Christianity Today Op Ed

[Mountain Man]

Buttigieg's lifestyle and rhetoric are far more in line with Scriptural themes than most of the pro-Trump Christians I see talkin' here and elsewhere. If your metric for anti-Scriptural behavior goes to "is gay" rather than "is cruel", it's your heart that needs realignment toward the Christian God.

--Sam

I see Buddy Christ has once again risen from the dead.

[rogue06]

Buttigieg's lifestyle and rhetoric are far more in line with Scriptural themes than most of the pro-Trump Christians I see talkin' here and elsewhere. If your metric for anti-Scriptural behavior goes to "is gay" rather than "is cruel", it's your heart that needs realignment toward the Christian God.

--Sam

Another one teaching that Jesus was a cream puff

[Sam]

Another one teaching that Jesus was a cream puff

You have lost the Gospel, and a basic understanding of cruelty, if you're misunderstanding Christ's nature so deeply. To the proud and haughty -- those who would use religion and power to grind down the meek and marginalized -- Christ was acerbic when needed.

But He was never cruel, nor was He dismissive of the poor, the helpless, or the stranger.

Folks have become far too accustomed to using Christ as a weapon -- as their weapon. He's not. People align with what He valued or they align against it ... and that values alignment rarely delineates cleanly between the "saved" and the "damned".

But, that's enough proselytizing. We know what the fruits of the Spirit are and we can see who exhibits them. We can compare public figures with how they stack up and look at just who Christians here support and attack, understanding their value system in the process.

The sheep and the goats will sort themselves.

--Sam

[rogue06]

Yup. "Creampuff Christ"

You are creating a god in your own image and rejecting the one in Scripture.

[Sam]

Yup. "Creampuff Christ"

You are creating a god in your own image and rejecting the one in Scripture.

I'll answer to mine and you'll answer to the same.

It's funny, though -- in my church conference, at least, the same people who who excoriate gay couples as anti-Scriptural have no concern about those who have remarried, even numerous times. Many don't have any real problem, in practice, with couples who never get formally married and live as boyfriend/girlfriend.

It used to make me wonder. It doesn't anymore. A man like Trump or Pence can get away with serial philandering or tearing children away from their parents and receive high praise; it was never, in the end, actually about Christ.

--Sam

[Cow Poke]

Buttigieg's lifestyle and rhetoric are far more in line with Scriptural themes than most of the pro-Trump Christians I see talkin' here and elsewhere. If your metric for anti-Scriptural behavior goes to "is gay" rather than "is cruel", it's your heart that needs realignment toward the Christian God.

--Sam

Calm yourself, brother - you're doing that spiritual grandstand thing again, and mixing a bunch of stuff up.

Buttigieg is openly defiant to the Scripture's teaching against homosexual relationships. That he does "good stuff" is a good thing, but it doesn't justify his perversion of Scripture.
Plus, he's pro-abortion, but too squishy to come out and admit it.

[Cow Poke]

I knew someone would go for the ad hominem.

At least, that's what you were hoping, because it's what you live for.

If only you had the arguments to prove him wrong you would probably do so instead of pointing fingers at the person.

Why do you have to be such a phony, Charles? Scriptures proves him wrong. He has opted to violate the scripture regarding his homosexual relationship and his pro-abortion activism (such as it is).

I know I have made this point many times but that is because some of you seem to be rather stuck in the ad hominem trap, so blame yourself if you find it tiresome.

It's been done over and over, Charles - you'll just ignore Scripture, or see your own interpretation of it, or find some way to justify his lifestyle.

Here is your new chance: Show why what he says is wrong. If you cannot I am not interested in hearing more personal attacks.

I'm not really interested in your whiny little complaints about "personal attacks", Charles -- you will always find a way to be offended.

[Cow Poke]

The sheep and the goats will sort themselves.

--Sam

But that won't stop you from stepping in and doing it yourself.

[Cow Poke]

So it is cynical to quote the Bible when the weak, the hungry and the stranger are treated in inhuman ways?

It's actually much better to actually do it than blog about it or appoint yourself as the unofficial Nanny of Tweb to judge others.
And if you're going to quote the Bible - try doing what it says regarding repentance, Charles.

[Sam]

Calm yourself, brother - you're doing that spiritual grandstand thing again, and mixing a bunch of stuff up.

Buttigieg is openly defiant to the Scripture's teaching against homosexual relationships. That he does "good stuff" is a good thing, but it doesn't justify his perversion of Scripture.
Plus, he's pro-abortion, but too squishy to come out and admit it.

Your implication was that Buttigieg doesn't have a legitimate voice concerning scriptural matters because of his homosexuality. But you're not going to apply that same standard to anyone here who has shown themselves to be cruel or uncharitable or supportive of oppression against the poor or the stranger.

You've created a system, in other words, where the gnat is strained and the camel is swallowed -- where cruelty is accepted into the fold and impurity (but only -some- impurities) is cast out.

And I would argue that is an inverted function of Gospel.

--Sam

[Cow Poke]

Your implication was that Buttigieg doesn't have a legitimate voice concerning scriptural matters because of his homosexuality.

That may have been your inference, Sam, but it was not my implication.

But you're not going to apply that same standard to anyone here who has shown themselves to be cruel or uncharitable or supportive of oppression against the poor or the stranger.

That's a whole lot of assumin' you got going on there, brother. You're ASSUMING that somebody who voted for Trump did so, what... believing that Trump is actually actively setting up polices whose primary purpose was to be cruel to the poor or stranger?

You've created a system, in other words, where the gnat is strained and the camel is swallowed -- where cruelty is accepted into the fold and impurity (but only -some- impurities) is cast out.

No, actually I have not. That's your judgmental little "I'm more spiritual than everybody else here" attitude.

And I would argue that is an inverted function of Gospel.

--Sam

Lemme hit you with a fundamental of the Gospel you seem to keep ignoring in your sanctimony, Sam.

Jesus said,

Scripture Verse: Matthew 16

25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. 26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

© Copyright Original Source

The Gospel begins with repentance and salvation. WITHOUT repentance and salvation, you can give all the peanut butter sandwiches, warm blankets, milk, clothing..... without Jesus, they're still dying and going to hell. THAT, sir, is cruelty.

My ministry EVERY WEEK is about feeding the poor, helping them find jobs, teaching and encouraging --- but above all, it's about helping them find Jesus as Savior.

[rogue06]

So it is cynical to quote the Bible when the weak, the hungry and the stranger are treated in inhuman ways?

As I recently noted in another thread

And before you respond keep in mind that I contribute to charities (I use money orders so I don't incessantly get hounded for more), have worked feeding the hungry (spent more than one Thanksgiving working with Hosea Williams Feed the Hungry) and helped set up for the local Muscular Dystrophy Association during the telethons as well as contributed money to my church to assist a wide variety of causes.

So tell us, what have you ever done except act like a cry bully?

[rogue06]

You have lost the Gospel, and a basic understanding of cruelty, if you're misunderstanding Christ's nature so deeply. To the proud and haughty -- those who would use religion and power to grind down the meek and marginalized -- Christ was acerbic when needed.

But He was never cruel, nor was He dismissive of the poor, the helpless, or the stranger.

Folks have become far too accustomed to using Christ as a weapon -- as their weapon. He's not. People align with what He valued or they align against it ... and that values alignment rarely delineates cleanly between the "saved" and the "damned".

But, that's enough proselytizing. We know what the fruits of the Spirit are and we can see who exhibits them. We can compare public figures with how they stack up and look at just who Christians here support and attack, understanding their value system in the process.

The sheep and the goats will sort themselves.

--Sam

Seems like you are busy projecting when you talk about the proud and the haughty.

And please do tell, explain how Buttigeg qualifies as the "poor, the helpless, or the stranger." His six figure salary makes him one of the highest paid mayors in Indiana. While that doesn't make him "rich" he is anything but poor. As for helpless, as a mayor he wields a great deal of power. And "stranger"... I don't see it.

[Cow Poke]

Seems like you are busy projecting when you talk about the proud and the haughty.

And please do tell, explain how Buttigeg qualifies as the "poor, the helpless, or the stranger." His six figure salary makes him one of the highest paid mayors in Indiana. While that doesn't make him "rich" he is anything but poor. As for helpless, as a mayor he wields a great deal of power. And "stranger"... I don't see it.

I think he means Saint Pete's advocacy (such as it is) for taking care of "the poor, the helpless, or the stranger" with tax payer money, which, of course, is NOT a Gospel imperative.

I see that as a command to the followers of Christ, and I try respond accordingly.

[Cow Poke]

I think he means Saint Pete's advocacy (such as it is) for taking care of "the poor, the helpless, or the stranger" with tax payer money, which, of course, is NOT a Gospel imperative.

I see that as a command to the followers of Christ, and I try respond accordingly.

Jesus was speaking to His followers - or to His detractors about how His followers should conduct themselves...

• Luke 6:20-21 - Then he looked up at his discipleshe has anointed me to bring good news to the poor.

Where is the mandate that we institute (or require) a government to do these things?