Evangelical politics

[buttercup]

"The Church" technically means the Roman Catholic Church (big-C).

When I hear the phrase "the church" I think of the body of Christ… In other words, all genuine Christians.

 

[yiostheoy]

When your have but two choices, one a lying criminal and the other a blowhard, which would you chose?

In what election did you find but two candidates and no "write in" option on the ballot you were given?

Please don't be juvenile. Let's be serious today. Okay?

...and please keep your posts concise, if you can.

Please don't be juvenile.

Apparently, the question, which asks about a point of simple fact about what voting options were presented to you on a ballot, is too challenging for you to answer directly.

When your have but two choices, one a lying criminal and the other a blowhard, which would you chose?

It really is surprising for you that there is a massive apostasy going on today in the church?

Whether I do or do, and whether there is or is not, has nothing to do with the dichotomy between what evangelical Christians profess or how they vote and whether their votes align with their theological attestations.


I really don't know whether there's apostasy in any church. What I know is Jesus' teachings on how to live as a good Christian and I know when I see someone who has routinely for the whole of their adult life pretty much rejected or ignored every one of the most significant of those teachings that I can recall or review.

What I know used to be so is that evangelicals for all their proselytizing and "Bible thumping," were people of good character with whom I may on occasion disagree. I know that over the past couple years I've seen less and less evidence that they remain thus.

Am I passing judgement on evangelical Christians? No. I'm asking them how they reconcile their faith and professed acceptance of the primacy of God's/Jesus' law and teachings with giving their approbation to the likes of Trump and other clearly immoral individuals who observe it not at all beyond paying lip service to it in order to gain their votes.

But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people.
-- 2 Timothy 3:1-7
​

Read that passage above. But for one part of that, one need not be a theist to by and large be not "such a person," yet Trump is, as far as I can tell, every one of those things. And evangelical Christians voted for him in droves. I'm asking how one can ascribe to the words in the Bible yet vote for someone who embodies every trait the Bible explicitly instructs one to "avoid."

That passage in Timothy is an indictment on all who have denied God and what will/is happening right now. No person is perfect. Not one of our presidents was perfect. By your deductive reasoning, we should have never elected anyone. How do you reconcile someone who is still struggling with these afflictions of the flesh but yet is asking for forgiveness from the Lord? No one knows the true heart of anyone except God.

George Washington was perfect (Father of our Country).

John Adams was perfect (Father of the American Navy).

Andrew Jackson was perfect (the only President to pay off the National Debt).

Zachary Taylor was perfect (raped Mexico).

Abraham Lincoln was the most perfect (died in office saving the Union).

Teddy Roosevelt was perfect (walked softly and carried a big stick).

FDR was perfect (gave everyone a New Deal).

BHO was perfect but has his hands tied by Boehner.

 

[Seawytch]

When your have but two choices, one a lying criminal and the other a blowhard, which would you chose?

Both statements describe Crooked Donnie Two Scoops to a T.

 

[yiostheoy]

When your have but two choices, one a lying criminal and the other a blowhard, which would you chose?

Neither.

Okay, but I voted AGAINST the criminal in a pantsuit, not for the blowhard.

I understand. A lot of people did that. But I firmly believe that every 4 years we are manipulated into voting for "the lesser evil" who is someone we would never have supported if we weren't put in that position. That's how the powers–that–be move us toward their agenda, by controlling both sides and creating this "Republican vs Democrat" false dichotomy. It always works. Each side is so fearful of the other *more evil* person winning, that they feel they have no choice but to hold their nose and vote for their side's guy, no matter how horrible he/she is.

In my opinion, anyone who gets that far in politics is part of "the club," they're all on the same team, even though they play the part of a "conservative" or liberal or whatever. I refuse to play their game, and if there isn't a candidate that I genuinely support/agree with, I won't vote at all.

Its not manipulation.

The best you can do is vote for the lesser of two weevils.

 

[buttercup]

Its not manipulation.

The best you can do is vote for the lesser of two weevils.

Yes it is manipulation. And I'm not sure why you thought the biblical interpretation of the phrase "the church" is funny? It means all genuine believers, all who are in Christ. It's not about religion or a brick-and-mortar building.

 

[yiostheoy]

"The Church" technically means the Roman Catholic Church (big-C).

When I hear the phrase "the church" I think of the body of Christ… In other words, all genuine Christians.

"Church" is a word that comes from ekklesia kirios -- correct.

But when the English first began using the English word after 1066 A.D. when English was finally invented, it meant the Roman Catholic Church -- not to be confused with the Constantinople Eastern Orthodox Church.

And when Henry the 8th later rebelled against Rome and took all the Church's property, the English began to distinguish the Anglican Church from the Roman Church.

The days of St. Paul are long gone by millennia.

We have since been framed by Henry the 8th and Martin Luther, but that does not make their rebellious churches The Church.

 

[yiostheoy]

Its not manipulation.

The best you can do is vote for the lesser of two weevils.

Yes it is manipulation. And I'm not sure why you thought the biblical interpretation of the phrase "the church" is funny? It means all genuine believers, all who are in Christ. It's not about religion or a brick-and-mortar building.

You are confusing Greek with English.

 

[buttercup]

Its not manipulation.

The best you can do is vote for the lesser of two weevils.

Yes it is manipulation. And I'm not sure why you thought the biblical interpretation of the phrase "the church" is funny? It means all genuine believers, all who are in Christ. It's not about religion or a brick-and-mortar building.

You are confusing Greek with English.

The concept of "the church" was around long before the Roman Catholic Church. What matters is the original intent of that word in the scriptures...Not what people said it meant later.

 

[bodecea]

Left Wing Lunacy: repeatedly telling groups how much you hate them and then complaining that they won't vote Democrat

They think they can shame and ridicule you into voting D. LMFAO! An Orwellian approach is their nature.

Why anyone would vote D after all that has been exposed, is beyond me. Time to put an end to the party for good.

How can you possibly be shamed?

 

[ScienceRocks]

"The Church" technically means the Roman Catholic Church (big-C).

When I hear the phrase "the church" I think of the body of Christ… In other words, all genuine Christians.

Christ was against judging people and dong a lot of the nasty crap the gop supports. HE believed in helping everyone.

 

[Natural Citizen]

You seem to have forgotten about the 1st Amendment.

Ha. No. I haven't forgotten the First Amendment.

I think perhaps some might never have learned or been taught that any right that one claims should never be written or spoken absent the word responsibility. For every right one claim,s there is an inseparable duty. For every aspect of freedom, there is a corresponding responsibility.

To reflect on the words of the op, christians have a moral duty to God, the giver of those rights, to secure them and use them soundly and with due respect for the rights of others.

I'm paraphrasing from a great book on the topic. Though, it should be common knowledge.

https://www.amazon.com/American-ide...O1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch&tag=ff0d01-20

 

[buttercup]

"The Church" technically means the Roman Catholic Church (big-C).

When I hear the phrase "the church" I think of the body of Christ… In other words, all genuine Christians.

Christ was against judging people and dong a lot of the nasty crap the gop supports. HE believed in helping everyone.

I'm actually an independent and I don't support a lot of what the GOP does…(the R's or D's) so you're kind of barking up the wrong tree there.

 

[ScienceRocks]

"The Church" technically means the Roman Catholic Church (big-C).

When I hear the phrase "the church" I think of the body of Christ… In other words, all genuine Christians.

Christ was against judging people and dong a lot of the nasty crap the gop supports. HE believed in helping everyone.

I'm actually an independent and I don't support a lot of what the GOP does… so you're kind of barking up the wrong tree there.

I agreed with your post. Just expanding on it.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

When your have but two choices, one a lying criminal and the other a blowhard, which would you chose?

In what election did you find but two candidates and no "write in" option on the ballot you were given?

Please don't be juvenile. Let's be serious today. Okay?

...and please keep your posts concise, if you can.

Please don't be juvenile.

Apparently, the question, which asks about a point of simple fact about what voting options were presented to you on a ballot, is too challenging for you to answer directly.

When your have but two choices, one a lying criminal and the other a blowhard, which would you chose?

It really is surprising for you that there is a massive apostasy going on today in the church?

Whether I do or do, and whether there is or is not, has nothing to do with the dichotomy between what evangelical Christians profess or how they vote and whether their votes align with their theological attestations.


I really don't know whether there's apostasy in any church. What I know is Jesus' teachings on how to live as a good Christian and I know when I see someone who has routinely for the whole of their adult life pretty much rejected or ignored every one of the most significant of those teachings that I can recall or review.

What I know used to be so is that evangelicals for all their proselytizing and "Bible thumping," were people of good character with whom I may on occasion disagree. I know that over the past couple years I've seen less and less evidence that they remain thus.

Am I passing judgement on evangelical Christians? No. I'm asking them how they reconcile their faith and professed acceptance of the primacy of God's/Jesus' law and teachings with giving their approbation to the likes of Trump and other clearly immoral individuals who observe it not at all beyond paying lip service to it in order to gain their votes.

But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people.
-- 2 Timothy 3:1-7
​

Read that passage above. But for one part of that, one need not be a theist to by and large be not "such a person," yet Trump is, as far as I can tell, every one of those things. And evangelical Christians voted for him in droves. I'm asking how one can ascribe to the words in the Bible yet vote for someone who embodies every trait the Bible explicitly instructs one to "avoid."

The answer is simple. We don't believe you. Complain about Trump. Democrats are still the party of homosexual perversion. Recoil with disgust at Roy Moore. Democrats still want little girls sharing toilets and showers with adult male strangers.

We don't believe you. When a liberal purports to explain Christianity, we don't believe you. When a liberal pontificates the Bible and becomes the minister, we don't believe you.

This won't help, of course. Democrats will patiently explain themselves and disregard the obvious. We won't listen because we don't believe you.

 

[yiostheoy]

You seem to have forgotten about the 1st Amendment.

Ha. No. I haven't forgotten the First Amendment.

I think perhaps some might never have learned or been taught that any right that one claims should never be written or spoken absent the word responsibility. For every right one claim,s there is an inseparable duty. For every aspect of freedom, there is a corresponding responsibility.

To reflect on the words of the op, christians have a moral duty to God, the giver of those rights, to secure them and use them soundly and with due respect for the rights of others.

I'm paraphrasing from a great book on the topic. Though, it should be common knowledge.

https://www.amazon.com/American-ide...O1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch&tag=ff0d01-20

Guns, ammo, and the French Navy gave us our freedom from England.

 

[gipper]

Left Wing Lunacy: repeatedly telling groups how much you hate them and then complaining that they won't vote Democrat

They think they can shame and ridicule you into voting D. LMFAO! An Orwellian approach is their nature.

Why anyone would vote D after all that has been exposed, is beyond me. Time to put an end to the party for good.

How can you possibly be shamed?

True. It is not possible.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

When your have but two choices, one a lying criminal and the other a blowhard, which would you chose?

In what election did you find but two candidates and no "write in" option on the ballot you were given?

Please don't be juvenile. Let's be serious today. Okay?

...and please keep your posts concise, if you can.

Please don't be juvenile.

Apparently, the question, which asks about a point of simple fact about what voting options were presented to you on a ballot, is too challenging for you to answer directly.

When your have but two choices, one a lying criminal and the other a blowhard, which would you chose?

It really is surprising for you that there is a massive apostasy going on today in the church?

"The Church" technically means the Roman Catholic Church (big-C).

No, wasn't referring to catholics.

 

[Old Rocks]

When your have but two choices, one a lying criminal and the other a blowhard, which would you chose?

The present President is a lying treasonous criminal. What was the quid pro for the Russian help?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Who's complaining thus? I'm certainly not. Suggesting for whom to vote is not my aim.

I'm merely holding people accountable to that which they profess. If one is an evangelical Christian, living a life of Christ is supposed to prevail above all else. I'm saying that if that's what one values most, then act like and reject candidates who don't align with that way of life. All that speaks to is whom one should not vote for, not whom one should vote for.

Judge not, lest you be judged...

Surely you can't sit there and look down your nose at other people for who they voted for. This thread of yours is indeed nothing but an ad hominem fallacy. From one end of the thread to the other you consistently judge people by what they profess their values to be against who they voted for.

Your black and white interpretation of Christianity is purely offensive, and not only that what's more offensive is using the teachings of Christ to tear people down instead of build them up.

Romans 14:1-5 ESV

"As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind."

 

[Aldo Raine]

When your have but two choices, one a lying criminal and the other a blowhard, which would you chose?

If you think Clinton is a criminal wait till the end of the investigation of Trump . As it is right now he is pay for play big time. Entertaining at his golf courses, etc.

Okay...but we KNEW Cankles was a criminal before the election. We did not know this about Trump, before the election. So, I chose to vote for the blowhard. Did you vote for the criminal?

Come on you seriously did not know Trump was a criminal even before the election. What rock were you living under?