Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Zaac, Dec 1, 2015.
Why does this man keep talking?
Honestly, that doesn't bother me. There have been very few presidents who have had the right view of God, Scripture and the afterlife. Out of this entire group of candidates, who has the best possibility of running the country well and at least with some moral control? That is what I'm looking for.
Rubio, Cruz or Huckabee if they weren't so hawkish.
This seems to be the wisdom from the devil with which Christians are making decisions. If you want to run the country well and at least have some moral control, why don't Christians start supporting men of God who show some character and integrity instead of supporting folks who don't? How on earth do we expect the condition of the country to change by always settling for evil?
I don't settle for evil - I just choose out of the poor choices we have. I refuse to not vote and I refuse to throw my vote away - although voting in NY anything but Democratic is pretty much tossing your vote away except in local elections.
If they are poor choices, why do you and the Body keep choosing them and expecting the tide against Christ to turn?
Again, like many so-called followers of Christ, every election cycle yall make it abundantly clear that you care more about your politics than you do standing firmly for Christ. And if you feel like the democrat is gonna win in NY local elections anyhow, then why wouldn't it make sense to support a candidate who aligns with Christ instead of going with one that just happens to not be a Democrat?
I would love to see Hilary be bold enough to give HER Biblical interpretations to a biased media source. Won't hold my breath (can you imagine that?! Alien)- and of course this issue would then be insignificant, wouldn't it Zaac??? Many Christian's believe Hell is spiritual separation from God and not a "physical place". Maybe Zaac would like to tell us exactly were this physical Hell is at according to the Bible???
BTW, I don't believe in the rapture either and as for his view of annihilation - which followed his statement that not everyone interprets the Bible the same - SO WHAT!
Zaac, you must really be worried about Ben Carson to be repeating this kind of rhetoric and suddenly basing your opinion on perfect religious conformity...
BTW, I also love this Washington Post reporting:
Maybe Zaac can give us a precise description of, as the Washington Post author puts it: "the divine"Cautious? LOL
Why? You planning on supporting Hillary? If you're okay with killing babies and not loving people, then go right ahead.
I will right after you give me the GPS coordinates of heaven.
The so what is what I already said or are you one of those folks who struggles to read before commenting?
Yes, i stay up nights at a time worrying about a sociopathic 2015 version of Herman Cain.
Maybe they should ask the Divine Miss M?
My point was that you wouldn’t think to make an issue if it was Hilary giving her religious views…but you already knew that, didn’t you?
Get real Zaac, first of all I see you attacking Ben Carson in thread after thread which you start here but not so on Hilary (His only true adversary should he win the nomination). Second, if abortion is the issue you have against Hilary and this issue is a priority point for you, Ben Carson is in truth unquestionably the most outspoken candidate we have against it! If you can’t or won’t admit that I have to question your true motives and wonder why you are merely in denial.
Either you hope to help Hilary Clinton by attacking Ben Carson or you are being quite ignorant in your belief that in taking up the agenda to attack the man with the most persuasive arguments against abortion while voting non-partisan to boot does not appear to any rational thinker as counterproductive to any real hope of achieving the goal of making positive changes to deter abortion. Therein your priories are revealed so you look quite foolish in bringing up the subject with your little attempt to distract from being called out on how you base your conclusions.
But apparently there are bigger issues for you. Deny it all you want. Your agenda speaks itself that if your desire was to put up a serious fight against abortion then you are not showing it by repeating biased liberal media hypocritical(concerning requesting judgment being made on religious interpretations) rhetorical (lies) about Ben Carson as you do in this thread (obviously being inspired by the liberal biased Washington Post antics) by joining in with spinning Carson’s words which clearly reference the “physical” Hell and then you following that by making a false rhetorical statement such as the title of this thread to persuade others to agree with your cause.
People are not stupid and see what the media (and you) are doing with such reporting and rhetorical lies. Even if there was merit to it you can’t levelheadedly use it as an argument against Carson on religious grounds while simultaneously saying religion doesn’t matter or shouldn’t be in play. BTW, I read just fine and frankly see logically undeniable hypocrisy throughout your arguments being based first on the issues of religion and now abortion while neglecting to note the primary opponent to it.
Heaven will physically be on Earth. Your turn. – I mean, serious Zaac, since you base your conclusion that Ben Carson should stop talking because does not believe in Hell based on his words that clearly say “physical hell” you should be able to give us the Biblical physical location, no? Or, was the “physical hell” part just a “little” oversite when designing this argument of “yours” that Carson should be dissed based on these religious interpretations??
Or maybe you should stop talking?
And you know this how? When Hillary thinks it's important to give her religious views and breaks out in southern black preacher cadence, come talk to me for a critique. As it stands I don't know you from Adam and have spoken to you twice if three times.
Where on earth are all you "new" folks popping up from? Yall just graduate from the right wing academy or something? Dude, I don't know you. There's no need to talk about Hillary YET. So rest your fingers. You will have enough time over the next 9 years to talk about her foolishness as much as you like. Right now, she's just warchesting money.
Again, I don't know you. So why are you coming at me sideways about something you don't know? It's making you look kinda ...odd.
Pure foolishness. Why do I care what his stance is about abortion when his stance on other things leave me thinking the man needs Jesus? What on earth are you talking about? Are you just trying to start an argument? Why would I admit or not admit anything about his stance on abortion? Did I mention Ben Carson and abortion and suddenly forget that I did???
Again, what on earth are you talking about?What does the man's foolishness as quoted in the original post have to do with abortion? what are you trying to defend his abortion stance for when no one has questioned his abortion stance? Maybe you need to exit stage left, come back and introduce yourself and try this again.
Dude, you went all the way left about something no one was talking about.
Like I said, I'll give you the physical location as soon as you give me the GPS coordinates of heaven.
Maybe I should just stop talking to you because i don't know ya yet you've taken t upon yourself to come at me sideways about something that I hadn't said anything about as Ben Carson is concerned. And it doesn't do for me to talk to folks who blatantly disregard the word of God about hell.
But alas i don't know ya and don't think I really care to at this point.
Just adding you to ITL's favorite file because you might not be okay.
Honestly, belief in hell is not an essential Christian doctrine although most Christians do believe in hell because this world is a preview of hell, but many SDA do not believe in hell. SDA theologians like the brilliant Desmond Ford argue that eternal hell is too much punishment, but actually all people deserve eternal hell. Desmond Ford believes that Christians go to heaven and non-Christians suffer the destruction of the soul, but that is a minority doctrine. Most Christians believe in eternal torment for the damned, or the non-Christian. The SDA has liberty in the non-essentials and we should treat them with charity.
If you want to hear some really ignorant Christian theology, listen to Obama himself or his long-time preacher Jeremiah Wright.
I believe in the great Protestant saying:
In Essentials Unity, In Non-Essentials Liberty, In All Things Charity.
I don't expect the tide against Christ to turn because truthfully, there are really no true Christ followers in the government who can make a difference. There may be a few but not enough to turn the tide. This country is anti-God and as such, that's how the government is going to be.
I don't care more about politics than standing firmly for Christ. If there was a candidate who aligned with Christ (truly aligns with Christ and not just with lip service), I'd vote for them but I just don't see them on my voting card.
I think Cruz is a good Southern Baptist, but I doubt if Fundamentalists consider him a good Christian.
As for Dr. Carson, I think that it is a mistake in both parties to call all Seventh Day Adventists cultic after all these years of evidence to the contrary but try and have an intelligent conversation on theology with an American.
Democrats hate Dr. Carson but I would rather live next door to Dr. Carson than any of the Democrat candidates. Both Democrats and Republicans should avoid theological criticisms of Dr. Carson in my opinion because Dr. Carson loves Jesus and the Jesus that he loves is God.
Foolishness. from the sounds of it, Ben Carson loves A Jesus, but definitely not THE Jesus of the Bible. His Jesus is a self manufactured, idolatrous version of the Biblical Jesus. There is no difference between his manufactured idolatrous Jesus than there is the one of the Mormons.
You are 100 % wrong and you cannot show that the SDA are cultic as the Mormons are.
The Protestant Reformation taught In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, and in all things charity.
I fail to see the unity, liberty or charity of your point of view. All I see is your political hatred.
Dr. Carson is Christian.
Sounds like your own brand of political ignorance and hatred because I didn't say anything about politics. He rejects Hell for what Jesus says it is. He's a false teacher. And his beliefs lead me to wonder if this manufactured Jesus that isn't the Jesus of the Bible is the one that he supposedly placed his trust?
I don't have to show that they are as cultic as the Mormons. They, by their own reshaping of who Jesus of the Bible is, makes them as cultic as the Mormons.
Is this discussion really happening? Don't believe in a literal hell? Not Christian...pretty simple.
The motto of the Protestant Reformation serves us here:
In Essentials Unity, In Non-Essentials Liberty, In All Things Charity
Belief in hell as the lake of fire and a place of eternal torment is not an essential, so Dr. Carson has liberty and as Christians we should be charitable towards what we believe is a doctrinal error. Even Desmond Ford, a better theologian than either one of us, believes that the souls of non-Christians are merely destroyed and do not suffer eternal torment, which Dr. Ford (also SDA) considers too terrible to contemplate. The basic error of this correct contemplation of the horror of hell is that the human soul is eternal and cannot be destroyed. Baptist radio preacher Oliver B. Greene used to preach that he wouldn't want a little dog to go to hell and would try to catch it by the hind leg to keep it from falling into the pit of hell.
Of course, I myself consider this SDA doctrinal point erroneous and even though I agree 100% with the SBC Baptist Faith and Message, I also consider that my doctrinal beliefs are only as good as my flesh and blood brain which God gave me and I do not presume that I have a perfect understanding because my brain is sinful and my thoughts are sinful so therefore I recognize Dr. Carson as a brother in Jesus and I forgive his minor errors and I pray that he has charity for my shortcomings and when we all get to Heaven we will understand better by and by.
Sorry...sounds like a liberal theology cop-out to me. Denial of a literal Hell is not a minor error or a non-essential.
If a literal heaven exists, then a literal hell must too. Believe it, or you are believing in the wrong thing.
You have not shown from SDA doctrine that they have a false doctrine of Jesus, because they do not. The Mormons say Jesus is the Spirit brother of Lucifer, etc.
A theological doctrine of hell is not a doctrine of the second person of the Trinity.
Where is your charity?