Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Christian and Theologically Protestant? Or, sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Fenced Community

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible- believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non- Nicene, non- Biblical heresy.
Register now

Christian Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Sign in to follow this  
News Feeder

Republican Lawmaker: Conservatives Need to Reclaim the Bible from Liberals

Recommended Posts

A GOP lawmaker from Virginia said that conservatives need to take back their Biblical rhetoric and not allow liberals to use it against them.

 

 

 

 

More...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over a fifth of Syrian refugees are adult males between 18 and 59, and not a one of them is a widow or an orphan. It would be most foolish for anyone not to be concerned about letting in terrorists infiltrated in the refugees from a country we're at war in. Neutral countries should take the refugees, especially those closest to Syria in geography and culture. Any help the US wishes to provide should be by means other than taking refugees. My first choice of means is for the US to pull out of the middle-east so that we're not making more refugees.

 

How does the Republican lawmaker propose Conservatives reclaim the Bible from Liberals?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to be joking, right? Try emailing them or calling them. They don't even respond from party headquarters. The reason they don't answer their phones is that there is too much money involved to change what they are doing. Second, Democrats are shaking hands at the pols trying to make friends with everyone. Republicans don't show up to shake hands, make friends, etc.

 

Christians were in both parties and Democrats kicked some of the real Christians out because they decided the power was with the people or the number of votes.

Businesses are in the Republican party which don't have the votes. So Christians side with the business party that doesn't give those whom Christians are to help anything. By your love people will know you are Christ's disciples and areas of the countries where the homes cost $300-400K, the PSAT scores are high and in areas where the homes cost less, the PSAT's are lower.

 

So basically Christians are using big business or heathens to dictate Christian policy and it won't work. If you have a moderate on the Republican side, whom do you think they side with to get things done? Democrats.

 

By Christians siding with business in the Republican party, you alienate yourselves from those whom you are to evangelize.

 

The lawmaker can get in touch with me if he wishes to change anything.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
areas of the countries where the homes cost $300-400K, the PSAT scores are high and in areas where the homes cost less, the PSAT's are lower.

 

Interesting, no wonder only property owners used to be able to vote. The thinking, I believe, was that property owners have an invested interest in the country, moreso than those that do not. Of course those invested in property pay education taxes, the more wealthy areas having more invested resulting in more finances for academics. If voter restrictions were ever used to make voting more difficult, such as a certain PSAT score, or literacy test, the advantage might just very well be a more informed electorate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can conservatives reclaim the Bible when Evangelicals reconsider Republican ties?

 

US evangelicals question Republican ties

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20649525

 

The other problem is that Republicans are electing unelectable people for office that few people will vote for and that can be seen in previous elections that they lost. The Republican party use to have more moderates but it has been dominated in the news by a few people with media problems:

 

Several Republican candidates made comments on social issues during the 2012 election cycle that received criticism from the public. In August, U.S. Senate candidate and former U.S. Rep. Todd Akin, R-Mo., received backlash when he made comments about “legitimate rape” rarely resulting in pregnancy. He later lost the election by a wide margin to Democratic incumbent Claire McCaskill.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...ghtened-women/

 

In January, the congressman [Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.)] defended Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), saying the lawmaker was “partially right” in saying a woman could not become pregnant after a “legitimate rape.”

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...omment-stupid/

 

Her 2010 election campaign where she stated "I am not a witch" was widely mocked and parodied.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_O'Donnell

 

Since former Rep. Todd Akin's (R-Mo.) comments about "legitimate rape," the GOP has tried to get its members to stop talking about the topic. (AP Photo/Jeff Roberson, File)

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2796875.html

 

 

RNC Completes 'Autopsy' on 2012 Loss, Calls for Inclusion Not Policy Change

"Priebus noted that the party's policies are fundamentally sound but require a softer tone and broader outreach, include a stronger push for African-American, Latino, Asian, women and gay voters."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/...ry?id=18755809

The theme of inclusion continued with Glenn McColl, a national committeeman from South Carolina who insisted the party seems to some as "intolerant and unaccepting of differing points of view."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/...8755809&page=2

Priebus was asked at the end of the event during a question-and-answer portion how he will make the language of the GOP more open to gay Americans and women and Priebus noted that Sen. Rob Portman's public reversal last week in which the Ohio Republican said he now supports same-sex marriage helps the message of openness.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/...8755809&page=2

 

And don't forget who is talking about leaving the GOP.

 

Franklin Graham

 

 

Are you going to stay in the Republican party?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you going to stay in the Republican party?

 

I think the GOP is being divided from Establishment politicians such as Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio. Trump and Ted Cruz have the establishment scared. As for my before mentioned posts, most Americans are repeating the same mistakes, we are no longer a nation of values - the GOP is losing its party platform. Americans are voting for people they can relate to, like Bill Clinton appearing on MTV playing the Saxophone, or a token POTUS, Obama. I think Thomas Sowell said it best:

 

The Real motives of liberals have nothing to do with the welfare of other people. Instead they have two related goals -- to establish themselves as morally and intellectually superior to the rather distasteful population of common people and to gather as much power to tell those distasteful common people how they must live their lives.

 

I do not believe Trump is a man running a campaign on integrity, example, he boasts in bribing politicians. I think the liberals have swung us so far left at the moment that the GOP establishment looks "middle" ground, and someone like Ted Cruz appears extreme right. For me, Ted Cruz is the Conservative thoroughbred race horse, ya just show your support in the right direction and let him run. Trump is "Winging" it, Carson is learning, and Bush is dumping mass amounts of money.

 

Conservative Review gives scorecard for candidates and politicians according to their voting record. I think one should vote based on the record of a candidate, there should be no surprises as to how he will "evolve" or stand on certain issues. For this reason, Cruz is my favorite. I want a "doer", and not political campaign promises despite a contrary record.

 

As for the Grahams, neither of them will affect my vote. For example, losing my respect, Billy Graham or his administration deleted a previous statement by their ministry, stating that Mormonism is a Cult, right before Mitt Romney paid him a little visit. The GOP nominating Romney told me that at that time people were more inclined to vote for an establishment candidate than one according to Judeo-Christian values. I'm not voting for the Grahams, but I am voting for a candidate I can be most certain of - I want predictability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Interesting, no wonder only property owners used to be able to vote. The thinking, I believe, was that property owners have an invested interest in the country, moreso than those that do not. Of course those invested in property pay education taxes, the more wealthy areas having more invested resulting in more finances for academics. If voter restrictions were ever used to make voting more difficult, such as a certain PSAT score, or literacy test, the advantage might just very well be a more informed electorate.

 

 

Why should Democrats vote for immaterial values over material values? How would they eat?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think the GOP is being divided from Establishment politicians such as Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio. Trump and Ted Cruz have the establishment scared. As for my before mentioned posts, most Americans are repeating the same mistakes, we are no longer a nation of values - the GOP is losing its party platform. Americans are voting for people they can relate to, like Bill Clinton appearing on MTV playing the Saxophone, or a token POTUS, Obama. I think Thomas Sowell said it best:

 

The leaders are not career politicians.

 

Bush ruined the party. I think the Republicans are trying not to win this election because in order to win, you have to have a Republican that Democrats can vote for. Do you see any Republicans in this last debate that Democrats can vote for?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Why should Democrats vote for immaterial values over material values? How would they eat?

 

The irony is that every Democracy in the history of the world has fallen around the age of 200 years. As soon as the people learn they can vote themselves an elected official that promises generous gifts from out of the Treasury, the nation collapses due to loose fiscal policy. How will Democrats eat? I suggest that question should be part of the PSAT.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Real motives of liberals have nothing to do with the welfare of other people. Instead they have two related goals -- to establish themselves as morally and intellectually superior to the rather distasteful population of common people and to gather as much power to tell those distasteful common people how they must live their lives.

 

I don't see it that way and historically it isn't that way. People see liberalism as merciful because they will spend your taxes on helping someone. Government has become God to these people and you've become the heathen because you don't believe in helping the little people (in the Democratic party sense). See how their religion has works? It is works without faith.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The leaders are not career politicians.

 

Bush ruined the party. I think the Republicans are trying not to win this election because in order to win, you have to have a Republican that Democrats can vote for. Do you see any Republicans in this last debate that Democrats can vote for?

 

I think that is actually what the problem is. The people voted GOP last general election by a majority. Now, we have "liberal" Republicans or rather RINOS that couldn't care less about the Party Platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think that is actually what the problem is. The people voted GOP last general election by a majority. Now, we have "liberal" Republicans or rather RINOS that couldn't care less about the Party Platform.

 

 

They feel that Bush lied about weapons in Iraq and that we were drug into the Iraq war for oil and that people senselessly died as a result.

The reason Bush got re-elected is because they felt unsafe from 9-11.

 

The reason this administration got elected was because people were lied to about the Iraq war and because people wanted a man of color elected. Bush destroyed the Republican party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't see it that way and historically it isn't that way. People see liberalism as merciful because they will spend your taxes on helping someone. Government has become God to these people and you've become the heathen because you don't believe in helping the little people (in the Democratic party sense). See how their religion has works? It is works without faith.

 

I see liberalism both in politics and religion as taking a broad approach to interpreting both the Constitution and the Bible. The source text is destroyed in favor of what the reader has in mind rather than what the author(s) had in mind.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I see liberalism both in politics and religion as taking a broad approach to interpreting both the Constitution and the Bible. The source text is destroyed in favor of what the reader has in mind rather than what the author(s) had in mind.

 

 

My definition of liberalism is to liberate you from God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GOP front-runner, Trump, didn't support the Iraq war from the start. He's the most strongly outspoken against illegal immigration. And, he doesn't grovel and apologize to the PC police.

 

Jeb Bush started the campaign with a big war chest, name recognition, and party backing. He was a strong supporter of the Iraq war and doesn't want to admit it was a "mistake". He's for amnesty for illegal aliens. He tries to keep the PC police happy. And, he is floundering in single-digit support.

 

Ted "make the sand glow" Cruz seems like a good guy but his insanity-for-Israel neutralizes his conservative values -- which is a reflection metastatic cancer that is Dispensationalism. There's a half-joke in poor communities: When a thug is seen to vandalize or steal something, someone comments "That's why we can't have nice things." Similarly, with Dispies, Conservatives can't reclaim the Bible.

 

For conservatives to reclaim the Bible, religious liberty in the USA needs to be the top priority. A corollary of that is meaningful changes in education to free kids from anti-Christian public schools. Ted Cruz once said School Choice is the Civil Rights issue of the 21st century, but being a Dispie, his position on School Choice is neutralized. On his campaign for president website, under issues, "stand with Israel" is there, but "school choice" is not, not even under the in a section on "religious liberty".

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For conservatives to reclaim the Bible, religious liberty in the USA needs to be the top priority. A corollary of that is meaningful changes in education to free kids from anti-Christian public schools. Ted Cruz once said School Choice is the Civil Rights issue of the 21st century, but being a Dispie, his position on School Choice is neutralized. On his campaign for president website, under issues, "stand with Israel" is there, but "school choice" is not, not even under the in a section on "religious liberty".

 

 

You can't reclaim the Bible because I've gone door in evangelism efforts and I've recognized people who go to churches and they don't identify themselves as Christian.

Being involved in politics does not make people vote Christian.

 

 

I am in the Church of Jesus Christ. Tell me which 1 Peter 2:9 is true based on the Church's behavior?

 

1 Peter 2:9 "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

10 "Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy."

 

- OR -

 

1 Peter 2:9 "But you are a democratic people, a political priesthood, a powerful nation, a people behaving for God that you may enforce an agenda of one who called you from apathy into activity once you were not a coalition but now you are the coalition of theological rainbows. Once you were apolitical but now you are very political."

 

We are diluted to think we can beat the world at its own game by dropping the spiritual weapons and taking up worldly armour. If we lay down our spiritual weapons, we will have to take up carnal weapons because we know that we will have to fight.

 

2 Cor 10:3

 

Our sword is the proclamation of the word.

 

Are we laying down our weapons? The average church has a 10 minute sermon.

 

By being political, Christians are waging war like the world does. See 2 Corinthians 10:3.

2 Corinthians 10:3-5New International Version (NIV)

 

For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

 

Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV® Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.®Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They believe he might be the most pro-LGBT Republican there is. See page 4.

 

http://issuu.com/dailypenn/docs/0114_7c5d05972cdd4d

 

I'm under no delusion that Trump is a conservative. But, Trump has spoken out against SSM (explaining that he's a traditional guy) and he has never (to my knowledge) pushed for SSM. He has expressed that the Supreme Court's SSM ruling settles the issue. Most Republicans have no interest in fighting the Supreme Court's SSM ruling. Even the Tea Party Republican, in the OP, David Brat, who said Conservatives need to reclaim the Bible, said this, "The political Right likes to champion individual rights and individual liberty, but it has also worked to enforce morality in relation to abortion, gambling, and homosexuality. " That looks no less pro-LGBT than anything I've seen from Trump. (If David Brat really believed in individual liberty, he could easily articulate that government involvement into people's relationships does not advance the individual liberty of those people. And, if David Brat really believed in individual liberty, he would recognize the fact that SSM is really nothing but a foundation for taking away the individual liberty of people who don't want to support SSM.)

 

I believe Ted Cruz is strongly against SSM. But, Ted Cruz's Dispensationalism makes him useless on the issue of SSM, just like George W. Bush was useless on the issue of SSM when SSM first landed in America, by judicial fiat, in his fist term (the year after the Iraqi invasion). Cruz will be too busy carrying neocon water to bother with promoting liberty. Cruz will also quickly hand Congress to the Democrats, to cement Cruz's uselessness as a conservative.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christians should be involved in all aspects of their country's life. Business, politics, arts etc. We are taxpayers so we have the right to be involced and we should do so unashamedly as Christians. When we are fully involved in our society as Christians for the glory of God through Jesus Christ, empowered by the Holy Spirit then we show that world what Christ is all about. We are not meant to be hermits. If politics is your calling (I love it) then go where the Spirit directs you, where the Glory of God can best be reflected. If you are in business, do so with the aim of pleasing God in your methods as scripture instructs us to. At the end of the day it is how have I pleased God and been obedient to His commands. If I were American I would support Ted Cruz and be active in the GOP to move the party in a Godly manner and would encourage other Christians to do likewise.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 Peter 2:9 "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation

 

Yes, Christians are a holy nation, a holy nation with the name Israel. Dispies deny this important truth.

 

Our sword is the proclamation of the word.

 

I'm not sure of your point. Are you saying Christians should stay home on election day?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whether I am a Covenentalist or not I strongly support Israel.

 

So do I. Just not for the same reasons as Dispensationalist.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Christians should be involved in all aspects of their country's life. Business, politics, arts etc. We are taxpayers so we have the right to be involced and we should do so unashamedly as Christians. When we are fully involved in our society as Christians for the glory of God through Jesus Christ, empowered by the Holy Spirit then we show that world what Christ is all about. We are not meant to be hermits. If politics is your calling (I love it) then go where the Spirit directs you, where the Glory of God can best be reflected. If you are in business, do so with the aim of pleasing God in your methods as scripture instructs us to. At the end of the day it is how have I pleased God and been obedient to His commands. If I were American I would support Ted Cruz and be active in the GOP to move the party in a Godly manner and would encourage other Christians to do likewise.

 

I mostly agree with everything you've said in that quote. But, from a practical perspective, I think Trump will make the better president. Trump won't be a conservative president (but, we won't be a liberal president, either). The two most redeeming qualities of President Trump is that he won't push us into useless middle-east wars; and, he won't drag down conservatives in Congress as Ted Cruz would. The media and the public will essentially see President trump as a political independent. Compare to George W. Bush who came to office with a Republican majority in Congress. Bush used that majority to push America into a useless and unjust war in the middle-east, rather than for conservative legislative reforms. And, the media easily used Bush to drag down conservatives in elections for Congress, quickly giving Congress to the Democrats.

 

I don't know if I could vote for Cruz, knowing that he's seemingly committed to repeating George W Bush's mistakes: “We will utterly destroy ISIS. We will carpet-bomb them into oblivion. I don’t know if sand can glow in the dark, but we’re going to find out!” ISIS is not a target that can be carpet-bombed (also carpet-bombing is now widely considered a war crime, along the lines of dropping chemical weapons). And, our military aggression in the middle-east that created ISIS in the first place (remember, insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results).

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes, Christians are a holy nation, a holy nation with the name Israel. Dispies deny this important truth.

 

 

 

I'm not sure of your point. Are you saying Christians should stay home on election day?

 

 

 

I don't agree with replacement theology.

 

 

Do you think by voting for the better of two evils that we will have Christ's righteousness on earth?

I vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I believe Ted Cruz is strongly against SSM. But, Ted Cruz's Dispensationalism makes him useless on the issue of SSM, just like George W. Bush was useless on the issue of SSM when SSM first landed in America, by judicial fiat, in his fist term (the year after the Iraqi invasion). Cruz will be too busy carrying neocon water to bother with promoting liberty. Cruz will also quickly hand Congress to the Democrats, to cement Cruz's uselessness as a conservative.

 

 

What does dispensationalism have to do with any of this?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
Articles - News - Privacy Policy