A New Type of Christian Political Discussion

[windcatcher]

Hypocrite!!

Now that's funny............... I don't care WHO you are!:laugh:

 

[Revmitchell]

If you want to have a "higher level of discussion" just do it and stop debating about.

 

[JustChristian]

If you want to have a "higher level of discussion" just do it and stop debating about.

I was simply answering a question from yjr ptevious poster.

 

[TomVols]

I wish we could do this sort of thing around here, but people are too partisan to be kind and civil.

 

[carpro]

I was simply answering a question from yjr ptevious poster.

It seems you were incapable of keep your pledge even until the end of this thread.

Somehow, I knew you weren't serious.:laugh:

Your past posting history suggested you were being disingenious in the first place.

You have confirmed the suggestion.

 

[JustChristian]

There are just core biblical principles at stake that divide us. Not going to happen. We will not compromise them. These will be socialism/communism, abortion, and homose*uality.

This doesn't say anything about agreeing on any issues. I'm simply talking about doing it in a more reasonable fashion. It looks like that is going to happen. Talk among yourselves.

 

[Revmitchell]

This doesn't say anything about agreeing on any issues. I'm simply talking about doing it in a more reasonable fashion. It looks like that is going to happen. Talk among yourselves.

My statement wasn't addressing anything you said. I didn't even quote you.

 

[JustChristian]

Hmmm...

seems as if liberals now want to tone it down since their guy was elected.

Where were your Christian attitudes and Christian posts for the past few years? Some of you even now try to turn every comment critical of Obama toward some criticism of Bush. Is that what you mean by "more christlike"?

Christ knew a hypocrite when he saw one and didn't hesitate to point it out. He condemned sin always.

If that's what you mean by being Christlike, I'm in.

But I suspect it's just a liberal ploy to limit criticism of Obama ...sounds sorta like this may be the Christian liberal version of the fairness doctrine.

JMTC

Is there ever a time to change our behavior for the better? I suppose you're saying there there for you at least. Actually, I've already pretty much given up on achieving this objective. Have fun bashing.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I will answer appropriate questions in the most reasonable way I can. I will ignore wild unsubstantiated accusations and attacks.

I have given you several excellent questions that have gone unanswered. In your approach to be more Christlike, will you make a better effort towards honest debate ?

However, I'm concerned that we see primarily a unwillingness by conservatives to stop the bashing and name calling as evidenced by a very low participation in my offer to tone things down.

That's because we have learned you can't be trusted. To even suggest some people are ignoring your thread on purpose after the challenges you have left unanswered tells me you just don't get it.

And show me, in scripture, where Christ agrees to disagree in a doctrinal dispute.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

As I find I have a little more free time to re-enter the board, albeit on a more limited basis than last time I was here, I will redouble my efforts to keep the level of discourse on a level worthy of Christian dialog and discussion.

 

[Bible-boy]

I'd like to propose that we change the way we communicate as Christians on political issues. I realize that I've been as bad as anyone else and I apologize for that. I personally am going to try to correspond on the board in a more Christian way talking about the issues but leaving out personal attacks or outlandish statements. I hope that we can together make this political discussion more Biblical and more valuable than it has been recently.

I hope that the majority of posters will join me in this effort. This means not characterizing political figures as:

1) the Anti-Christ

2) the Fuhrer

3) Marxist

4) a murderer.

I'm all on board for changing the way political discussions are handled here on the BB. However, I'd have to disagree with your points 3 & 4 above. If a political leader espouses and embraces Marxist political philosophies and ideals then I'm going to point out my concrens regarding him/her. Likewise, if a political leader's voting record and announced position indicates that he/she is a supporter of abortion then I am going to call them what they are, namely a child murderer.

This applies to name-calling of fellow Christians on the board as well.

I wholeheartedly agree.:thumbs:

I think that discussions of economic and legal policy justifiably can include the terms socialistic, free market only, strict constructionist, etc.

I believe that the word "liberal" should be defined and that theological liberals should not be considered to be the same as social or political liberals.

As far as defining liberal goes, your preferred definition of the term is likely not to be the same as mine. However, I agree that there is a difference between Theological liberals and social/political liberals. However, when a Theological liberal's social/political views fall right in line with those espoused by social/political liberals there is nothing wrong with pointing out those connections and expressed ideals.

Radical is beyond liberal. The two do not mean the same thing.

Agreed. However, it is possible to be a radical liberal.:thumbs:

I'm going to do a poll to see how many people are willing to give up the name-calling and harsh rhetoric we've had in the recent past. All facts are one the table. All reasonable interpretations are on the table. All wild accusations with no basis in fact are off the table.

Agreed.:thumbs:

I pledge to start doing this myself. I will try hard not to initiate such attacks and I will no longer answer them.

Agreed. However, as BB Moderator I am bound to answer/address posts that violate the BB Posting Rules and/or User Agreement.

 

[Bible-boy]

Wow! Where are all the hyper-conservatives at?

Come on now. You made this comment after the thread had only been open a few hours. Plus, the thread started the weekend before Thanksgiving. Did it occur to you that some regular posters may be out of town and/or away from the Internet over the holiday week?

 

[Bible-boy]

Yes, one may forgive..... but that does not mean one must trust: Trust is earned, or is given til it is broken and then, if it remains in a state of unfaithfulness in spite of promises and empty words, then it become irreparable: One may then forgive another, but the expectation is that that person is no longer equated as having integrity which agrees with his confession. It doesn't alter love..... but does alter one's position of respect in relationship to another.

Exactly. I have a convicted child molester in my family. Do I forgive him and pray for him? Yes, of course. Will I ever agree to leave my children alone with him? No, never.

 

[Bible-boy]

In this context I can see your point. If a spouse was cheating, and the couple was going to try and save the marriage, it would take both forgiveness and trust. If the offended party said, I forgive you but do not trust you, the marriage might as well end. Sometimes the two are inseperable.

Trust must be earned, especially when it has been broken. In the case above the offended spouse must be willing to allow trust to be re-established (i.e. earned) and the offending spouse must be willing to re-earn that lost trust by his/her faithful actions. But this line of discussion is way off-topic. Please feel free to open a thread on Trust in the General Baptist Forum if you'd like to continue the discussion.

 

[Palatka51]

As long as "Christians" continue to vote for agents of death I will yell at them from the mountain tops. Just as Jotham did against his brother Abimelech in the book of Judges.

 

[Bible-boy]

As long as "Christians" continue to vote for agents of death I will yell at them from the mountain tops. Just as Jotham did against his brother Abimelech in the book of Judges.

Amen!:thumbs:

 

[Dragoon68]

I hope to remain civil in my comments and, if I get out of line which is entirely possible, then I hope to be corrected as appropriate. But I plan to stay the course to speak out on things I think are right or wrong in politics as they relate to the interest of Christians. I plan to name things what they are. I plan to use those descriptions that fit. I don't intend to personally offend any other poster. I may offend the ideas that many have and the positions they take. I may indirectly offend those about which I write but the intent therein is to direct the comments towards fellow Christians - Baptist Christians - not the general public. The purpose is for our discussion and debate to hopefully air our points and encourage thought and discourse. It is doubtful opponents on any discussion with yield to the opposite view but perhaps other readers will be persuaded one way or another. If nothing else the debate often strengthens our own positions as we work through our offense and defense. I also plan to take some breaks from time to time because it takes a lot of time and it can get intense.

 

[JustChristian]

As long as "Christians" continue to vote for agents of death I will yell at them from the mountain tops. Just as Jotham did against his brother Abimelech in the book of Judges.

So you question the salvation of those who vote Democratic? Do you have a Biblical basis for that?

 

[Revmitchell]

So you question the salvation of those who vote Democratic? Do you have a Biblical basis for that?

There was nothing in that post that any reasonable person could gleen your assumption from. Good Grief!

 

[JustChristian]

There was nothing in that post that any reasonable person could gleen your assumption from. Good Grief!

You don't consider "Christian" to have negative connotations? Are you a "Christian" or a Christian?