL
In addition, we no longer live in a world where superstition trumps reason. Though fundies would like us all to go back to such times.
I would suggest that if anyone is interested in living in a theocratic society where authoritarianism is the rule, there are quite a few such nations in the mid east that satisfy the unconstitutional desire to bring us to the caves. SMH
WAIT! did someone insist on removing someone's response here because they didn't like their tone?!!
LMAO!!
Say it ain't so!
This is why empirical studies show that at the core of political conservatism is resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and common psychological factors that include:
* Fear and aggression
* Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity
* Uncertainty avoidance
* Need for cognitive closure
* Terror management
Richard Graves~As I stated I don't believe that Rupublicans have a corner on the morality market. Neither do I believe that Republicans are any more or less Christian than Democrats. This is a "Christ-thing" not a "partisan-thing".
Your contention with me is that you feel I have defined some one else's Christianty predicated on the FACT I choose your flawed human ideology. Well, that's intellectually fraudulent my friend. I reject human ideology and stand on the written Word of God. What I have done is just what you wrote SHOULD be done. YOU wrote:"you need[s] be call those who CLAIM TO SHARE your faith, to HOLD ITS PRINCIPLESWell, that's what I'm doing! That's precisely the reason I have a problem with those who share my faith, I believe that they did not hold to the principles of God. I am not saying they aren't Christians,neither I am I saying they they don't love the Lord. I just believed those Christians who supported Barack Obama and cast a vote for him chose to use YOUR words "flawed human ideology"" over Christ. If implicit in that you read that I feel I never sin, or miss God then you are mistaken. I more often than is comfortable to admit chose to do that which I know will be displeasing to the Lord. Why? Because at those times I am more interested in pleasing myself. Likewise Christians who voted for Barack Obama were more interested in pleasing themselves than the Lord...But, that doesn't mean that they have forsaken Christ and left the faith.
You may believe that the Bush administration used abortion counseling as an excuse to withhold aid, I personally do not believe that. I don't believe tax dollars should be used to exterminate human life either here or abroad. God has given us freewill, so women are free to choose whether or not to terminate their pregancies but I don't want to aid and abet in that effort and I applaud the Bush Administration to holding firm in that area.
Siddity~You write:"What baffles me is that it seems the reasoning some folks are conservative is not based upon fiscal policy, actual view points, but clearly just religion.' Clearly you are new to this blog because I have a veritable laundry list of reasons why I identify with conservatism that have nothing to do with my faith.
You write:"Yes he has made a massive push to support abortion and the gay agenda. That is major sarcasm.". Siddity, did you watch the posted video? If so, I question how you can sarcastically suggest that Pres. Obama has made a massive push to support abortion--because HE HAS.
You also write:...believers are beneath you. I love [has] you act as an ambassador of God, but yet, aren't you like everyone else a sinner? Isn't that what Jesus died on the Cross for? Why would we use sinners to spread the word of the all knowing and all wonderful God? It's like getting pedophiles to speak in schools to children about why what they do is bad."
I don't believe that non-Christians are "beneath" me. But why would I expect someone who does not believe in God or His Holy Word to follow it? Oh, I see you expect me to be like "liberals" and demonize anyone who doesn't see the world the way I do.
As a matter of fact I do consider myself an ambassador of Christ because the Bible says that all Christians are in 2 Corinthians 5:20 We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God.. Now why God would choose lowly man to communicate His message in the world is an issue you will have to take up with Him.
Lastly, I am deeply sorry for the loss of your baby. However, the suggestion that the Born-Alive Infant Protection act is about imposing extreme life saving efforts to save the child is false. It is simply about considering the child a Child, a human-being, a homo sapien. The reason this bill was drafted is because some believe most notably Peter Singer, a bioethicist from Princeton University that parents should have the right to decide to kill their disabled or unhealthy newborn babies within 28 days of birth. Singer reasons from a utilitarian perspective that a fetus at a gestational age up to late in the second trimester has no capacity to suffer or feel satisfaction. The higher functions in the fetal brain simply have not developed sufficiently. Thus, in his "esteemed" opinion it is not possible for such a fetus to hold any preferences at all. He believes that if the woman prefers to have an abortion, then termination of the pregnancy is morally permissible. Using a similar argument, he suggests that newborns similarly lack certain essential characteristics of personhood: "... rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness" Thus, he writes, "... simply killing an infant is never equivalent to killing a person.". In rare cases, a fetus may have a fatal deformity, (e.g. anencephaly or lack of a brain), but is still born alive. Other fetuses which are normal but are born at 22 weeks or less gestation also show signs of life. In both situations, they have zero chance of surviving long-term. No treatment is possible for their condition. Most hospitals have a policy to give these newborns comfort care. This involves keeping the them warm and well fed. They treat any discomfort that the newborn is experiencing. They typically die within a few hours or perhaps a day or two. But, if the prevailing thought in the land is that these infants are not human (and some people see it that way) then it is not inconceivable that these children will be placed on a table to expire without any intervention. Why do you think Barack Obama would be opposed to this bill?
[quote]@CBW, CF and all other Righties who "can't understand why" Christians voted for Barack and imply, infer and if not, out right state that the RIGHT has more reason for the votes of Christians than the LEFT[/quote]
Richard Graves:
I seem to have missed the point in MY OWN WRITING where I expressed bewilderment about how a Christian could vote for Obama.
Do you mind pointing me to this?
In the mean time let me fill you in with what I do believe.
I have the audacity of pointing out a people's PERMANENT INTERESTS. These might be in the auspices of a "Christian", "A Black person", a "worker" and so on. I then begin to inspect the question surrounding their interests in relation to their voting patterns. Here is were the most conflict is found Mr Graves.
On a related note - I just ran across an interview by Kanye West in which he says that he doesn't believe in Jesus as a Savior:
http://bossip.com/76535/exclusive-pt-1-kanye-religion-is-like-branding/
So in this case, rather than JUDGE Mr West I would be inclined to ask those who listen to him and profess themselves to be Christians if they are inclined to take intimate direction from a man who doesn't believe in that which they believe in.
Ok, CBW if you want say it I will. All the liberal left wing blacks who voted for Obama are not Christians. As far as I am concerned they are reprobate and Romans 1 details in how liberals believe.
"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
God said many would come in my name, but go not after them, you black liberals couldn't wait to cast your vote for this reprobate who you call your messiah. You liberals have no Holy Book or God to turn to in times of trouble, but yet when you are stricken with something, my Saviors name is the first thing out of your wicked mouths, that is why you are vain in your imaginations and hate the one true God.
If you were to read the Bible in its entirety, it mentions abomination and the fornication of the beast. You really have no idea of the power and majesty of the one true God, because you have hardened your hearts. Those who war against the Lamb will number in the billions and "the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshiped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
El whatever your name is, The fool has said in his heart, there is no God. I've went to college with many liberals like you who feel the only way to succeed is to deny the existence of God to curry favor with other reprobates, this earthly existence is but a blink in the eye of the Lord, you and your foolish thoughts and ways will turn to dust and then you will be called before God for Judgment, none of your foolish and vain philosophies will save you.
CBW if you feel this post is to personal I will understand if you delete, but this is how I approach life no matter who is standing before me, I will not deny God, who died for my sins that I may have life and have it more abundantly. I do not wish to be with or like any of these liberals who will face the ultimate judgment, that even Obama will not able to save them, because he will be Judged according to his works as well, and it aint looking good right now!
El Nuyorican~It is clear that you need to work on your reading comprehension skills. Or perhaps you posted your rant before reading all of the comments. For the record, I do not maintain that one is not a Christian if they voted for Barack Obama. I also do not moderate or delete comments...EVER.
I'm sorry that you have such a low opinion of Christian people. It's not your fault--you have come to a very logical conclusion as most of us have not been the beacons of light in the world that we are called to be which is the real point of this post. However, if you preceive that my unapologetic, unyielding radical radical faith in the Lord Jesus Christ -- provencial then good I should have known it would manifests itself in "spades".
However you write:"
In addition, we no longer live in a world where superstition trumps reason. Though fundies would like us all to go back to such times."
Are you of the opinion that those who believe in God are superstitious and unreasonable? It seems that many of the world' s finest minds hold this view, however, the Bible which I believe to be the inerrant inspired word of God teaches that it is the fool who says there is no God.
Further, I would argues that at its core Christianity is rational and reasonable.
Regarding your "empirical" studies that conclude that show "that at the core of political conservatism is resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and common psychological factors that include:
* Fear and aggression
* Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity
* Uncertainty avoidance
* Need for cognitive closure
* Terror management"
First of all, I can live with all of those descriptions. But, this Berkeley study which you have referenced is nothing more than re-hashed misinformation on the last 50 years of conservative-bashing in the psychology literature. The Berkeley group seems to have given little or no weight to the fact that psychologists are overwhelmingly Leftist and so lean over backwards to find fault with conservatives. In other words, a survey of biased “science” has just produced more biased “science”! But again I think they pretty much pegged me.
However what you fail to realize is that liberalism is a mindset just as conservatism is a mindset. While most liberals have no true goals or agendas for their beliefs, those in position to affect public policy often do have such goals. The average "Joe" liberal is but a pawn in the ongoing struggle between socialism and freedom. Those in power on the left know that our system of representative democracy enables them to pursue their socialist or collectivist (call it what ever you want) agenda by winning over the majority of the voting public to their positions and candidates. They are well aware that most people have little time or inclination to study about or give great thought to important matters of the day. Instead, large numbers of voters cast their ballots based purely on emotional terms ... the very heart of liberalism's appeal. Now, one could argue that the average conservative is no less a pawn for those on the right.
Yet, by definition, a conservative arrives at his beliefs through the process of critical thought afterall aren't we are dogmatic, intolerant of ambiguity and need cognitive closure by your definition. It's much harder to make a pawn out of someone who needs cognitive closure wouldn't you say? As such, conservatives are much less likely to be swayed by wrong-headed proposals even should they be offered up as "conservative". Most conservatives will weigh issues and solutions on their individual merits and only then decide if they are worthy of support.
@Richard Graves
Richard, you said:"The GOP are no better or worse than the Democrats. Neither has moral authority over the other, sure the GOP gives lip service to being against abortion, yet for all the time they had influence, since Gingrich, all they did was use that as an excuse to not give aid to foreign nations, a way to forward their cold hearted and clearly ANTICHRIST policy of NOT aiding the widow OR the orphan."
Don't know how closely you follow scripture, but here goes...keep in mind that all through the old and new testament, when God tells his people to feed the poor, widow, and orphan, those are commandments of a direct, personal nature. Meaning "WE" you and me. Personal conduct towards those you mentioned. God never doled out the responsibility to government. He tells us WE are to purposefully do this thing. It implies that we are to get involved with those who are less fortunate. Not dole out the duty to a large federal government. The personal interaction that results from individuals assisting the less fortunate is superior to a set-up that allows someone to get a check or other assistance from a nameless, faceless, system. Among other things, one-on-one individual interaction with those who are less fortunate whether by lifestyle choices or through no fault of their own is a blessing to, and transforms both parties involved. It encourages personal responsibility to those are are poor because of lifestyle and poor decisions, and lets the widow, orphan, etc. know that someone cares for them. It is easier to have our government take on the task of doing this, but it wasn't God's intention. When our tax dollars are automatically taken(not all of our taxes are going for this purpose, but you know what I mean)it is no longer us giving out of our own will, or out of obedience to God, it is forced giving...Another thing, the bible doesn't instruct the king of any nation to be responsible for the welfare of the citizens of another nation does it? It's possible I've missed this if it does ever instruct to do that. I't possible you will blame the poverty of other nations on America and the West in general, but the inability of many poverty stricken nations to produce honest, visionary leadership is the root of their problems. Many cling to socialist economic and political structures or resort to re-distributionist policies that ensures societal failure. (Mugabe in Zimbabwe for instance) BTW, America, regardless of which party held the whitehouse, gives billions in aid to poor nations.
[quote]God never doled out the responsibility to government.[/quote]
You are too correct on this one.
I heard poet Maya Angelou say "A corporation that has given money to a charity for the purposes of a tax break has NOT given charitably because charity is the acknowledgment that you have excess and you CHOOSE to give it to someone else in need."
As I sat in a room full of dressed up Black folks who clapped wildly at her comments I noticed that her birthday event had been sponsored by Delta Air Lines, Coca Cola and UPS.
I began to think of the "right wing" photographic negative of her comments:
A Social Justice Advocate who seek to use a nation's TAX LAWS to take money from those who have and transfer it to THOSE WHO NEED has NOT done an act of charity EITHER for charitable giving comes from a PERSON who has the choice to do many things with his money and yet he chooses to give it in the name of charity.With taxes if you CHOOSE to not give to this "charity" the government forces will come to your house and FORCE your donation.
I think Wesley Snipes saw this recently
Here is another perspective of the 100 Days:
http://www.jasmynecannick.com/blog/?p=5083&cpage=1
Now That the National Holiday of Obama’s First 100 Days Is Over…by Jasmyne Cannick
"Look—I am just as delighted as everyone is who supported the election of President Barack Obama that we’ve got a brotha, a sista, their daughters, and a grandma in the White House, but let’s not go cuckoo for Cocoa Pops people.
"The nation—no make that world—was affixed on President Obama’s first 100 days of reign to the point that days before the Big Day, all news, local and national, pointed east to the nation’s Capitol. Which in theory, I don’t really have a problem with IF we do the same on the local level.
"Yeah I know—here that b***h goes with that local level s**t again—and you know what, you’re right. And I am going to stay on the local level as long as it takes.
"I cram to understand our fixation with what the President is doing when we can’t turn the same attention to what’s going on right in our city.
"Yes it’s been 100 days since we sent President George Bush packing and rolled out the red carpet for the Obamas. And in that 100 days, Los Angeles continues to be plagued with gang violence and homicides, our state’s budget is beyond repair, and don’t even get me started on our dilapidated public school system. In a few short weeks, we’ll be headed to polls to add more taxes on top of the new taxes that were just legislated, yet and still we have the audacity to be celebrating President Obama’s first 100 days.
"I was afraid of this happening. I was afraid that once Black Americans saw the election of a Black man to the presidency that any chance of us focusing on what’s going on at home in our city and state would be overshadowed by the fact that, 'we got a Black president now' mentality. As if, all is well with Black people.
"How about we get together for the first 100 days of the new session of the Legislature and discuss whether we’re happy with the new taxes forced on us? Better yet, how about we get together after the first 100 days of the new school year to address how we’re feeling about the way our children are being educated in our public school system? Maybe after the first 100 students dropout this year we could meet to see what’s really going on. Ooh ooh, I know—what say you to getting together after the first 100 shootings in our neighborhood between rival gang members to figure out what can really be done to end this s**t once and for all?
"Yes, I went there and now I am going here.
"Do you know why your rent went up?
"It’s not because your landlord is a greedy *******—ok I could be wrong on that. It’s not only because your landlord is a greedy *******, but when property taxes are raised, who do you think the landlord is going to pass the cost off to? You.
"Underpaid, unemployed, welfare receiving, Section 8 having, Food Stamp using, you.
"You, who just registered to vote for the first time in 2008 but haven’t been back to the polls since then, even though there’s been two elections in the past several months.
"You, who couldn’t tell me who represents you in city council or the State Legislature to save your life, but can tell me everything about what Obama has done in the last 100 days in office.
"You, who hasn’t visited your child’s school since the last time you were a student there but yet and still want to bitch and complain about your child’s report card.
"You, who wants to be out on the corner hustling Obama t-shirts and memorabilia screaming, 'we gots us a Black president now—get your t-shirt!' but isn’t even registered to vote.
"You who rolls around in your 2009 BMW with your 'Obama Biden' bumper sticker, and a matching lawn sign on your neatly manicured greens that belong to the house you rent on top of that hill looking down on everyone else, but won’t donate some chump change to the local candidate running to represent you, your Beamer, and that castle you call a home.
"Yeah, you.
"And that’s just one example of what’s wrong with Black people’s fixation on all things Obama and our ignorance when it comes to the what’s going on in our very own backyard.
"Let me tell you that the Obama’s sleep well at night. There’s no loud *** ghetto bird hovering over their neighborhood with a bright *** light shining at all hours of the night.
"The Obama’s eat well everyday and don’t have to decide whether or not to go to KFC for chicken because it’s cheaper than buying the ingredients to make the same meal at home.
"And I seriously doubt there’s any question about the quality of education that their daughters are receiving.
"Can you say the same? I didn’t think so.
"I may follow President Obama’s every move, but I’m an equal opportunity cynic. I do the same for those who represent me locally. I’ve got enough pessimism to spread around.
"What’s it going to take to get that message through to the hood, that what happens locally affects us directly and faster than anything coming out of Washington? How come that message isn’t being drilled into our psyches in the manner that vote for Obama was?"
The fact that so many people of strong faith in the Lord Jesus did cast that vote for him (statistically it was quite a few) troubles me all the time. The only thing I can think of is that not only has the Enemy deceived many, many people, but also that many people must go for the "feel-good" person of the moment rather than truly voting biblical values.
Thank you, CBW for your point of view. It seems that many think that all afri-amer people vote and think the same. It is healthy for us to be able to think differently. Thank you for expressing your view on this issue & on the Word.
People who 'step out of the box' face much unkind remarks from those who do not have the courage to do so. Thank you for your courage, historical quotes & stand on the Word.
Signed 'in agreement with you' & another CBW
I am a Believer [I leave the title of Christian], to all you wanna be's very, and I mean very few of you are Christ like. I voted for Obama and would do it again in a heart beat. I believe in pro-choice when it comes to abortion and a womans right to choose. Woman are raped and impregnated by the rapiest. What, they are expected to suck it up, and keep the child?
I don't see you churched folks complaining nor standing outside of a clinic when a man gets a vasectomy~~How is that ANY different from abortion? In fact it should be considered by the Churched to be EVEN MORE detremental.
I could care less about same sex marriages [whatever makes them happy] I'm all for it. A persons sexual orientation is between their legs and between them and God~~~In other words "Mind your business".
The church needs to get out of folks bedrooms, sex lives, and STAY OUT!! You wanna tell people what positions and what they can and cannot do in the bedroom. Next the Churched will be calling tongs a sin...
Hell, the church itself is full of undercover homosexuals and gays and has been since BC [you probably have a few beating tamborines, and praying down heaven up in your own local church]. Heck, most them are in leadership positions buy you'll support it on Any Give Sunday, but yet the churched seem to turn a blind eye to that, cause Gods got them. The churched can be so hypocritical.
Has the Churched considered that infants can be male & female outwardly and yet have a total diffent cormozone make-up inwardly? Has the church considered that some infants are born both male and female, with both sex organs? I believe the world calls them hermafordites. Is is not the Churched that is quick to hollar that God doesn't make mistakes? AND HE DOESN'T~~LETS NOT FORGET THAT!!
So what happened in their cases? And don't say they don't exist because I grew up with someone who had a child born like that~~~And by the way, her and her HUSBAND are and were both Christian when they made that child.
I have not found one of you that wanna stand against Adultry and and have a law placed on the books about that. Yes, there is an adultry Law, we have one in Connecticut. [moving on]
"Thou shalt not kill" ~~You churchy churched folks are the biggest killers on the planet, via that smallest member in your mouth that cannot be tamed. You spew hate, not Gods love, not His mercy nor His compassion and definately not His Grace...And you wonder why "The Salt of the Earth" cannot win the "lost"....It's because many of you are the Lost, yourselves.
You are so spiritual, "UNTIL, you are of not Earthly Good".
Mans looks on the outter but God looks on the heart~~~
You my dear, do don't know the heart of Obamma, McCain, nor anyone else....And if you're thinking, "Actions speak louder than words", then I would say, "That aint scripture, period." Let's not forget that Moses was a murderer!
The Churched, spends more time mummering and complaining than any of you do praying, and fasting. Now in accordance to the Bible, it is the CHURCH that is responsible for the things going on in World, not the world. Why? Because you fail AND CONTINUE TO FAIL too pray without seasing.
The [Bible] has told you that one can put 100 to flight, and two can put 10,000 flight...Hell, if all you churched folks were praying like yu should be, the world should be in state of total Bliss. My question is, why is the Church not touching and agreeing?
Simply, because the church itself is divided and full of crap!
Cyndee~Do all liberals have reading comprehension problems? You write:"You my dear, do don't know the heart of Obamma, McCain, nor anyone else....And if you're thinking,"
However in my original post I explicitly stated:" who really knows what is in the heart of a man? The best you can do is make a decision based on their respective voting records and stump speeches"You might want to take a look at the scriptures because although the phrase "actions speak louder than words" isn't found anywhere in the Bible, it does express a very biblical principle. In fact James 1:22 says "Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says."Professing Christians are supposed to believe God's word is true and act on it. I'm sorry if you feel that I am "unChristlike" because I can't support Barack Obama the "High Priest of the culture of Death"...Yes, I said and and I will not back down. Barack Obama never met a culture of death program he didn`t like; he supports abortion, partial birth abortion, allowing babies born as a result of a botched abortion to die in the trash, he wants embryonic stem-cell research (in which embryos-nascent human beings-are carved up like cattle at a butcher`s shop for their stem-cells) despite the fact that adult stem-cells have proven more effective for treatments and that we can now turn adult cells into embryonic stem cells, thus eliminating the need to clone and butcher children.
He had this to say about attempts to legalize physician-assisted suicidephysician-assisted suicide:
"I am in favor of palliative medicine in circumstances where someone is terminally ill. … I’m mindful of the legitimate interests of states to prevent a slide from palliative treatments into euthanasia. On the other hand, I think that the people of Oregon did a service for the country in recognizing that as the population gets older we’ve got to think about issues of end-of-life care. …“While Obama plays it close and safe to the vest, he does not condemn the concept of euthenasia per se. His answer suggests that he would accept a middle ground. How do you accept a middle ground, where life is concerned?
BTW, I don't care what two consenting adults do with their lives. As I stated in an earlier comment God gives us free-will-- so do what you do that's between you and God. However, marriage is a divine covenant between man, woman and God. It is clear, that the Bible condemns homosexuality as an immoral and unnatural sin. Leviticus 18:22 identifies homosexual sex as an abomination, a detestable sin. Romans 1:26-27 declares homosexual desires and actions to be shameful, unnatural, lustful, and indecent. First Corinthians 6:9 states that homosexuals are unrighteous and will not inherit the kingdom of God. Since both homosexual desires and actions are condemned in the Bible, it is clear that homosexuals “marrying” is not God’s will.
Whenever the Bible mentions marriage, it is between a man and a woman. The first mention of marriage, Genesis 2:24, describes it as a man leaving his parents and being united to his wife. In passages that contain instructions regarding marriage, such as 1 Corinthians 7:2-16 and Ephesians 5:23-33, the Bible clearly identifies marriage as being between a man and a woman.
Now that being said I don't expect those who do not hold to the teachings of the Bible to give a flying fig about what it says but because I am a believer in the Bible and I believe in "faith in action" I do not support same-sex marriage. Especially in light of the fact that civil unions offer the very same protections under the law.
Cyndee, I'm sure you are a believer, but not in Christ, your secular view of the world has tainted and perverted your view of the Christianity. I dare you to agree with everything written in the Bible, you can't therefore you are a unbeliever and you only believe in what can see and hear, which is obama. Woe unto the man who addedth or taketh away from the Word of the Lord. I really don't know what has motivated such unbelief in the black community and then you think if you go to church and sit a spell you will be saved. Sorry dear, your reward is waiting on you for your unbelief - enjoy!
@Muscle:
You declined my grace, I decline to debate with cretins who don't know how to be good guest.
@Ziggy:
For the people BY the people, don't all convienently start acting like you reich or right wingers aren't trying to legislate "personal" morality, or is it the right only cares about other peoples bedrooms and not their refrigerators in their kithens?
@CBW & CF:
Again, as horible as abortion is, supporting executions of criminals at the expense of the innocent that ultimately will be executed in a flawed human system is just as bad. Allowing the poor and the widow and the orphan to be exploited as you demand they be born, is hypocritical at BEST.
DJBA,Convenient for you that the rest of us don't take that approach, no?
...allows you to be as churlish as you wanna be.
-MD
...oh, and supporting a system that could or may unintentionally take an innocent life (at least as far as that's even possible with an adult) is "just as bad" as the purposeful and intentional wholesale-slaughter of innocent life?
Damn, baby - talk about 'Flawed'.
- MD
I'm a Christian who is against abortion (a theoretical life to some) but is more concerned with those who are known to be alive.
I voted FOR Obama because abortion wasn't the only issue for which I was concerned.
[quote] I voted for Obama and would do it again in a heart beat.[/quote]
Cyndee - it is ironic that after 100 days you are telling us of your plans to vote for Obama once again without any knowledge of how YOUR BEST INTERESTS are going to be advanced in the next 3 years and 265 days.
Some people would call this intrangesence. What would you call it?
[quote]I believe in pro-choice when it comes to abortion and a womans right to choose. Woman are raped and impregnated by the rapiest. What, they are expected to suck it up, and keep the child? [/quote]
Cyndee - what percentage of abortions originate from rape or incest? In committing to this argument you say nothing about the much larger domain of terminated babies which derive from consensual sex and an unwanted child.
I am technically "Pro-Choice" only because while I do believe that abortion destroys the life of a being that would become a child if not molested in the womb I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD STEP IN AND PROSECUTE A WOMAN with regard to such an intimate topic.
It is the job of the CULTURE and COMMUNITY ORDER to reduce the situations in which this 'choice' needs to be made, implementing the appropriate constructs to do so. Far far fewer married couples abort their children.
It is amazing to me how the varied CONTEXT affords the news of a pregnancy brings JOY to a man and woman while the same news in a different context triggers the question "Are you going to keep it? Is it mine?"
[quote]I don't see you churched folks complaining nor standing outside of a clinic when a man gets a vasectomy~~How is that ANY different from abortion?[/quote]
Cyndee this is a DUMB question.
Why do you even put the onus on "Church Folks"?
What about the 2 individuals that have been given the gifts of the tools for PROCREATION? While we know your expectations for "churged folks" I have not heard you mention any particular RESPONSIBILITY for them?
If a person stops going to church is he removed from your set of expectations?
Why do YOU apply these expectations to a CHURCH?
What alternative institutions will you promote as having these same EXPECTATIONS placed upon the "unchurched"?
Why not the dance club that they go to weekly? What obligation should be put upon these entities which prove more popular among those who are SEXUALLY ACTIVE? Don't they broadcast MESSAGES just as a church does?
[quote]I don't see you churched folks complaining nor standing outside of a clinic when a man gets a vasectomy~~How is that ANY different from abortion?[/quote]
Cyndee this is a DUMB question.
NO IT IS NOT, possible you just don't get it! It takes the cells in sperm to impregnate an egg...Does it not? A mans choice to have a vasectomy "in occordance to you Holier Than Thou rollers", Also, COULD NOT, possible be within the will of God's either. Does not the Bible clearly state, "Be fruitful and multiply." A males choice to have a vasectomy should be viewd by you churchy folk's as "Abortion at it's highest level!"
The issue I have with the churched is that you only have one view, which is often a highly warped view. You are totally incaple of thinking or forming an independant thought outside of what's "boxed".
---->Cyndee~Do all liberals have reading comprehension problems?
However in my original post I explicitly stated:" who really knows what is in the heart of a man? The best you can do is make a decision....
The key word in what you stated was "the heart of a man?"...Which is why I stated what stated
----> "You my dear, do don't know the heart of Obamma, McCain, nor anyone else....<-----
And as the free thinking Believer that I am, obviously you did not believe what you wrote, yourself. If you honestly did, you would have never been hit post, simple as that.
@Muslcedaddy:
"DJBA,Convenient for you that the rest of us don't take that approach, no?"
Sorry, I may "disagree" with a blog host, rarely do I disrespect them, two entirely different things. You don't have to respect me, BUT, I don't have to deal with you on my bandwith.
And as for unintentional in regards to a flawed Criminal Justice system with corruption from the police to the jduges, I guess its always funny TIL it happens to you.
DJBA,Right - of course, we've already determined that "Disrespect" = "Insolent Tone" for you... or rather, when it's directed TOWARD you.
On the other hand, setting our 'host' up with such a "question" as that the act of "answering" it would automatically be to "define anyone elses Christianty", and hence allow you to derisively shout her down - somehow doesn't seem to trip your 'disrespect-meter' - odd, that.
As to 'unintentional' versus 'intentional', I submit to you that the while the Criminal Justice System requires 'flaws' and 'corruption' (or even incompetence, I'm handing you that one) in order for an innocent life to be lost...
The whole slaughter of *literally* millions of the most innocent lives every year is, conversely, the defining indicator of an Abortion System that is working both perfectly and precisely as designed and intended.
The only thing I find "funny" is your attempts at drawing an equivalence between the two.
- MuscleDaddy
uptownsteve,Nice.
Tell me, how far is it to the next step of:
'...if your "deliverer" does not look *enough* like you'?
Because you know there are already people out here who feel that BHO looks/sounds "too White" to 'really' be black.
Just askin' - since you sound like the authority and all.
- MuscleDaddy
@Muscle:
Choosing to be pro-life is choosing to be pro-life. What I find funny is that Right wingers can only muster up concern for the theoretcial "lives" unborn ... That is relatively easy. It requires spiritual fruit to be able to have MERCY for the guilty or have concern for those who are innocent and wrongfully accused.
You are a typical right winger, claiming a moral authority on sound foundations which are liquid at best.
And sorry, I am pretty straight forward, I don't do passive agressive, my question to CBW was clear and direct, as right wingers are notorious for defining Christianity in their exclusive political views (not theologically). I asked her to clarify, as for you, your colors are quite clear.
As for your "insolent tone", THAT was a joke, until that is, it appears you have shown you actually DO have an insolent tone, wonders never cease.
"Because you know there are already people out here who feel that BHO looks/sounds "too White" to 'really' be black."
And most of those people are pinhead righties who don't know jack about black folks.
One of the posters here who calls himself "Jules Fennellon" said that I could not possibly be black because I used the word "knickers".
Now back to the issue.
Christians of color are the only folks in the world who worship a God who bears no resemblence to themselves.
What's wrong with THAT picture.
I once put a picture of black Jesus in my cubicle when I was in the Coast Guard.
Many of my co-workers had religious symbols and pictures on or around their desks.
A lieutenant ordered me to take it or he would court martial me.
I asked "on what charges"?
He screamed "Take it down, that is a direct order."
So I guess the charge would have been disobeying a direct order by a superior officer.
uptownsteve,"And most of those people are pinhead righties who don't know jack about black folks."Quite so - but I was referring to those who hail from the ranks of 'black folks'.
"Christians of color are the only folks in the world who worship a God who bears no resemblence to themselves."Um...Hinduism?about 837 Million of them.
Have you considered that you might be 'left waiting' if you ignore salvation that comes in a form you don't find personally pleasing to your ego?
Seriously - no snark intended.
- MuscleDaddy
DJBA,.
"What I find funny is that Right wingers can only muster up concern for the theoretcial "lives" unborn ... That is relatively easy."Something just over 1 million people per year would seem to disagree with you.
"You are a typical right winger, claiming a moral authority on sound foundations which are liquid at best."Um...no.
I'm a typical stickler-for-detail, noting that you're trying to draw a moral-equivalence between one system that must-needs be 'broken' in order to take an innocent life - and another that takes innocent lives by design.
The old less-than-perfect-is-every-bit-as-bad-as-real-evil position.
Also, putting quotation-marks around "lives" doesn't actually make them theoretical - and if they were merely "theorectical", Obama wouldn't have had to work against legislation that would have kept them from being discarded in hospital laundry-rooms and garbage-cans until their "theoretical" last breaths.
"my question to CBW was clear and direct,"Yah, like standing up during a presidential press-conference and demanding a 'yes-or-no' answer to "Do you intend to stop beating your wife" - would be clear and direct.
"As for your "insolent tone", THAT was a joke..."Guess it's another instance of sarcasm not coming through this particular medium very well, then.
- MuscleDaddy
Muscledaddy:
Murder is murder if you want to call abortion murder, murder of people wrongly accused by a system that has been shown to be flawed is the same thing, both equal murder of innocents, if that is what your position is. NOW, I don;t know where you frame your moral / ethical arguements from, BUT for those of us who use Christ' teachings as the foundation, your standards do not apply.
Based on Jesus' objective standard, if one defends the innocent, defend them all with the SAME presupposition, that being justice and mercy, defending those who are marginalized by the indifferent, such as yourself, who hid behind "moral" debates.
Laila Tov
DJBA,.
"Murder is murder if you want to call abortion murder, murder of people wrongly accused by a system that has been shown to be flawed is the same thing, both equal murder of innocents, if that is what your position is.".
My position is that murder-of-innocents requires intent to be the 'same thing'.
"Based on Jesus' objective standard, if one defends the innocent, defend them all with the SAME presupposition, that being justice and mercy, defending those who are marginalized by the indifferent, such as yourself, who hid behind "moral" debates.".
Which is a very fine thing to say, and yet the bible recognizes that society & the law must move against criminals (Timothy 1:9), as well as attesting to the need for justice in the execution of that duty (Numbers 35:30).
The same is addressed in our own legal rules of process and system of appeals.
Again, while it may be that "death is death" (and perhaps because of this) the matter at hand must hinge on intent.
The intent of the criminal justice system is to protect the innocent and punish the guilty, and any deviation from that is a flaw in the system against its intent - if an individual or group of individuals deliberately manipulates the system to kill an innocent person, then that person(s) has merely turned the utility of that system into a weapon, much as you might turn the utility of an earth-turning shovel into a blugeon - neither its mis-use nor its inherent imperfection makes the shovel itself an evil thing.
Conversely, the intent of the abortion system is to end the lives of unborn children - an intent so clear and explicit that (as I mentioned before) Obama had to stand against legislation that would have required assistance be given to such children as initially survived that intent.
The purpose of the criminal justice system is not to end lives - but the purpose of the abortion system is.
Mark 10:14 makes Jesus' view toward children pretty plain.
I invite you to offer-up the scripture that accepts the taking of innocent life as a matter of convenience - or, the scripture wherein Jesus teaches that a murderer, convicted via the process of the legal system, should not be punished accordingly.
- MuscleDaddy
(I will say that I am heartened to see that the value of the lives of unborn children have been elevated from "theoretical" to at least that of a person tried, convicted and sentenced to death by the criminal justice system of the state - it shows progress)
@Muscle Daddy:
"Which is a very fine thing to say, and yet the bible recognizes that society & the law must move against criminals (Timothy 1:9), as well as attesting to the need for justice in the execution of that duty (Numbers 35:30)."
Ohhh so sorry, 5 yard penalty improper exegetcial technique. Suggestion, be carefule when interjecting the Mitzvahs of the Torah when discusing New Covenant theology.
A for effort, NT for Nice Try.
DJBA,Oh? When did I say I was restricting this to "New Covenant Theology"?
You may also notice that I attributed neither the 'Timothy' nor the 'Numbers' references to Jesus.
You may feel that the New Testament completely invalidates the entirety of the Word of God given before it, but I find worth & wisdom in ALL of it.
Nice side-step, though.
By all means, use New and Old Testament when proffering those scripture examples I asked for.
Or, you know - don't - and just make an honest attempt at a response...
What you've got there is tantamount to a rejoinder of "Your argumentis invalid because it's supposed to be 't-h-e' not 't-e-h'".
I mean, if you would rather just throw out a quick "Nya-na-na-nana", I guess we could call that your reasoned-response.
- MuscleDaddy
@Muscledaddy:
You are out of your depth here my friend, I suggest you quite while you are not so far behind.
1st off, I talked about Jesus and Christian ethics predicated on His teachings, which by definition are New Covenant. Anytime the Tanakh is referenced it is to be referenced in context with Jesus teachings, if you are trying to speak with any authority to a Christian.
It is not about invalidation, it is about relevence and context, or do you want to tell me how ALL 613 mitzvahs of the Torah are VALID to Christians, in particular, non_Jeiwsh Chrirstians?
Or just admit, you are talking outside of your depth and move on.
Further, in your previous posting you implied that I somehow was saying criminals should not face consequences for their actions, which is a strawman argument, my point was that in a human system which HAS and continues to be set up that a person who is innoncent can be convicted of a crime they did not commit, the death penalty should not be an option.
But as ususaly, the right is about vengence masked as justice.
DJBA,.
"Anytime the Tanakh is referenced it is to be referenced in context with Jesus teachings, if you are trying to speak with any authority to a Christian."Oh. My. Stars.
I do believe you're trying to define someone else's Chritianity!
"Further, in your previous posting you implied that I somehow was saying criminals should not face consequences for their actions,".
Nice try - No.
I keep bringing your contortions back around to your assertion that a flawed criminal justice system is somehow "just as bad" as this entrenched system of abortion currently condoned in this country.
You just keep trying to wriggle out from under your own indefensible position, misrepresenting my points (as you have yet again) so that you can shout 'Straw-Man!'
Talk about out-of-your-depth.
- MuscleDaddy
DJBA~You write"my point was that in a human system which HAS and continues to be set up that a person who is innoncent can be convicted of a crime they did not commit, the death penalty should not be an option.God places a very high value on human life, we know this from the scriptures. So DJBA do we know better than God? How does one make "restitution" for a murder committed? I don’t think in such a case God was necessarily interested in rehabilitation. Where is justice for the victim for whom there is no possible restitution?
@MD:
"I do believe you're trying to define someone else's Chritianity!"
Not at all, Christianity isn't a "free for all" there are essential doctrines within the varied traditions and denominations that make those traditions authenntic and allow for apostates and cults to be identified. The Orthodoxy of the faith (Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant and Oriental churches) have essential doctrines that are clear even within their diveristy.
So no, I was just trying to inform you, that you can't hop around all willy nilly tacking scriptures together to make a point OUT of their historical, literary or covenant context.
@CBW:
"option.God places a very high value on human life, we know this from the scriptures. So DJBA do we know better than God? How does one make "restitution" for a murder committed? I don’t think in such a case God was necessarily interested in rehabilitation. Where is justice for the victim for whom there is no possible restitution?"
God knows the heart of men, HE knows who really is guilty, and HE doesn't hire corrupt police officers who beat confessions out of people, and he doesn't have a justice system that works for who can AFFORD the best justice.
I am all for GOD giving the death penalty, however; WE (as a people) are not above reproach. There should be JUSTICE for the victims, so yes, lock criminals up, let the punishment fit the crime. However; I am for life in prision as opposed to the death penalty because I have SEEN at least 50 people over the last few years get off death row, for crimes they didn't commit.
Walk in a mans shoes mentally, imagine being in jail 10-15 years on death row for a crime you didn't commit soley because you had a crappy PD who didn't give a crap, a public out for "VENGENCE", corrupt cops who put it to you, and there you sit.
Now, if this is the reality for ONE person, it is enough for me to spare the guilty and let them stay in jail for life.
[quote]NO IT IS NOT, possible you just don't get it! It takes the cells in sperm to impregnate an egg...Does it not? A mans choice to have a vasectomy "in occordance to you Holier Than Thou rollers", Also, COULD NOT, possible be within the will of God's either. Does not the Bible clearly state, "Be fruitful and multiply." A males choice to have a vasectomy should be viewd by you churchy folk's as "Abortion at it's highest level!"[/quote]
I gotcha now Cyndee.
When I practice the "Early Withdraw Method" with my wife......I have sinned against the will of God.
[quote]It requires spiritual fruit to be able to have MERCY for the guilty or have concern for those who are innocent and wrongfully accused.[/quote]
DJ Black Adam - I am not sure where YOU live BUT there are far too many homicide victims in the metro area where I live who may have been "wrongfully accused" by their DEATH PENALTY PROVIDER......but this civilian killer ALWAYS SEEMS TO PERFORM THE EXECUTION absent any appeals.
It amazes me how you and others using the "This might be the wrong guy" theory to even allow Court Room Killer Brian Nichols who KILLED 4 PEOPLE to escape with a life sentence due to jury nullification against the death penalty.
Fear not - he used the "UptownSteve" defense, saying that when he punched the Black female guard in the face and broke her jaw before doing his killing he felt like an ESCAPING SLAVE who was lashing out against the system of slavery.
How this translated into the hitting of the Black female and the killing of the Black sheriff that was a married father of 2 I have no idea.
DJ Black Adam - the Black community is presently living with the consequences of "It is better to release 10 guilty men than to detain 1 innocent man".
Unfortunately those 10 men are the Domestic Pirates who are causing the mayhem on our streets while you and others maintain your abstract theories in pursuit of "Justice Thurgood Marshall Justice" - where the actor-vists are SILENT upon the damage from the thug criminals UNTIL the SYSTEM violates some procedure and makes the ASSAILANT into a VICTIM OF THE SYSTEM.
MuscleDaddy'
"Quite so - but I was referring to those who hail from the ranks of 'black folks".
Like who specifically?
I bet you can't name anyone and provide proof of their statements.
"Christians of color are the only folks in the world who worship a God who bears no resemblence to themselves."Um...Hinduism?about 837 Million of them."
Hmmm indeed..
The Hindu Gods look pretty much like the folks who worship them.
Do you have some point you're trying to make here?
http://www.sanatansociety.org/hindu_gods_and_goddesses.htm
@CF:
“DJ Black Adam - I am not sure where YOU live BUT there are far too many homicide victims in the metro area where I live who may have been "wrongfully accused" by their DEATH PENALTY PROVIDER......but this civilian killer ALWAYS SEEMS TO PERFORM THE EXECUTION absent any appeals.”
CF, my older brother was a victim of murder, so you can spare me the histrionics.
You are making a faux argument. I am NOT advocating that criminals not be punished, I am saying that the ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT must be, or should be left to the ONLY one who can be SURE the person is guilty. You brought up “Brian Nichols who KILLED 4 PEOPLE”, sure I’d agree he should be executed, unfortunately the law isn’t written to “Just execute the people we ‘REALLLY’ know are guilty” and can’t be.
My position is that we should not execute ANYONE, because at the edn of the day, at least right now, It seems like there are people who have been on death row that were found NOT guilty and in fact framed and set up in some cases.
I presuppose that HUMAN NATURE is Not “GOOD” (as Jesus said: “…there is none good but one, that is, God…Mat 19.17) so HUMANS include Judges, Cops, Lawyers, Expert witnesses, regular witnesses, etc. Therefore no human agency can or should be able to execute people. How many Black men were hanged due to false witness? How many people who could not afford adequate counsel were and are wrongfully locked up? We know this has happened, so it is not a matter of if it is merely a question of “how many”.
I know you righties love saying: “You have to break a few eggs to make omelets” or such other platitudes, but the truth is, how would you feel if it were YOU or YOUR SON or DAUGHTER who was falsely accused and heading for the gallows?
And since you asked I live in CHICAGO, where we had the UN investigate corrupt police offices like John Burge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Burge) and now the US attorney is investigating for Torture and getting FALSE confessions. A family friend’s cousin was releases from death row after it was shown they were wrongfully prosecuted, in fact the criminal who DID the crime admitted it and these corrupt cops and lawyers STILL were pushing to execute the guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolando_Cruz_case)
Sorry CF, I am against abortion AND against the death penalty, both predicated on protection of the innocent. Again, I guess its easy to advocate for a n unborn child, not so easy when your own prejudices get in the way of what should be common sense and JUSTICE in regard to the wrongfully accused, who often times are not so “cute” and / or “innocent” in our minds.
You wrote: "DJ Black Adam - the Black community is presently living with the consequences of "It is better to release 10 guilty men than to detain 1 innocent man".
Again, you present an argument I AM NOT presenting, I am saying better to give 10 guilty men life without parole than the EXECUTE ONE INNOCENT MAN.
Even when it came to Sodom, GOD said to Abraham: "And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake." Gen 18.32.
Abraham pleaded for those who were in Sodom that were NOT guilty, he did not plead for the GUILTY.
Now, of course GOD did seperate the WHEAT FROM THE CHAFF in that one, because HE can, WE do not have the facilities to do that.
DJBA,.
"Even when it came to Sodom, GOD said to Abraham...".
So much for the topic-derailing imperative of remaining on New Covenant Theology, eh?
Tell you what, if I formally acknowledge you as a 'great biblical scholar', will you try addressing ...well... any of my points on the whole "flawed CJ system being just-as-bad as the abortion system"?
- MD
DJBA~I actually think you make a compelling case for not instituting the death penalty because unlike God we do not possess the facilities to separate the wheat from the chaff and our justice system is woefully flawed. However to say that the teachings of Christ are inconsistent with the support of capital punishment is just not true.
What say you about this passages of Scripture:
Matt 15:3-4
"Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ´Honor your father and mother´ and ´Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death´."
Here Jesus quotes the word about the death penalty from the Old Testament (Ex 21:17), and uses it as proof against the scribes. Therefore, Jesus confirms the validity of the scripture and shows that the words are not only linked to the time of the Old Testament. In this situation Jesus strikes hard at the scribes whom he claims are revoking the commandments of God in order to hold their own laws and statutes. He says to them: "You nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition" (v 6). And "the word of God" in the example that Jesus uses also includes the words concerning the death penalty (v 4). This word is therefore a strong and clear acknowledgement by Jesus concerning the justification and validity of the death penalty.
It is obvious that if Jesus had been against the death penalty he would not have quoted this scripture and used a commandment for the death penalty as a foundation for his criticism of the scribes.
This scripture then confirms that the Old Testament’s commandment of the capital punishment rests also the spirit of Christ.
uptownsteve,.
"Like who specifically?
I bet you can't name anyone and provide proof of their statements.".
What, like the people @ church? The people I work with?
What, you want me to call them out in their names here - or convince them to make comments on this site?
Like you're able to come up with verifiable references for half the crap you say here.... for instance:"The Hindu Gods look pretty much like the folks who worship them."So - they look like elephants or monkeys, have multiple arms or heads and/or are ...blue?What are you trying to say here?
- MD
@CBW:
You predicate that Jesus would have supported the death penalty predicated on this:
Matt 15:3-4
"Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ´Honor your father and mother´ and ´Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death´."
Let’s look at the context in what Jesus was teaching here. Jesus was being chastised by the Pharisees for allowing the disciples to ignore the mitzvahs of the Torah regarding ceremonial washing of hands before eating. Tow hich at the point of verse 3-4 in Matthew 15 Jesus was showing that the Pharisees ignored mitzvahs that required death, whereas Jesus was having the disciples to break mitzvahs that were not even as serious in regard to punishment. Further Jesus stated that what made men evil was not eating with unwashed hands as what enters the belly leaves the body, but the heart is where evil comes from.
So the question would be then, if someone broke this mitzvah of the Torah what would Jesus do? Well dealing with other CPAITAL OFFENSES UNDER LEVITICAL LAW, such as ADULTERY, we can see what JESUS did. We see this in John chapter 8. 4-5: “They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?”
So what did JESUS say to them in verse 7: “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”
And what he said to the person who committed this capital offense in verse 10-11: “When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.”
So, it appears that Jesus didn’t execute a woman who was guilty of a CAPITAL OFFENSE under the Mosaic / Levitical Law of the Torah.
UTS~ You wrote:""Christians of color are the only folks in the world who worship a God who bears no resemblence to themselves."Um...Hinduism?about 837Million of them."
I am very confused how this issue is relevant. Unless you are saying that there is a different God for Black people. Is that what you are saying. That white people have a god who only creates white people and black people have a different god who only creates black people? I am sure you aren't saying that but I just wanted to illustrate how preposterous your comment really was.
Maybe you don't know but Jesus was the son of God, not man. I am aware that the black liberation types like to say that Jesus was a descendant of the Cannaanittes, Moabites or Nubians. However this is inconsistent with scripture.
He was to be one of his brethren, the Jews, according to 4000 years of prophecy. He was not to be other any of nation except Israel. Mary had to have a pure Hebrew lineage, to be qualified as a mother for the Messiah. If she had been of any other race, God would have had to pick another woman. Jesus was a Jew. Jesus is the Messiah. He died for everyone. Why did we even have to go here?
@Muscledaddy:
I wrote: "Even when it came to Sodom, GOD said to Abraham...".
You replied: "So much for the topic-derailing imperative of remaining on New Covenant Theology, eh?"
Follow along MD, when I wrote about separating WHEAT from CHAFF (which was giving the story of Sodom and Gomorrah and Abraham's advocacy for MERCY a CONTEXT in JESUS teachings, most of the Christians here should know where Jesus spoke about HWEAT and TARES, however for your CONETXTUAL UNDERSTANDING the scripture that puts Genesis 18-19 in a New Covenant context is Matthew 13.30).
The point being, that no human agency should be given the power to execute, as Jesus said, surely we will burn WHEAT with the Tares.
The Abraham story shows a specific instance where God showed mercy (even before there was the covenant of GRACE) as well shows were a great man of FAITH, advocated for mercy even though he knew many in Sodom were in fact wicked, his concern was for those that were not wicked.
You asked: “"…flawed CJ system being just-as-bad as the abortion system"
Ah, so now you want to go back to what you accused me of, that being making a false equivalence. Are both of these systems equally bad in the eyes of the general public or to people who predicate their morality outside of a Christian worldview? That is for those who don’t have a Christian worldview to determine. My point is that if a CHRISTIAN opposes abortion predicated on the biblical teaching of NOT KILLING, then that CHRISTIAN would logically have to be against CAPITAL PUNISHMENT because it has been shown and can be demonstrated that innocent people are locked up and some on death row.
As I wrote to explain my initial statement that you took ought with: “Murder is murder if you want to call abortion murder, murder of people wrongly accused by a system that has been shown to be flawed is the same thing, both equal murder of innocents, if that is what your position is.".
Your reply: “My position is that murder-of-innocents requires intent to be the 'same thing'.”
When you continue to execute the guilty, knowing that systemically there are innocents within that population of the guilty, your intent is to execute the INNOCENT with the guilty. The reason for the intention is not the issue.
Now if you want me to concede that I may have OVERSTATED in my comparison of the flawed and corrupt Criminal Justice system here in the US (which is admittedly not as flawed and / or corrupt as OTHER man made systems) with the system of allowing women to choose abortions sure, I can concede that it is overstated or an improper basis for my argument, however; thanks to you, I provided a CONTEXTUAL Biblical argument for Christians to oppose Capital Punishment, Thanks.
My position regarding capital punishment as being something that should be left to GOD in a Christian worldview and that CHRISTIANS should do as Abraham and advocate for the few innocent who sit with the many guilty.
And no, I am no Biblical scholar, I just understand the Gospel of the Kingdom of God and the Law and the Prophets in context of that Gospel.
@CBW:
While I agree with your overall position regarding the fact that Jesus was born a Hebrew, as for Him being Black / White or whatever, is quite a different issue.
Whatever color He was has no spiritual significance as he came for the repentence of all PEOPLE (if they accept it) regardless of their color, ethnicity or nationality.
"Unless you are saying that there is a different God for Black people. Is that what you are saying. That white people have a god who only creates white people and black people have a different god who only creates black people?"
No CBW, I'm saying that I'll bet the picture of Jesus that you have in your house is of a white blond blue eyed man.
And if a person like me suggests that Jesus wasn't white, you'll be among the first screaming..
Along with the white christian right.
The same folks who hate Obama, opposed Civil Rights, integration, etc........
And you think something is wrong with ME?
Muscle Daddy,
"What, like the people @ church? The people I work with?"
Yeah.
Right.
"Maybe you don't know but Jesus was the son of God, not man. I am aware that the black liberation types like to say that Jesus was a descendant of the Cannaanittes, Moabites or Nubians. However this is inconsistent with scripture.
He was to be one of his brethren, the Jews, according to 4000 years of prophecy. He was not to be other any of nation except Israel. Mary had to have a pure Hebrew lineage, to be qualified as a mother for the Messiah. If she had been of any other race, God would have had to pick another woman."
@CBW:Its a scientific fact that has been proven and is supported with DNA evidence, that the people or Jews that the bible speaks of came out of Ethiopia. Israel was a tribe of people and not a nation as it is today.
Jews as they're known today and exist in Israel were converts from the Khazarian empire. You may not believe me, but if you take the time to study this you'll see for yourself.
@Rippa:
I doesn't matter SPIRITUALLY whatever color Jesus was.
@CBW:
Uptown is making a sociological point, not a theological one.
Rippa~I am very aware of that. My first husband is an Ethiopian Jew (Falasha). But my point is that I don't care what color my Saviour is. I feel a bit foolish even indulging it.
BTW UTS I don't have any images of Christ in my home.
@CBW:
AHA, so that is why you were asking me specific questions about Ge'ez when we talked, I was wondering how you came bout that info! My grandmother on my mom's side is an Ethiopian Jew. Part of the services at the Ethiopian Orthodox churches (liturgy) use that language. Did your first husband convert to Christianity or did he practice Judaism?
Small world.
DJBA~You write "So the question would be then, if someone broke this mitzvah of the Torah what would Jesus do?"No, that was not my question as I searched the scriptures regarding this matter. My question was/is "Is Capital Punishment inconsistent with the teachings of Christ?"I still maintain that if Jesus had been against the death penalty he would not have quoted Exodus 21:17 and used a commandment for the death penalty as a foundation for his criticism of the scribes.
The more I think about it--It was a death penalty that God used as the instrument to reconcile the world to himself. Likewise it was a death penalty that led a converted criminal (the thief on the cross) to the paradise. Jus sayin'.
I’m not saying that I completely disagree with you regarding the death penalty in these United States. But to say that the death penalty is not in line with the teachings of Christ is utterly false.
@CBW:
You wrote: "I still maintain that if Jesus had been against the death penalty he would not have quoted Exodus 21:17 and used a commandment for the death penalty as a foundation for his criticism of the scribes."
The "death penalty" was not the foundation of his criticism of the Pharisees, the punishment being mentioned was to indicate that as they tried to judge the disciples on minor matters of the law, they themselves may have been guilty of weightier issues regarding the law.
You conclude with "But to say that the death penalty is not in line with the teachings of Christ is utterly false."
Sorry, but you are wrong as two left shoes (or right shoes should I say) on that one, as the ONLY PLACE where JESUS had dealt with a person who deserved capital punishment based on the Torah was the woman in adultery and JESUS did not allow for the execution.
Unless you can provide, scripture and verse, where JESUS indicates that he was for executions to be done by HUMANS against other HUMANS, all you have is your opinion in contrast to his CLEAR actions when dealing with the subject of CAPITAL OFFENSES.
I can admit I could be wrong in my assertion, but "UTTERLY FALSE" would require you to provide chapter and verse and to outline that precept in contrast to the expressed teaching that we see in the Gospels of Jesus giving mercy to someone who BY THE LAW should have been executed.
DJBA~Are you kidding me? Surely you are not suggesting that Jesus was a prophet with new insights for living! He was God in the flesh--the same God who gave us the Ten Commandments, and who said, "Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man" in Genesis 9:6.
The passage you reference was about an adulteress whom Jesus forgave. Jesus is God. He has the authority to remove consequences of sins whenever He sees fit to do so. The death penalty for murder is not even the issue in this particular passage of scripture.
Do you believe that Jesus abolished the Mosaic Law? Well actually it's irrelevent even if you do because the death penalty for murder , Genesis 9:6 was given before the Law and even before the existence of the nation of Israel. It was a universal mandate given by God - Whom we both agree is Jesus, right?
Come on DJBA you know this!
DJBA~"Did your first husband convert to Christianity or did he practice Judaism?"He converted to Christianity before we married but he insisted that we go to the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. I couldn't understand a word of it and I really don't think he could either...lol.
"But my point is that I don't care what color my Saviour is. I feel a bit foolish even indulging it."
It does to your beloved white conservatives.
You can deny it all you like.
I'VE SEEN IT.
The slighest suggestion that Jesus was a man of color sends white righties into fits of apoplexy.
Sort of the way a black US President does, if you know what I mean.
BTW UTS I don't have any images of Christ in my home.
@CBW:
You wrote:"The death penalty for murder is not even the issue in this particular passage of scripture."
Sorry, capital offense is a capital offense under the Mosaic ? Levitcal law, in fact "murder" isn't always punishable by death under the Mosiac Law, adultery is, do you really want to use that as your standard? Heck, your husband would have grounds based on your Zo comments alone! Thank God for GRACE.
You wrote: "Do you believe that Jesus abolished the Mosaic Law?"
I believe what Jesus said in Matthew 5.7: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."
And what he said in Luke 16.16 "The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it."
So I believe that the Law and the Prohets have been fullfiled, now we live under a dispinsation of GRACE, which is the Gospel of the Kingdom of God.
Come on CBW, I still Deal with anti-missionaries from my former faith and the occasional Hebrew Israelite, now tell me you don't REALLY try to keep all 613 Mitzvahs of the Torah do you? You mean you don't eat Lobster, Shrimp or Crab legs? You kmake it to Israel (Jerusalem) for the High Holy days too? ;-)
BTW, I still don't understand Ge'ez, but I enjoy the services at the Ethiopian Church. lol
DJBA~"Heck, your husband would have grounds based on your Zo comments alone! Thank God for GRACE.So you've got jokes, huh? LOL
Admittedly that was a good one. Yes, thank God for grace because Zo....well,some things are better left unsaid.(I'm kidding really but that was good DJBA I'll have to show this comment to the spousal unit)
Regarding Capital Punish, I guess yet AGAIN we will have to agree to disagree. Try as I might, I'm not following your logic on this one.
uptownsteve,.
"You can deny it all you like.
I'VE SEEN IT.".
(let's see - how did that phrase go again...oh yes...).
Yeah.
Right.
- MuscleDaddy
(funny how 'eye-witness-accounts' only make for acceptable citations when they're yours)
@Uptown:
"The slighest suggestion that Jesus was a man of color sends white righties into fits of apoplexy. Sort of the way a black US President does, if you know what I mean."
I am inclined to agree. I think it is sociological brainwashing that Whites undergo as seeing their image dominant in media and in many times their communities.
MuscleDADDY,
(funny how 'eye-witness-accounts' only make for acceptable citations when they're yours)
I'll tell you what daddy.
Next time you attend a Republican gathering, take a picture of "Black Jesus" while professing your devotion to the Savior and watch the reception you get.
Just about all my friends and family voted for Obama and I can say that none of them have ever suggested that he wasn't "black" enough.
Most blacks (like myself) have mixed race ancestry and as far as how Obama speaks and carries himself, how is that any different from any professional black who has to navigate the corporate world?
I'm a corporate salesman.
You think I give presentations in ebonics?
Have you seen the film- Maafa21? It links abortion and Black Genocide to Slavery and Eugenics ! Very Powerful. get it here: www.maafa21com
Just came upon your site today and it's great! Regarding the abortion issue and Obama and how could those of Faith have voted him in office is clear; they (black folks) cast a vote based solely on the color of his skin and nothing else. Afterall, he desired to make it illegal to give comfort to a living, though aborted, late term fetus, thank you very much.
Post a Comment