Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Crabtownboy, Dec 22, 2008.
There is hope, praise God, there is hope.
I didn't realize you support gay "civil unions."
I don't, never have, probably never will. Read beyond this simple issue and please talk to the real issues raised.. They, the new evangelicals do not support gay civil unions either, but they do see there may be other issues more important.
The older generation of "conservatives" do not seem to give a whit about these kids, human trafficking, poverty, or people with AIDS ... and that is simply un-Christian. That the new generation of evangelicals sees these as important issues is, to me, a sign of hope. The older generation likes to protest and talk about how bad eveyone else is, but does not want to have to get their hands dirty helping people. This has been the modus operandi of the Baby Boom generation and the evangelicals of that generation.
I do agree with the statement from the article. Do you?
And the bottom line to those issues is??????????
The answer is sin!........ and, yes, the wages of sin is death, and only Jesus is the cure!
What do these propose that we do??????
We can give to missions and we can go and serve.....or we can do both at home and many do. ........But it still doesn't solve the problem of sin or its consequence.
If they're proposing political activism........ I've got one proposal: If the top 5% of the wealthiest people were required to give just 4% of their wealth for medicine, clothing, shelter, food, deep wells, and education..... to the third world countries, and withdraw the corporate controls off the natural resources and lands which they've acquired and give it back to those people so they can make a living, the problem would most likely be solved. ........But it wont happen.....just like it doesn't happen already: Our country contributes to charities, religious organizations, and aid from our government, only for much....particularly that of government aid, going to finance the corruptions within the structure of power elsewhere. Why doesn't it produce better results????? Because greed (sin) lieth at the door!
Sin is not pc. But it is sinners that come to the cross of salvation. Only Jesus can change the world..... and, until he comes, Jesus changes the world through changing one person at a time. We should not allow the confusion of politics with ministry...... but we must be constant in affirming our Christian values, which includes moral issues affecting the lives of our families and our children, when there is a forum, an issue, a point on which we can vote or cast our opinion.
they apparently don't care about sin either. This group seeks to be politically correct. Want to water down the gospel, be as unbiblical as you can get? PC is the way to do it.
How is doing something to help prevent the death of 30,000 children a day "politicaly correct" in the negative sense you used it? They are calling people to follow the gospel of helping others. That is much harder to do than just screaming about what you do not like. Complaining only about abortion and "politically correctness and gays, but doing nothing to help others is watering down the message of Christ!
Those who can help, do. Those who cannot, criticize.
And a lot speculate on the giving of others.
They are not calling people to follow the gospel if they are not calling homosexuality and abortion sin.
How would you popssibly know if people who are anti homosexuality and anti mudering children do anything to help others or not? You wouldn't, assuming they don't is the same as lying about them.
When a mainstream media is highlighting a church, bells go off in my head. The world hates Jesus Christ. If this church was doing the Lord's work, thay wouldn't be on ABC news.
And the idea that some people can assume that others don't give, or care, is completely ignorant.
Some high horses around here.
You chose to quote the article, but overlooked the opening paragraphs?
So let me guess: You're going to respond that you don't agree with everything the person in this article believes, but you applaud his one comment that you do agree with?
I point you to the article again:
From the bottom of page 2 of the article:
This is not a "simple" issue.
I was driving down the interstate the other day, and realized: Just about every non-major off ramp had an adult bookstore. I asked my wife, is it just that I notice it more because I'm a Christian, or are there really more of them than there used to be? And she replied, there's more of them.
Do you enjoy the fact that pornography is more prevalent now than at any other time in our history?
If not, then realize this: This article proposes emphasizing other areas/issues of concern, in order to lessen the emphasis on those openly living in sin--something you said you do not support. This "one simple issue," as you put it, affects lifestyles, marriage, families -- the core elements of our society. The erosion of our core biblical values is never a "simple issue."
In part. But I also look at what the final paragraphs of the article say, where one of these supporters is focusing all his efforts on helping displaced Iraqis. Based on what you're trying to say, one could ask: Why is he only focusing on one simple issue? How come he's not spreading his efforts to all the issues brought up in the article, to include heterosexual marriage and abortions?
My answer to you is from 1 Corinthians 12: Some are feet, some are ears. Be who God made you, and work as the ability which He gave you.
If some folks are called to focus on gay "civil unions," and some are called to work on anti-abortion, and you are called to work with displaced Iraqis -- why do you disparage the others? Aren't we all of the same body, but different members?
Trying to divert the topic again. Why is it that you are not concerned about the 30,000 children who die around the world daily from starvation and disease. It is not necessary that they die.
Are only the unborn worth saving ... so many can die of starvation and disease later?
Did you just criticize me?
I knew that without fail the topic would come up and that some would try to hijack the thread into a topic of homosexuality.
Do I have to agree with everything a person says? Can I not agree on some issues and not on others?
I point you to the article again:
From the bottom of page 2 of the article:
This is not a "simple" issue.
I believe your wife is correct.
I do not know if it is more prevalent than at any other time in our history. It may well be. Pornography is a topic that I do not follow and am quite ignorant about. I do not approve of it and would love it if it were to disappear forever. I am not sure what the definition of pornography is and would be hard pressed to define the word ... I know the Supreme Court has struggled with this topic. What is pornography to one person may not be to another. To some extent what is considered porno is cultural. I remember reading an article about what part of the body does a woman cover if a man see her totally undressed. In one Asian culture the woman immediately hids her knees behind her hands. That is not what most American women would cover first ... at least I do not think so.
I would say that living in abundance and doing nothing to help keep alive 30,000 children a day that are dieing around the world is also living in sin ... a different type of sin
We would have to ask that person to know for sure. Maybe that is the area the feel God is calling them. You quote from I Cor. 12 could well apply here.
You are right ... but we seem to have far too many mouths that can shout, but not enough hands that are willing to help. [No, I am not criticizing you ... but the American body of Christ in general.
Primarily because the very large majority of those I have talked with, and have seen post on this bb appear to have no concern for the child once it is born. It requires work to help these children, not just feel-good protesting. Personally I have never seen nor heard of a Christian group protesting in support of starving and children in distress around the world.
If as much effort were put into helping the living, but needful children of the world we would see amazing results.
".....you let your money do your giving for you, and you call it love, Christian love....."
'60s protest song, can't remember any more of it.
And yet, you wrote that the "new evangelicals" did not support gay civil unions; I pulled several quotes from the article that proved they do.
What say you?
And yet, you would disparage those who disagree with you on some issues, and choose to focus on certain issues, rather than the ones you feel are important?
Why are you focusing on this one issue, while others focus on abortion?
That's why I posted it.
Perhaps, in some cases, that's all they can do? Or know how? Yet you, as the feet, would feel like you're more worthy than the mouth?
Why do you need to hear of them doing so? Have you done an internet search to find out if there are any Christian organizations trying to feed the children? Perhaps they choose to focus on feeding the children, rather than bring it into the political arena?
You need to realize: If you're going to support articles of this type, which openly say in more than one place that they support gay civil unions, you're right: It will become a homosexual issue.
Let me ask you: Would you be willing to de-emphasize a murderer or an adulterer, if they fed the 30,000 children you're worried about?
Oh for sure. I know there are Christian organizations and that many are doing great work. I knew that long before the Internet was invented. However, having said that I have seen few churches really trying to help. I have seen churches demonstrating against gays and abortion ... again it seems that many are concerned about the unborn, but not about the living. I see these folk as partial pro-life and partial pro-death.
And I feel that is true largely because protesting gays and abortion costs nothing personally. Getting out and helping the homeless, the starving, etc. takes hard work.
It is not an either/or topic. We should emphasis both equally ... and we are not. If we are to be pro-life we should be pro-life for both the unborn and for the living.
So since you don't see it, you assume it doesn't happen. You probably disregard the passages in scripture that say give in private, and the lord will reward you openly. Perhaps that church demonstrating does give. Perhaps it is none of your business how much.
I am not sure what your comment has to do with the topic of the thread. Are you concerned about 30,000 kids dieing each day from starvation and desease ... both of which could be prevented?
Each church's primary responsibility is their own flock. From there, they should be sure that they are making a difference in the community. They should also be raising up men and women for missions and supporting them in such. Each church cannot do everything but every church can do something. I cannot make a difference for the 30,000 lives that are lost each day but I can help make a difference by supporting those ministries that ARE helping them and I can keep up doing what I can do here. Our church preached against abortion but felt that just preaching against it was not enough so we started a crisis pregnancy center. We had a man who felt called to be a doctor in the Congo from the time he was 8 and after growing up in our church, he's been sent off to the Congo and is running a hospital there and is working on trying to get another started. We send teams to Nicaragua and Cuba every 9 months or so to build a Bible school (Cuba) and to support an orphanage and school (Nicaragua). We have missionaries in Banda Ache who are training other missionaries to go on the mission field and then we have numerous other missionaries who serve from upstate NY running a girl's camp to Estonia, helping the child prostitutes. We have atleast 3 teens who I know of right now who are using their high school and college time to prepare them for the mission field.
But what is the main goal of each and every missionary here? To save souls. Should a life be lost without Christ, that is a soul lost. A soul that is saved and the life is lost is gain for them. We cannot brush sin under the carpet because we are not following Christ's commands. Instead we are to preach the Gospel first. To say anything else is demeaning the sacrifice of Christ's life on the cross. Did He come here to make lives better or to redeem lives? If it was to make lives better, why wasn't everyone rescued from abuse, poverty and sickness? They weren't. He came to save the lost. That is now our job to point the lost to Him.