'St. Jack' and the Bullies in the Pulpit

No, actually, I think I said that it's none of my business. As a matter of fact, I was pretty clear with respect to saying that. I simply do not share your seemingly insatiable desire to impose your beliefs upon the rest of the country.

The two issues are mutually exclusive. Furthermore, I never once introduced pedophilia into this discussion.

You are only accountable for your own actions. You are correct in that we have a higher moral law, and our understanding of that fact is why we choose to live our lives in the manner we do.

Do you feel the same way about adultery, divorce, idolatry, and greed? Or is your energy simply directed at one topic?

That is what the Dominionists seemingly claim, and I reject that notion. Thankfully, we do not live in a theocracy.

I agree. I don't recall ever writing anything to the contrary.

I agree. As in the case above, I do not recall ever writing anything to the contrary.

I agree. One more time, I do not recall ever writing anything to the contrary.

That is your opinion, to which you are entitled. I could not help but notice that NO candidate has done anything to reverse the notion that abortion is the law of the land. I hear some talk about the "culture of life," but I have not seen anyone doing anything to reverse this fact.

I can respect that, as you are entitled to your opinion. Personally, I "honestly cannot see" how Christians can simply let someone get away with talking the talk, but not walking the walk. Reagan didn't do anything to reverse Roe v. Wade, and neither did George H.W. Bush. Clinton certainly didn't, and neither did the GOP candidates who won in the landslide of 1994. Nothing has happened since January 21, 2001 either. So, in other words, the candidates for which you have voted have done nothing to reverse this sin you seemingly despise above all others.
Additionally, I find it quite amazing that some among us subscribe to the idea of Dominionism. Freedom of religion is also construed to be freedom from religion. Do any among us want to see "our laws reflect Gods laws?" If so, then whose interpretation of God's Laws will be the law of the land? Are we going to reinstitute the Books of the Law, or simply what is considered to be mainstream evangelical conservatism?
Contrary to what Joseph believes, Judiasm is not a cult by either definition offered, as they do not pretend to adhere to orthodox Christianity. It is simply another religion who is allowed the same freedom to worship as we are. What right do we, as Christians, have to enforce our laws upon them, especially when they do not believe as we do?
Neither of you have ever claimed to be Dominionists, but some of what you write (especially you, tinytim) seemingly would indicate that? Since I don't want to automatically assume anything, are either of you Dominionists? (as defined by Rushdoony at chalcedon.edu)
I certainly hope not......

BiR (in BEAUTIFUL Tampa, FL)

 

No, actually, I think I said that it's none of my business. As a matter of fact, I was pretty clear with respect to saying that. I simply do not share your seemingly insatiable desire to impose your beliefs upon the rest of the country.</font>[/QUOTE]How dare I attempt to impose my belief that innocent human life is sacred and that we should not allow murder. How intolerant of me. Perhaps, I should simply turn the other direction and act like it is none of my business whether someone else commits murder like you do. How noble of you.

Joseph Botwinick

 

What have you done? What would you do to reverse Roe v Wade? Oh yeah. That's right. The murder of the unborn is none of your business. You wouldn't dare push your morality (?) on anyone else. As long as you are not the one committing the murder, it is A-OK with you.

Additionally, I find it quite amazing that some among us subscribe to the idea of Dominionism. Freedom of religion is also construed to be freedom from religion. Do any among us want to see "our laws reflect Gods laws?"[/QUOTE]

If it, likewise, also reflects the will of the people in our democracy and protects the civil rights of all. You know, the rights of the unborn to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

If so, then whose interpretation of God's Laws will be the law of the land? Are we going to reinstitute the Books of the Law, or simply what is considered to be mainstream evangelical conservatism?[/QUOTE]

How about an interpretation that protect the civil rights of the unborn? Wouldn't you like to see that, or does that just not matter to you?

Contrary to what Joseph believes, Judiasm is not a cult by either definition offered, as they do not pretend to adhere to orthodox Christianity.[/QUOTE]

In as much as they do deny Christ, and therefore, worship a false god, they are a cult. I am, btw, referring to modern Judaism and not that of the OT.

It is simply another religion who is allowed the same freedom to worship as we are. [/QUOTE]

Now, this is true. They do have the same freedom of religion as we do just as Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and every other false religion does.

What right do we, as Christians, have to enforce our laws upon them, especially when they do not believe as we do?[/QUOTE]

We have enforced nothing on them. Everyone who stays in America freely chooses to stay here. We have the right to have our opinions spoken and to try and convince others of the sanctity of human life. The government has just as much right to enforce that civil right on society as it did back in the civil rights movement for the blacks.

Neither of you have ever claimed to be Dominionists, but some of what you write (especially you, tinytim) seemingly would indicate that? Since I don't want to automatically assume anything, are either of you Dominionists? (as defined by Rushdoony at chalcedon.edu)
I certainly hope not......

BiR (in BEAUTIFUL Tampa, FL) [/QUOTE]

If, by dominionist, you mean a person who speaks up for the civil rights of the unborn and tries to effect change in my government, which is my democratic right, then yes, I am a dominionist...as are you, my friend, when you likewise speak out against what you percieve to be the atrocities of the Bush administration and the war in Iraq.

Joseph Botwinick

 

BiR, we're just now forming a Supreme Court that would have a chance of overturning Roe v. Wade. None of those Congressmen or former Presidents had a supreme Court that would allow an overturn.

It was terrible law, not founded on Constitutional law when it was enacted.

 

You are defining my beliefs according to yours.....

 

Well, you might want to re-read what I posted, as I did not identify you as a polarizer. I said that you were polarized, qualifying that by saying that you were the most polarized person I have seen on the list.

That is where you and I differ. They have the same rights as you to "exist and proselytize." To suggest otherwise is simply un-American. The greatest thing about this country is that we have liberty. That means that we can choose our method of worship, our denomination, or we can even choose not to worship or believe in the existence of a Creator, should we so choose. I may not agree with you completely, and you may not agree with me completely. But we have the liberty to choose for ourselves, not simply submit to some state religion.

Just remember: if they can have their rights taken, you can have yours taken as well…..

Actually, you didn’t mention Judiasm as a cult per se; however, you did amplify when I asked you if they were a cult, and in that amplification, you most certainly did identify them as a cult. It is right there in your post.
Your “mother-in-law once removed” has to make her decision with respect to her Lord and Savior, just as you and I have done. We all have family and friends who are in the same boat; nevertheless, it is a choice that we all must make for ourselves.
I will, however, add your “mother-in-law once removed” to my prayer list. I will also pray that God will grant you the discernment to capitalize on every opportunity to show her the Truth. You can count on that.

I cannot believe you would honestly write such a statement. I really do feel sorry for you.

Regards,
BiR

 

That is not exactly what I said now, is it?

Again, you are defining my ideals based solely upon how they relate to yours.

I have already communicated my stance on this topic, and you are repeating yourself.

Much in the same way, you are defining them according to your beliefs. I am beginning to believe that you live in a Joseph-centric world, where everyone is wrong if they do not agree with you. Of course, you haven't actually stated that, but you most certainly give the reader that impression.

To the Jewish community, you and I are considered to be part of a cult.

Would you fight for their right to worship? I certainly did not get the impression that hillclimber would.

Oh, I see......

Joseph, I was very clear by what was meant by "dominionist." Here is what I said again:

Again, I was very clear as to what I meant. As a matter of fact, I even supplied a website that clearly defines what I meant by "Dominionist."

Two points:
1. Based upon our interactions now and in the past, I have never for one minute been under that impression that you would consider me as a friend. You have very seldom been congenial to me, as exhibited in this discussion. Despite making a concerted effort to be gracious to you (almost always offering my regards) you are almost always caustic towards me. I have even read your comments directed at others, and many times you are compelled to belittle anyone who dares to offer a differing viewpoint. You really give the impression that you possess an angry faith, which is rather disconcerting.
2. Please show me any statement where I have ever uttered the phrase "atrocities of the Bush Administration." I do not recall ever thinking this phrase, and I certainly don't ever recall typing it in a forum. As you have made the accusation, I would very much like to see it.

Regards anyway,
BiR (back in Richmond)

 

BIR, You wrote, "Thankfully, we do not live in a theocracy."

I hope you don't truly mean that you would not want to live in a theocracy...

As one day you will if you are saved. When you will live under the rule of our Lord Jesus Christ. You know the "KING OF KINGS, LORD OF LORDS"

All I am saying is that if someone claimed he or she was racist, or a pedophile, or a animal killer, they would never get elected. But someone that says they support the murder of babies do every election.

This is total hypocrisy.
Anyone that doesn't respect human life is not qualified to serve in a public office.

And when a Christian votes for a pro coice candidate that Christian is sinning.

You are supporting sin!
Babies' blood will be on your hands when you get to Heaven if you are not willing to stand up and fight for what is right. It is a coward that says,"It doesn't affect me personally, so they can do what ever." Sounds like Nazi Germany.
"I'm not a jew, so let Hitler burn them!"
Total hypocrisy.

As you can see I am very passionate over abortion. It burns me up to see Christians supporting "baby killers" and "baby killer supporting politicians".

And it is just not my opinion, it is God's!

He is the one that condemns abortion.. to support those that support it is to go against Him.. Which is SIN!

 

BiR,
Thank you for adding my x-mother in law to your prayer list. We continue to pray for her ourselves, and will till the end, but she's a spry old lady and she and her girlfriend attend every community function our little town offers.

Don't feel too sorry for me, as I'm very comfortable with my relationship with The Lord.

I understand that as Americans we fight for the "right" to worship as we choose, but I personally fight for the right to worship the Lord Jesus Christ. If others (by my efforts) gain the right to worship a false god then so be it. But my fight is for Christ. Not for someone to worship as a Morman or an orthodox Jew, or a Jdub, etc. If you want to be listed as a fighter for them, fine, but count me out.

 

But, Tim....He is not the one performing the abortion...so what is your beef?

Well...as always it's been less than enlightening conversing with BiR. Since he is dead set on twisting and attacking my every word, I will leave this fruitless conversation. If anyone wants to know where I stand on religious freedom, abortion, or what is or isn't a false religion, just read my posts here. They are pretty clear. Then you decide. Ultimately, it is God who will decide whether or not I speak the truth or if I was in error...and that is the only judge who will ultimately matter in the end.

Joseph Botwinick

 

If there is a difference between the Republicans and Democrats, it is infintesimal when compared to a Holy and Righteous God. Its time to dismantle both and start over. This party may be a new approach.

http://www.constitutionparty.com/

 

I am opposed to the immoral isolationist policies of the Constipation Party. I will never vote for them.

Joseph Botwinick

 

BIR: Have you not read:

"16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world...

"Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" Seems plain enough to me that He is commanding us to spread the Christian doctrine and morality to the world. What do you say now about the Christian morality and trying to impart it to the rest of the world?

 

Joseph,
You and Pat Robertson would make a great ticket in 2008 for said party you mentioned.

 

I would never have anything to do with the Constipation party and I am quite sure that Pat Robertson and I will not be teaming up for anything anytime soon.

Quite frankly, I have not a clue what you are talking about, and more than likely, neither do you.

Joseph Botwinick

 

ouch!! Joseph and Pat..

 

Well Joseph, it is like this. I made a suggestion that Christians look at the Constitution Party. You made a childish remark about the constipation party. There is a lot I do not understand very well, but I do understand government. I am not going to say you dont understand subjects. Posts can speak for themselves. Again, I would urge anyone to just check out the Constitution Party platform and see what you think.

 

That is precisely what I mean. I DO NOT want to live in a theocracy. I love having the liberty to worship my Lord and King in the manner I see fit. I do not want a state theocracy telling me what is appropriate and what is not. For example, I would not want to live in a theocracy similar to that of Spain during the Inquisition. I also would not want to live in England during the reign of Queen Mary I. On the other hand, I would not like to live in a theocracy like that of Iran either.

That would be the afterlife, which is an entirely different scenario. This would be the new heaven and earth, ruled by The Almighty. That is very different from a theocracy on this earth, where we are told the manner in which we will worship.

 

I feel sorry for you in the sense that you are so polarized that you make the statements I have seen on this discussion. I honestly do feel sorry for you.

This is precisely why I feel sorry for you.

Regards,
BiR