// Required code

Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Christians and Trump--two perspectives

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • By the way, all of the above is besides my original point, which was simply that moral perfection isn't the bar that is being set. None of us are sinless, but there are gradients of moral failure, and it's isn't improper to expect those with great authority to be principled and to act with integrity.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Adrift View Post
      I think it's possible to reason this way. If you are pro-life, you would not want Hillary in office because you believe that she will further the pro-abortion agenda. However, in order to stop her, you could put into place a man of questionable/low integrity and morality, who had, until recently, also been pro-abortion, but upon announcing his desire for office on the Republican ticket, tepidly declared himself a pro-lifer (for instance, declaring as late as 2013 on Howard Stern's show that it "wasn't a big issue for him," and even more recently, asserting that Alabama went too far on the subject).

      A Christian may reason that voting Trump president comes with consequences far greater than the immediate now. Yes, you may win the battle on abortion today, but what will it cost you in the long run? A concern may arise among some Christians that if people see us as hypocrites for choosing an otherwise corrupt leader, that we will lose the opportunity for evangelism. That when the tables flip, and a new president is in office, we may eventually lose our gains, and then some. That we will have traded the one who destroys the body for the one who destroys the body and the soul.

      Now that isn't to say that I believe that people were WRONG for feeling they had no choice but Trump. I fully sympathize with the predicament a lot of people felt they were in there, but I also think that there are justifiable reasons for people to have chosen a third party candidate that they felt better aligned with their own values, or to have chosen not to be a part of the process altogether.
      Since I was reasonably certain Trump would carry Texas, I looked at the 3rd party candidates...I didn't see any that were any better TBH.
      "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

      "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

      Comment


      • I disagree that voting third party as a means of protest is some kind of violation of "civic duty" (which is a concept I don't even believe in). My point of doing so when I do is to lower the percentages of both major party candidates to send an implicit message to both that they need to nominate better candidates.
        "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Adrift View Post


          Allowing a less great evil (so perceived) so that an even greater evil may not prevail seems to me to be antithetical to the Christian worldview. Jesus didn't teach his disciples to be for lesser evils so that even greater evils don't occur. That sounds much more like Islam where one is allowed to lie to people or spread the message with the sword so that the world might come to better appreciate the "religion of peace." I think when Christians are stuck between the rock and the hard place of lesser evils, it's often wiser to disengage. Let the world do its worldly things, and keep our heads above the water by focusing on spiritual things, perhaps directly in our local communities, and the places we can still make a positive impact without feeling we're selling out. I understand it's an incredibly difficult choice, and easier said than done, but sometimes maybe we should be less afraid of those who destroy the body, and more concerned about the one who is able to destroy both the body and the soul.

          .
          If you're ever up for reading something you disagree with on the outset, John Stackhouse's Making The Best Of It outlines a view of Christian realism that does involve getting one's hands dirty. It may be the most personally influential book to my own view of theology outside the Bible. (Admittedly, the first half of the book is slow with his painstaking looks at the views of Yoder, Lewis, and Niebuhr, but the second half is provocative in a good way.) He even takes his view so far as to argue that Bonhoeffer was right to try to kill Hitler, which I'm not convinced of (and his logic would seem to justify abortion clinic violence), but it is what it is.
          "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

          Comment


          • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
            If you're ever up for reading something you disagree with on the outset, John Stackhouse's Making The Best Of It outlines a view of Christian realism that does involve getting one's hands dirty. It may be the most personally influential book to my own view of theology outside the Bible. (Admittedly, the first half of the book is slow with his painstaking looks at the views of Yoder, Lewis, and Niebuhr, but the second half is provocative in a good way.) He even takes his view so far as to argue that Bonhoeffer was right to try to kill Hitler, which I'm not convinced of (and his logic would seem to justify abortion clinic violence), but it is what it is.


            If you were within reach, I'd smack you with... I dunno... probably something from my cat's litter box.

            I already had his Partners in Christ on my "books to get" list. It was the only time I'd even heard of him. Now I see he has a whole page full of books that sound interesting.
            Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

            Beige Nationalist.

            "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

            Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post


              If you were within reach, I'd smack you with... I dunno... probably something from my cat's litter box.

              I already had his Partners in Christ on my "books to get" list. It was the only time I'd even heard of him. Now I see he has a whole page full of books that sound interesting.
              I have that one too and it's not really one of his better offerings, though to be fair it's at a popular level while not all his other work is. It's very short and doesn't really bring much else to the table if you're already familiar with the basic arguments for egalitarianism.

              But, yeah, he writes and blogs a lot on ethics from a Christian perspective, and even appears a lot on secular media to give his take. He probably largely gets away with his opposition to Trump without losing any evangelical credibility because he's Canadian.
              Last edited by KingsGambit; 09-25-2019, 05:13 PM.
              "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

              Comment


              • Okay, I kinda dropped out because I wasn't feeling well enough to tackle this properly (and I have a backlog of reading to do). I'm not ready to debate yet but the first speaker on this panel hits an excellent point (awesome question, too) and I wanted to post it.

                For consideration only; feel free to ignore:


                "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


                "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                My Personal Blog

                My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Timothy View Post
                  Whatever. We both know that I don't approve of murdering children. And we both know that you refuse to apologize, and what will happen as a result of that.
                  then you agree that CP and the rest of us DO NOT SUPPORT IMMORALITY apologize for that Timothy before you ask for an apology from Telllaura. and stop harassing her in PMs.

                  Comment


                  • He already stopped, RTT.

                    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


                    "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                    My Personal Blog

                    My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                      He already stopped, RTT.
                      ok

                      Comment


                      • Let's think about 2020 for a moment.

                        In 2016, Christians had the choice between Trump whose morality is doubtful but he generally advocated conservative Christian positions and Clinton whose morality was also doubtful and she generally advocate non-conservative Christian positions. (At the risk of going off topic, I wonder if Trump could have been elected if Bill Clinton hadn't previously been elected and shown that the results matter more than character. I seem to remember the Republicans in the 1996 election tried to make character an issue and generally failed.)

                        In 2020, Christians will most likely have to chose between Trump who hasn't really changed from 2016 and a Democrat who will probably have better morals than Trump but may be more anti-Christian (yes, I'm looking at you Sanders and Harris) than Clinton was.

                        I did not like my options in 2016. I'm liking my choices in 2020 even less.
                        Last edited by Thoughtful Monk; 09-28-2019, 03:07 PM. Reason: Additional thought
                        "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6

                        "Theology can be an intellectual entertainment." Metropolitan Anthony Bloom

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Thoughtful Monk View Post
                          Let's think about 2020 for a moment.

                          In 2016, Christians had the choice between Trump whose morality is doubtful but he generally advocated conservative Christian positions and Clinton whose morality was also doubtful and she generally advocate non-conservative Christian positions. (At the risk of going off topic, I wonder if Trump could have been elected if Bill Clinton hadn't previously been elected and shown that the results matter more than character. I seem to remember the Republicans in the 1996 election tried to make character an issue and generally failed.)
                          The "Moral Majority" played a big role in getting conservative Christians involved in politics in the first place, about 40 years ago. Before that, there was a tendency for some to consider politics "worldly," and therefore to be avoided, and for others to essentially erect a "wall of separation" between their religious convictions and their voting.

                          Getting conservative Christians participating was a good thing. Getting them/us to consider how our religious convictions impact our voting was a good thing. But things got way too muddled together.

                          Yes, we despised Clinton's gross immorality, and decried it loudly. And if Orange Man as POTUS were engaging in the kinds of activities for which he was (in)famous in years past, I'd be castigating him also.

                          But I will no longer base my vote on whether a candidate claims to be a Christian, or has fawning Evangelical celebrities puffing him or her up. Nor will I rule out a candidate on "character" grounds. I'll pray, of course, but as far as the "natural" realm is concerned, I'll vote based on what the candidate promises to DO.


                          In 2020, Christians will most likely have to chose between Trump who hasn't really changed from 2016 and a Democrat who will probably have better morals than Trump but may be more anti-Christian (yes, I'm looking at you Sanders and Harris) than Clinton was.

                          I did not like my options in 2016. I'm liking my choices in 2020 even less.
                          There's a slim chance Orange Man will get "primaried." If so, I will almost certainly vote for him over other more "proper" and "respectable" Republican candidates. My preferences in 2016 were Lyin' Ted and Carly Fiorina, and I voted for Ted in the primary in my State. But now I'm glad Trump won. I don't believe Cruz would have even seriously *tried* to do most of the things Trump has done.
                          Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                          Beige Nationalist.

                          "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                          Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                            The "Moral Majority" played a big role in getting conservative Christians involved in politics in the first place, about 40 years ago. Before that, there was a tendency for some to consider politics "worldly," and therefore to be avoided, and for others to essentially erect a "wall of separation" between their religious convictions and their voting.

                            Getting conservative Christians participating was a good thing. Getting them/us to consider how our religious convictions impact our voting was a good thing. But things got way too muddled together.

                            Yes, we despised Clinton's gross immorality, and decried it loudly. And if Orange Man as POTUS were engaging in the kinds of activities for which he was (in)famous in years past, I'd be castigating him also.

                            But I will no longer base my vote on whether a candidate claims to be a Christian, or has fawning Evangelical celebrities puffing him or her up. Nor will I rule out a candidate on "character" grounds. I'll pray, of course, but as far as the "natural" realm is concerned, I'll vote based on what the candidate promises to DO.




                            There's a slim chance Orange Man will get "primaried." If so, I will almost certainly vote for him over other more "proper" and "respectable" Republican candidates. My preferences in 2016 were Lyin' Ted and Carly Fiorina, and I voted for Ted in the primary in my State. But now I'm glad Trump won. I don't believe Cruz would have even seriously *tried* to do most of the things Trump has done.
                            I would add that it's more than just "what they promise to DO", as all politicians promise to "DO" stuff. I would weigh heavily the track record of their ability to DO what they promised to DO. With regards to Religious Liberty, SCOTUS, the appointment of Federal Judges, etc... Orange Man has kept his promises.


                            ETA.... on the other hand, you have candidates like Beto who promises to take away your AR-15 and AK-47... Democrats are livid because he's showing their hand.
                            "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Timothy View Post
                              Someone put their red hat on the coat rack so the first thing a person saw when entering Christ's church was Trump's name. As if he saved us. I didn't want to touch the filthy hat
                              Triggered.

                              Trump is no avowed Christian, but as the prostitutes and tax collectors, many of the 'unclean' will enter into the kingdom before the self-righteous sanctimonious folk.
                              Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                              Comment


                              • I can understand if some Christians find their consciences don't permit them to vote for someone like Trump. I think it is unwise to follow that course if it has the effect of supporting or electing a pro-abortion, anti-Bill-of-Rights candidate. And I think their points about it being a "bad witness" are speculative and mostly irrelevant. But I'd hardly ever be inclined to suggest they are "bad Christians."

                                But ISTM they do not have the same attitude toward those of us who voted for Trump, and who are loath to criticize him, even when he may deserve it, because of the clamoring hordes denouncing him for anything and everything. They generally are a bunch of nattering self-righteous prigs. (So, ok, in that sense I *do* consider them "bad Christians.")
                                Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                                Beige Nationalist.

                                "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                                Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Thoughtful Monk, 09-26-2020, 07:50 PM
                                0 responses
                                5 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
                                Started by Thoughtful Monk, 09-07-2020, 01:08 PM
                                25 responses
                                335 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by mossrose, 07-29-2020, 02:54 PM
                                132 responses
                                3,463 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Thoughtful Monk, 06-26-2020, 09:47 AM
                                15 responses
                                8 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Thoughtful Monk, 01-26-2020, 11:10 AM
                                40 responses
                                5,372 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post mossrose  
                                Working...
                                X