New Republican Gov not fond of non-Christians

[Bass v 2.0]

He's referring to being brothers & sisters in Christ.

It's an exclusive relationship limited to those who are saved.

It doesn't imply a lack of consideration or love for the non-saved, and he pretty clearly states that.

Galatians 3:28.

Passage: Galatians 3:28 (ESV Bible Online)

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave [1] nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Come on man, read the rest of Galatians:

From Chapter 5


16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh.

17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want.

18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.


19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery;

20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions

21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit.

26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

 

[Ravi]

You're automatically assuming that a lack of love means hate. It could just be a lack of love. Saying that someone isn't your brother and sister because they are a non-believer is a false argument. He's willing to invite them to being something that they should already be.

He's willing to love them as brothers and sisters, if they convert. I don't believe Jesus ever said he'd only love all of his children, if they all converted to believing in what he said.

You're correct that apathy could be an option as well. But it doesn't matter. Because you have no evidence to make your "He doesn't love nonbelievers" claim. Nor does the OP have evidence to support that he isn't fond of nonbelievers.

Face it. Your accusation that he has no love for non-Christians is unfounded.

Not being fond does not equate to hate. If you don't count people as your brothers and sisters...especially if they elected you to office, you are certainly NOT fond of them.

 

[Avatar4321]

point to where he said he loves his brothers or sisters more...or that he loves the non brothers/sisters less....

thanks

Point to where he says he loves his brothers and sisters just as much as he does his non-brother and non-sisters. Thanks.

See? It can go both ways. You're missing the point anyway.

He's willing to invite them to be something they should already be in the first place. On top of that, his love as considering them brothers and sisters is constricted to whether or not they convert. What kind of love is that? Is that a healthy kind of love?

No. You're missing the point. You made the accusations. You can't back them up.

 

[Avatar4321]

You're automatically assuming that a lack of love means hate. It could just be a lack of love. Saying that someone isn't your brother and sister because they are a non-believer is a false argument. He's willing to invite them to being something that they should already be.

He's willing to love them as brothers and sisters, if they convert. I don't believe Jesus ever said he'd only love all of his children, if they all converted to believing in what he said.

You're correct that apathy could be an option as well. But it doesn't matter. Because you have no evidence to make your "He doesn't love nonbelievers" claim. Nor does the OP have evidence to support that he isn't fond of nonbelievers.

Face it. Your accusation that he has no love for non-Christians is unfounded.

Not being fond does not equate to hate. If you don't count people as your brothers and sisters...especially if they elected you to office, you are certainly NOT fond of them.

Ravi, please take this in the kindest way possible. That argument is absurd.

You actually expect me to believe that if someone isnt family then you can't be fond of them? Seriously?

I really don't want to break it to my girlfriend that I'm not fond of her because she isn't my sister.

 

[Modbert]

No. You're missing the point. You made the accusations. You can't back them up.

Accusations? The only thing I said about the Governor is that he isn't as fond of non-believers as he is of believers. This is clear by the way he intentionally points out that non-believers aren't his brothers and sisters. Something we both disagree with if I recall correctly.

You previously agreed with me that it could be apathy on his part as well. It doesn't necessarily mean hate or intense dislike. Heck, he could still like them but he would like them less.

You're missing the point still however.

You keep pointing out that he's willing to invite them to be his brother and sisters. Meanwhile, you agree with me that being a non-christian doesn't make someone less of a brother. So therefore, you should agree that he's merely inviting them to be something they should already be.

As you say here:

I have no problem if you disagree with him. Or if you think he is wrong. I certainly disagree with him. Being non-Christian doesnt make anyone less my brother.

It's the making crap up beyond what he said that I have problems with. Maybe it's just the defense attorney in me, but I dislike false accusations.

You're contradicting yourself trying to defend him against something you disagree with him with.

 

[Ravi]

You're correct that apathy could be an option as well. But it doesn't matter. Because you have no evidence to make your "He doesn't love nonbelievers" claim. Nor does the OP have evidence to support that he isn't fond of nonbelievers.

Face it. Your accusation that he has no love for non-Christians is unfounded.

Not being fond does not equate to hate. If you don't count people as your brothers and sisters...especially if they elected you to office, you are certainly NOT fond of them.

Ravi, please take this in the kindest way possible. That argument is absurd.

You actually expect me to believe that if someone isnt family then you can't be fond of them? Seriously?

I really don't want to break it to my girlfriend that I'm not fond of her because she isn't my sister.

Or that you would break up with her if she wasn't a Christian?

 

[Yurt]

point to where he said he loves his brothers or sisters more...or that he loves the non brothers/sisters less....

thanks

Point to where he says he loves his brothers and sisters just as much as he does his non-brother and non-sisters. Thanks.

See? It can go both ways. You're missing the point anyway.

He's willing to invite them to be something they should already be in the first place. On top of that, his love as considering them brothers and sisters is constricted to whether or not they convert. What kind of love is that? Is that a healthy kind of love?

it doesn't go both ways, you are the one claiming he doesn't love them equally, so it is up to you to support your claim and since you failed to back your claim, i'll take that as there is nothing to back up your claim

you're projecting your own feelings onto this guy and you're falsely accusing him of feeling a certain way....its like he said, if you don't believe in christ, then you have a different father, thats his opinion, he never said if you don't believe in christ, i love you less, merely that you aren't related to him....i have friends i'm closer than some family members

 

[Avatar4321]

Mod, Im hardly contradicting myself. Yurt obviously understands what I'm saying completely.

You made a false claim. You claimed that he doesn't love non-believers (or he isn't fond of them). You can't substantiate either claim.

You can't prove that "Not B&S" = "Doesn't love" or "Isn't fond of"

See I disagree that we are any less brothers and sisters simply because of belief or non-belief. I am not accusing him of not loving someone or not being fond of someone. There is no evidence for it. Quite the opposite. He wants to be everyone's brother and sister. That indicates to me that he does love them.

You seem to be confusing the two entirely different issues.

 

[Modbert]

Mod, Im hardly contradicting myself. Yurt obviously understands what I'm saying completely.

You made a false claim. You claimed that he doesn't love non-believers (or he isn't fond of them). You can't substantiate either claim.

You can't prove that "Not B&S" = "Doesn't love" or "Isn't fond of"

See I disagree that we are any less brothers and sisters simply because of belief or non-belief. I am not accusing him of not loving someone or not being fond of someone. There is no evidence for it. Quite the opposite. He wants to be everyone's brother and sister. That indicates to me that he does love them.

You seem to be confusing the two entirely different issues.

He should already consider himself as everyone's brother and sister. He's willing to love them as a brother or sister, if they convert.

Also, as for the "doesn't love" or "isn't fond of" part you posted about:

The only thing I said about the Governor is that he isn't as fond of non-believers as he is of believers.

The disagreement lays here about our conclusions of the fact he considers non-believers of Jesus Christ to not be his brothers and sisters. You see the fact he's willing to love them if they convert as proof he loves them just as much. I don't.

At this point, I figure we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[shintao]

I love my wife and yes, I have looked at other women but not with thoughts and intent of lust.

So you've never had strong thoughts about another woman before?

Before I was married, yes and before I was saved, yes. As a married man, no, I can look at a woman say she's fine looking or good looking to the eye without having lust for the flesh, simply looking isn't adultery.

@uscitizen

People sometimes take Jesus' words about not casting a stone out of context, Jesus spoke those words because he knew he was dealing with hypocritical Pharisees and knew they were tempting Him with evil when they brought that woman forth for stoning.

And some people claim they "knew" what Jesus was thinking.

 

[AllieBaba]

No. You're trying to claim he said that he doesn't love non-believers. That is a lie. That's not what he said. You're incorrectly extrapolating that from what he said. Which is the exact opposite of what he was actually saying.

Just because he doesn't think they are his brothers and sisters doesn't mean he hates them. Quite the contrary the fact that he is inviting them to become his brothers and sisters says otherwise.

Nor does it mean that he treats them badly. Nor that he wouldnt help them as his neighbor.

There is a far cry from disagreeing that nonbelievers are his brothers and sisters and your accusation that he doesn't love his neighbor.

You're automatically assuming that a lack of love means hate. It could just be a lack of love. Saying that someone isn't your brother and sister because they are a non-believer is a false argument. He's willing to invite them to being something that they should already be.

He's willing to love them as brothers and sisters, if they convert. I don't believe Jesus ever said he'd only love all of his children, if they all converted to believing in what he said.

Where does he say he doesn't love them?

He just says they aren't his brethren.

Nice job of reading what you want it to mean into a perfectly harmless and universally true statement.

 

[Yurt]

Mod, Im hardly contradicting myself. Yurt obviously understands what I'm saying completely.

You made a false claim. You claimed that he doesn't love non-believers (or he isn't fond of them). You can't substantiate either claim.

You can't prove that "Not B&S" = "Doesn't love" or "Isn't fond of"

See I disagree that we are any less brothers and sisters simply because of belief or non-belief. I am not accusing him of not loving someone or not being fond of someone. There is no evidence for it. Quite the opposite. He wants to be everyone's brother and sister. That indicates to me that he does love them.

You seem to be confusing the two entirely different issues.

exactly

modbert usually posts a link or something to back up his claims, but when he knows he is a full of it, he won't

 

[shintao]

You're automatically assuming that a lack of love means hate. It could just be a lack of love. Saying that someone isn't your brother and sister because they are a non-believer is a false argument. He's willing to invite them to being something that they should already be.

He's willing to love them as brothers and sisters, if they convert. I don't believe Jesus ever said he'd only love all of his children, if they all converted to believing in what he said.

You're correct that apathy could be an option as well. But it doesn't matter. Because you have no evidence to make your "He doesn't love nonbelievers" claim. Nor does the OP have evidence to support that he isn't fond of nonbelievers.

Face it. Your accusation that he has no love for non-Christians is unfounded.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

So you've never had strong thoughts about another woman before?

Before I was married, yes and before I was saved, yes. As a married man, no, I can look at a woman say she's fine looking or good looking to the eye without having lust for the flesh, simply looking isn't adultery.

@uscitizen

People sometimes take Jesus' words about not casting a stone out of context, Jesus spoke those words because he knew he was dealing with hypocritical Pharisees and knew they were tempting Him with evil when they brought that woman forth for stoning.

And some people claim they "knew" what Jesus was thinking.

I'm not claiming to think what Jesus was thinking, I'm pointing out how people quote scripture out of its full context just so they can make judges out of everyone who disagrees with sinful behavior.

 

[Yurt]

Before I was married, yes and before I was saved, yes. As a married man, no, I can look at a woman say she's fine looking or good looking to the eye without having lust for the flesh, simply looking isn't adultery.

@uscitizen

People sometimes take Jesus' words about not casting a stone out of context, Jesus spoke those words because he knew he was dealing with hypocritical Pharisees and knew they were tempting Him with evil when they brought that woman forth for stoning.

And some people claim they "knew" what Jesus was thinking.

I'm not claiming to think what Jesus was thinking, I'm pointing out how people quote scripture out of its full context just so they can make judges out of everyone who disagrees with sinful behavior.

long live legion troll!

 

[Yurt]

no surprise modbert ran away from this thread

 

[Wright]

You sure can try and twist something into something that it is not. Governing has nothing to do with religion. This speech was given at a church and not in a congressional meeting. How you govern and how you worship are two separate things and of course Gov. Bentley is clearing stating religious beliefs which are different from his governing practices.

How about you, if you were a politician would you ensure that all of your beliefs were pushed onto everybody or would you just work to govern. I am christian. I would never force anybody else to live a christian life. Neither is Gov Bentley. He is leaving church at church and living politics with politics. Why don't you do the same.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I am wondering if there is a full transcript of the sermon (it was in a church, so it was a sermon.) Were the statements made right next to each other, or was there something else left out that would add to the context of what he is saying?

Being elected to office isnt like going into the millitary, you do not lose any of your previous rights by becoming a governor.

no. but you shouldn't be proselytizing. i think you DO lose your right to that when you're getting a public paycheck.

Really? And where is it written that becoming a politician forfeits your Constitutional rights?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I am wondering if there is a full transcript of the sermon (it was in a church, so it was a sermon.) Were the statements made right next to each other, or was there something else left out that would add to the context of what he is saying?

Being elected to office isnt like going into the millitary, you do not lose any of your previous rights by becoming a governor.

no. but you shouldn't be proselytizing. i think you DO lose your right to that when you're getting a public paycheck.

He was doing it inside a church. Maybe if he was doing it at a governor's meeting it would be something to get concerned about.

Seems to me it's something to be concerned about if his constituents consider it something to be concerned about. He's not MY governor, so I don't give a shit. If his constituents don't like what he says, they can certainly elect a new governor, or even impeach him if they wish. I think that's all the censorship required.

 

[Cecilie1200]

More harm and hate is generated in the name of God then in any other human endeavor.

Wrong. A bloody little atheistic endeavor known as "Communism" actually holds that title. Christianity - religion in general, for that matter - is going to have to kill several hundred million more people to become the all-time champion.