Liar, liar ... pants on fire! Who's the bigger liar: Clinton or Trump?

[righteousdude2]

The next few months look to be one of the dirtiest presidential campaigns in American history. Granted, some of those from the previous two-hundred years may rival this one, but still, the mud will be flying. It should be equivalent to an old fashion "mus wrestling" contest.

With that in mind ... of the two candidates, which do you consider to be the most unbelievable, and why? ALSO, because the Bible does call for truthfulness (Eph. 4:15), do you consider this value to be important when choosing a president?

 

[Rolfe]

At least Clinton does not hide the fact that she is a Liberal...

 

[InTheLight]

At least Clinton does not hide the fact that she is a Liberal...

I think when Clinton lies she realizes she's lying. Trump lies to himself, so when he tells a lie he doesn't think it's a lie. Plus he tells it over and over and over again, sometimes in the same sentence. Therefore, I voted that Clinton was not quite at Trump's level of lying ability.

 

[Darrell C]

The next few months look to be one of the dirtiest presidential campaigns in American history. Granted, some of those from the previous two-hundred years may rival this one, but still, the mud will be flying. It should be equivalent to an old fashion "mus wrestling" contest.

With that in mind ... of the two candidates, which do you consider to be the most unbelievable, and why? ALSO, because the Bible does call for truthfulness (Eph. 4:15), do you consider this value to be important when choosing a president?

I think the culture that has risen in our country has brought about a shift in Presidential Elections. These days it seems we are voting in caricatures. Options for viable candidates use to be determined on policy, whereas today they are determined by something very different. Between the desire for celebrity and Agenda Figurehead, I would suggest that our voting population has fully embraced a sitcom mentality, and think their views are reality, lol. I think we have seen evidence of something we may have suspected before, but think is the case today, that...the Office of President ihas been put up for sale to the highest bidder. THe currency used is not just money alone, though.

The one thing I would counsel Christians in, when they decide to vote, is to go out and vote. A number of Christians sat out because "their conscience wouldn't let them empower a Mormon." And guess what...

...that's why we have Obama in Office, and then elected twice.

I don't like Trump, never had, but, because he is running as a Republican (and let's face it, we've had actors as president before), I feel he will have at least some responsibility to, and accountability to...the conservative voter. What that means is that we know without question that a vote for Clinton is a vote for abortion and the homosexual agenda, we stand at least a chance that a vote for Trump is, at the very least, not a vote for those things.

I think they are all liars, but that doesn't mean I don't think God can work in thier lives. Like I said, we had an actor for President before, and that turned out okay. Maybe if Trump is elected and we actually do pray for those in power, we might see something remarkable happen.

But of the two, hands down Clinton is the most unbelievable. We already know she is a liar. We ust have to sit out the mud-slinging to find out what Trump's lying about, lol.


God bless.

 

[Revmitchell]

Trump is not a liberal he is an opportunist. What ever gives him the best opportunity for business is what he goes with. He has no moral grounding. He has no agenda except making himself more money. He doesn't care about conservative issues, he doesn't care about liberal issues, except when supporting them make him more money.

 

[InTheLight]

Trump is not a liberal he is an opportunist. He doesn't care about conservative issues, he doesn't care about liberal issues, except when supporting them make him more money.

.

 

[Revmitchell]

.


View attachment 639

If you think this is true then you have no idea what conservatism is.

 

[preachinjesus]

How can we sit in the seat of judgment of two people who stand at such a distance to us that we have no access to their lives or who they truly are?

 

[InTheLight]

How can we sit in the seat of judgment of two people who stand at such a distance to us that we have no access to their lives or who they truly are?

Trump: "I'm such a strong Christian."
Trump: "I've never asked God to forgive me for anything."

One of those statements is true. Which one?

 

[Revmitchell]

How can we sit in the seat of judgment of two people who stand at such a distance to us that we have no access to their lives or who they truly are?

I suppose you believe that the information about the people that has been made public is not enough. I disagree. They are working to become the leader of this country. It is our place to make this judgments.

 

[preachinjesus]

I suppose you believe that the information about the people that has been made public is not enough. I disagree. They are working to become the leader of this country. It is our place to make this judgments.

It is our place to discern whether one, the other, or someone else, is being consistent and truthful, yes. But for Christians to openly call others liars and scoff at them is, imho, too far. It is like the accusation that President Obama is not a Christian...who am I to judge that man's salvation? I can't know. Perhaps instead of creating a situation where we, Christians, make such judgments we try crafting a better way. Politics does nothing to benefit the Bride of Christ.

 

[InTheLight]

It is our place to discern whether one, the other, or someone else, is being consistent and truthful, yes. But for Christians to openly call others liars and scoff at them is, imho, too far. It is like the accusation that President Obama is not a Christian...who am I to judge that man's salvation? I can't know.

Can't openly call someone a liar?
You can't know if someone is a Christian?

Trump: "I've never asked God to forgive me of anything."

1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.

Done and done.

 

[Revmitchell]

It is our place to discern whether one, the other, or someone else, is being consistent and truthful, yes. But for Christians to openly call others liars and scoff at them is, imho, too far. It is like the accusation that President Obama is not a Christian...who am I to judge that man's salvation? I can't know. Perhaps instead of creating a situation where we, Christians, make such judgments we try crafting a better way. Politics does nothing to benefit the Bride of Christ.

Do we judge a man's salvation when we refuse to allow someone to be a member of our churches because they are not saved? How is that any different?

Based on Obama's words, based on Trumps words about salvation and based on what scripture says we know they are not saved. We have not judged them God has and has made it plain in scripture.

Further, when our politicians knowingly attempt to deceive us about them, their character, their agenda, and what is going on in the world we should first recognize it and then condemn it.

 

[preachinjesus]

Do we judge a man's salvation when we refuse to allow someone to be a member of our churches because they are not saved? How is that any different?

This isn't the same thing. When we engage with someone in our covenant membership process (at the church where I currently serve) we have a direct, proximate relationship with them. We are close with them. We cannot say the same thing about someone like President Obama or either of the two major party candidates. This isn't the same thing.

Based on Obama's words, based on Trumps words about salvation and based on what scripture says we know they are not saved. We have not judged them God has and has made it plain in scripture.

We cannot know, through the filtered lens of media and propaganda, the eternal state of one's soul. To sit in judgment of one's salvation because you've seen them on TV is akin to the same attitude the religious leaders of Jesus' day had about tax collectors, Samaritans, and publicans. It is not unironic that Jesus rejected the former group and embraced the latter. We cannot ultimately know, through the distance between ourselves and these public figures, the nature of the salvation nor their followership of Jesus Christ.

 

[Revmitchell]

This isn't the same thing. When we engage with someone in our covenant membership process (at the church where I currently serve) we have a direct, proximate relationship with them. We are close with them. We cannot say the same thing about someone like President Obama or either of the two major party candidates. This isn't the same thing.

How is it not? Regardless of how close one stands to someone ( which is irrelevant) we receive clear explanations on their view about God and salvation directly from them. We see them saying it, we hear them saying it, therefore we know their understanding of it.

We cannot know, through the filtered lens of media and propaganda, the eternal state of one's soul. To sit in judgment of one's salvation because you've seen them on TV is akin to the same attitude the religious leaders of Jesus' day had about tax collectors, Samaritans, and publicans. It is not unironic that Jesus rejected the former group and embraced the latter. We cannot ultimately know, through the distance between ourselves and these public figures, the nature of the salvation nor their followership of Jesus Christ.

We can. The lens of media is not always as you say. There are plenty of times we see clear and direct statements from them. We take those clear and direct statements and measure them against scripture. It is my position that to ignore those clear and direct is fool hardy.

Further, if what you say is true about salvation then it need also be true of everything the politicans claim and say and that means we have no reliable means by which to make an intelligent decision on who to vote for. We should just always ignore the media and the political speeches of politicians and not vote for we do not know for whom to vote for.

I think you are over stating the impact of the media and then in an isolated way intentionally only applying that to the issue of salvation. I see your position as inconsistent.

 

[InTheLight]

We can. The lens of media is not always as you say. There are plenty of times we see clear and direct statements from them. We take those clear and direct statements and measure them against scripture. It is my position that to ignore those clear and direct is fool hardy.

Exactly.

Trump was asked point blank: "Who do you say Jesus is?" and his answer was not, "He is the Christ, the Son of God." He did not say, "He's my Lord and Savior", no, he said, "he's a brave man and someone that gives me confidence and security."

So Jesus is like an accessory to Trump's life. That is the answer of a non-Christian.

 

[preachinjesus]

How is it not?

It is different, if for no other reason than we don't use the same criterion to elect someone to office as we use to welcome them into church membership. The two things are entirely different.

Further, if what you say is true about salvation then it need also be true of everything the politicans claim and say and that means we have no reliable means by which to make an intelligent decision on who to vote for. We should just always ignore the media and the political speeches of politicians and not vote for we do not know for whom to vote for.

We absolutely should use the statements and speeches as barometers of who we cast our votes for, but (and I don't know about you) I don't care if someone claims to be or not to be a Christian when I cast my vote. In other words, I don't only vote for the Christians. When I vote for someone, it isn't based on their claims of faith or adherence to religion, it is because of their policies. As a result I entirely agree that speeches, interviews, and policy statements are helpful. However, the easiest of lies told to the public again and again since the founding of this nation have been "I am a insert religion" as a reason for voting for someone.

I think you are over stating the impact of the media and then in an isolated way intentionally only applying that to the issue of salvation. I see your position as inconsistent.

That's fine, I don't think it is. I believe it is the height of hubris to suggest we can know if someone is saved or unsaved based on a public perception and not personal relationship. It is also not the way of Jesus.

 

[preachinjesus]

Trump was asked point blank: "Who do you say Jesus is?" and his answer was not, "He is the Christ, the Son of God." He did not say, "He's my Lord and Savior", no, he said, "he's a brave man and someone that gives me confidence and security."

Most of those who claim Christ in the history of the Church would not answer your question with those words...including the authors of the New Testament.

 

[InTheLight]

Most of those who claim Christ in the history of the Church would not answer your question with those words...

I don't know about that, but I know how people in the last 100 years would answer that question, and I submit it would be something along the lines I suggested. It's not "Jesus makes me confident".

including the authors of the New Testament.

1 John 4:15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.

 

[Revmitchell]

It is different, if for no other reason than we don't use the same criterion to elect someone to office as we use to welcome them into church membership. The two things are entirely different.

Doesn't matter in each case we are making a judgment of their statements about their claims of being a Christian. The setting is irrelevant other than we should be consistent in both.

We absolutely should use the statements and speeches as barometers of who we cast our votes for, but (and I don't know about you) I don't care if someone claims to be or not to be a Christian when I cast my vote. In other words, I don't only vote for the Christians. When I vote for someone, it isn't based on their claims of faith or adherence to religion, it is because of their policies. As a result I entirely agree that speeches, interviews, and policy statements are helpful. However, the easiest of lies told to the public again and again since the founding of this nation have been "I am a insert religion" as a reason for voting for someone.

I do care if they are a Christian or not if they are publicly claiming to be. Once they do that I am looking for evidence of their claim. I would rather vote for a solid Christian than one who is not.

That's fine, I don't think it is. I believe it is the height of hubris to suggest we can know if someone is saved or unsaved based on a public perception and not personal relationship. It is also not the way of Jesus.

Wait a minute here. We have not been talking about making that judgment based on public perception. We have been talking about making that judgment based on clear and direct statements from them. That is not the same thing and the latter is more than enough to come to a conclusion about their salvation.