Was Obama's election God's will?

[Gxg (G²)]

Look at what Obama did in the beginning of his first term!

(SOURCE)

There was indeed improvement...

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Don't see why not. Regardless of what you personally may think of Obama as a President, God is sovereign AIUI, and who is in power in various nations is down to Him.

Indeed.

For believers, we're called to pray for our leaders/serve...

Regardless of those who do or don't like Obama, some things that're NOT options on the issue:

1 Timothy 2:1-4
2:1 First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, 2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. 3 This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Romans 13:1-7
13:1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

1 Peter 2:13-17
13 Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, 14 or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. 15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. 16 Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. 17 Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.

Titus 3/Titus 3

Doing What is Good

1Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good, 2to slander no one, to be peaceable and considerate, and to show true humility toward all men.
3At one time we too were foolish, disobedient, deceived and enslaved by all kinds of passions and pleasures. We lived in malice and envy, being hated and hating one another. 4But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, 5he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, 6whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. 8This is a trustworthy saying. And I want you to stress these things, so that those who have trusted in God may be careful to devote themselves to doing what is good. These things are excellent and profitable for everyone.


​

For those who can’t obey these refuse to submit to the Lordship of the Lord Jesus Christ

1 Timothy 2/1 Timothy 2

Instructions on Worship

1I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone— 2for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time. 7And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles. 8I want men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer, without anger or disputing.

​

As one of my brothers in Christ once said best in another discussion on the issue:

No president is the answer. And the people have very short memories. Administrations come and go but we the people remain. We try to look thru the mud-slinging and vote our conscience, but for the most part it is no different than gambling. We hope this one performs. Then a few months in we decide not to like him when things get tough for him and then start demanding change. I've seen few nations vacilitate more than the USA. While democracy is a wonderful edifice, it does have some drawbacks, as does any earthly government that does not look solely to God for leadership like we had before the Hebrews demanded a king.

As to demanding morality, I'm of mixed feelings on that. On one hand, I want my kids to grow up in a fairly moral civilization, where homosexuality is a hush-word and premarital sex is the abnormal rather than the normal as it is today. On the other hand, dictating morality on a lost culture only serves to do two things - create a moral culture still bound for hell, and create more hatred against us for our tampering. And then there's the third thing we must face - our efforts to enforce morality on society is inevitably doomed. We can protest abortion and homosexual marriage and premarital sex all we want, but society is going to go apostate and they're going to turn on us hard, regardless of what we do. Prophesy like that is not something that can be circumvented - it's going to happen. Knowing it's going to happen gives us the edge and helps focus us on the truly important issue we have been trusted with - bringing the Gospel to a lost world regardless of how they hate us.

Does that mean we give up protesting the wrongs? No - silence can equal acceptance and the world must know that we do not accept what is happening. We've been given tools by the system to express our opinions that can affect legistlation to a degree and those tools unused are tools that Satan would use instead, so we would be irresponsible not to use them. We have been told to pray for and support our leaders. Nero surely even was prayed for! However we need to ensure that we keep our focus on our job and not be overly caught up and distracted fighting something that is going to happen regardless. We need to be serving more to keep the light shining for the world that they may be convicted and repent, or later be judged by that same light where they had a chance but refused to take it.
​

Romans 13:1-,7
1bFor there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. .....4For he is God’s minister to you for good. .....7Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.
​

Are we not to honor the President? I did not vote for him this year (although I did back in 2008 - and that was after a long battle of prayer/even considering not voting at all since I didn't think any cannidates were others I could agree 100% with). I do not agree with many of his positions. But he is now my president, and I will offer him the full honor due of that position, but not the unquestioned acceptance of his decisions.

Serving has nothing to do with endorsing. It has to do with obedience. Scripture directs us to submit. And submission is about serving, not endorsing that which is wrong.

God has called us to submit to authority. But He has not called us to disobey Him in submitting to that authority. We see the same thing within scripture when it comes to Biblica characters like Joseph in Genesis 38-49...as Pharaoh was already the ruler. Joseph was submitting to that which God had placed in authority over him when it came to his work and the dreams he had. Joseph's people are the same people that Moses led out of bondage. He submitted to Pharaoh because that's what he was supposed to do. And when God was ready to get His people out from under the rule of that which was against Him, He did.

Scripture makes clear (such as the Book of Ezra) is sovereign, in spite of the failures and faithlessness of men.

The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord like channels of water;he turns it wherever he wants (Proverbs 21:1).

​

Just as God moved in the heart of Cyrus, so that his decree fulfilled the prophecies of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 25:8-12; Jeremiah 27:21-22; Jeremiah 29:10-14 )and Isaiah, with Cyrus being God’s servant (Isaiah 44:28-45:9 ), as well as Nebuchadnezzar (Jeremiah 25:9),….or even with Joseph in Egypt/having the support of unbelieving pharoah, so I believe the same’s possible today

Many were already saying "President Romney" when he was running while saying "Mr.Obama" (something that came off very disrespectful) - but Mitt Romney was not in authority. He was running to be in authority. And there is a stark difference between submitting to someone whom God has placed in authority over you and endorsing that person who is against God to be placed into authority over you.

Had that man, Romney, been elected, it would have completely changed what Christianity is in the eyes of the world. And to an extent, it probably already has. I know many who wanted Romney kept saying "Well, it doesn't matter that He's Mormon and we're not voting for a Christian president" - and yet if his Mormonism was a none issue, it wouldn't have been avoided like the plague by every evangelical who was trying to convince people that it was in the country's best interest to support him. If his Mormonism was not an issue, the Billy Graham Organization wouldn't have taken it down as a cult.

So many people placed their faith in having a conservative cannidate (or one who was labeled as such, since many didn't feel Romney was anything close to being conservative) that they ended up doing a lot of things that were anti-Christian....and it was interesting to see how many felt that their faith was lost at the election. But it's not about being conservative in office or liberal and I'm glad for others noting the issue. Internet Monk noted it best on their site, as seen in the article entitled "I am Not a Conservative Christian - Internet Monk"

As they said best:

Barack Hussein Obama has won reelection as president of the United States of America. No matter what comes our way, Obama is the one the majority of Americans said they want to lead us.

Whether this makes you happy, sad, mad, or simply makes you reach for the TV remote to see what is on Sportscenter, the fact is Barack Obama is going to continue in his role as our nation’s leader.

We, too, (at least those of us who live in the United States) have a role to play. We are free to defend him or criticize him. But one thing we are commanded to do is to pray for him. Let us pray with humility, kindness and love for the leader of our nation that we may continue to experience the freedom we have to worship our God as we do.

​

 

[Ringo84]

Ringo, I just have to say that I always thought you were a solid drummer!

Well thank you!

Most of our founding fathers including Pilgrims were Christians. In the early 1800's all Ivy League universities were started by Christians and half of their graduates became ministers. When George Washington studied in school, the main book was the Bible. Biblical principals speak loud and bear presence within the Constitution, Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights. Before that, where did they come, England, France, Spain, Italy, etc and they were all under a Christian influence.
Currently 40% of Americans attend Christian churches and even 60% would claim that they are Christians.
Happy Thanksgiving to you, instituted by Abe Lincoln, a prayerful man, and who do think he prayed to, Budha, Allah, Krishna? Every president who was ever elected claimed to be Christian with maybe the exception of a few deists. Obama said he was a Christian from Rev Wright's camp --who damn's America and is highly racist; but then his roots yearn to accomplish his father's dream (a Muslim). Muslim's want to convert the planet to Islam.

Whether or not the founders were Christians does not affect whether or not our government is Christian, which it is not. Neither does the percentage of Americans who consider themselves Christian.

Lincoln was not a founding father, and Thanksgiving Proclamations do not make us a "Christian nation"

Reverend Wright and Muslims seem irrelevant to the issue at hand.
Ringo

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Catholics, Prostestants an most non-denominational churches agree on the essentials of Christianity

Ironic, no? This from the guy who wanted to tell me how my faith was not real and then accused me of thinking salvation came through works vs grace. I should think you might want to review the development of Protestantism and "Justification by Faith". Just an FYI.

"essentials"? That's quite interesting.

But more to the point: do deists fall into the same category? So it seems that in this view it is merely important to believe in some random supernatural being of some sort, not necessarily "Christianity" per se?

Unless you think "all paths in Christianity lead to God".

You spent 30 years seeking God and didn't find Him. All you had to do is look at Jesus, He is God, the fullness of glory, grace and truth.

Again, you were so busy telling me how my faith was not real that you built a rather clear distinction about what is proper and what is improper in the "Faith". I find it intersting now that you are so ecumenical!

So says your liberal minded revisionists who want to change history.

LOL! Sorry, Ronald but many of the features of the Declaration of Independence and the philosophy espoused by many of our founding fathers comes straight from folks like Locke.

Here's an interesting bit from a book on Jefferson:

As Jefferson saw it, rational empirical investigations determined what constituted reality. When viewed from this perspective, the Trinity was -in his words- "incomprehensible jargon" "metaphysical insanity" , "a hocus pocus phantasm of a god like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads", a "deliria of crazy imaginations, as foreign to Christianity as that of Mahomet and "abracadabra". (SOURCE: "Faiths of our Founding Fathers", David L. Holmes)

This is NOT TO SAY JEFFERSON DIDN'T BELIEVE IN GOD! Not at all! He was apparently by all measures a "Deist" or more associated with Unitarian faith of the time.

further (though loathe I am to rely on Wiki):

... in private letters Jefferson variously refers to himself as "Christian" (1803),[4] "a sect by myself" (1819),[5] an "Epicurean" (1819),[6] a "Materialist" (1820),[7] and a "Unitarian by myself" (1825).[8] Historian Sydney E. Ahlstrom associated Jefferson with "rational religion" or deism.[9]
(SOURCE)

Again, I suspect some of the various founding fathers would differ from your Christianity on some points.

Plastered? And that is your perspective.

Mine is one of a plural, enlightenment, rational society made up of various faiths. The individual's faith is sacred to them, not to everyone. And since we are a PLURAL society we all get to worship (or not) as we wish.

It is only certain groups who demand that their faith be the "Label" for our country.

A true man of God lead by God, no doubt!

But would his "faith" be appropriate in your earlier "defintions"? Would he merit salvation in your soteriology?

All good things come from God, we can do nothing without Him!
This nation was built by people of faith who believed they could do all things in Christ who strengthened them!

Well then those people who helped build this country who were not Christians I guess were just serving the "REAL" people?

Good for them. Maybe we could set up a tax they have to pay to be a member of our Christian Nation?

 

[Ronald]

Whether or not the founders were Christians does not affect whether or not our government is Christian, which it is not.

I said Christian "nation" not so much government. It is a government by the people and for the people. To me, the nation is American, consisting of people. I don't think of this nation as just government which is narrow. But hey, that's where Demoncrats are leading the this nation > big government in more control and lesser freedoms for the people.

Lincoln was not a founding father, and Thanksgiving Proclamations do not make us a "Christian nation"

Not founding as in being included in the creation of but He was instrumental in ending slavery, that was crucial and that made the country great. A fighter for freedom of all men is a founding father to me.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Whether or not the founders were Christians does not affect whether or not our government is Christian, which it is not. Neither does the percentage of Americans who consider themselves Christian.

Lincoln was not a founding father, and Thanksgiving Proclamations do not make us a "Christian nation"

There was actually a very interesting article on the issue that spoke on the issue of how much people often say they want a Christian nation and yet resist it often politically on issues they disagree on which the scriptures promote:

• Once Upon A Christian Nation | internetmonk.com

https://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/h...lse&aff_id=0&locale=en_us&ui=1&os_ver=6.1.1.0</DIV>

 

[TeddyReceptus]

There was actually a very interesting article on the issue that spoke on the issue of how much people often say they want a Christian nation and yet resist it often politically on issues they disagree on which the scriptures promote:

• Once Upon A Christian Nation | internetmonk.com

Very interesting article! I too have wondered why evangelicals would fight against welfare programs in preference for some nebulous "localized" charity.

Seems we can do more good if we all pull in the same direction.

Personally I voted for Obama because I believe that Progressive ideals are truly more "decent" and "good".

Obviously I don't believe in it from a supernatural standpoint, so I don't have to wonder what Jesus would like to vote for, but in general I feel that our primary goal should be to help one another.

I don't have to be a Christian to have a solid moral compass and behave in an ethical manner. So why do we need to have people demand we call ourselves a "Christian Nation" when so many of these same people are repelled by progressive ideals that work to help everyone?

We are only a "Christian Nation" for those who think that being a Christian is necessary to be a good person and an admirable nation. For the rest of us we realize that a Christian can be good, so can a muslim, so can a hindu and so can an atheist, so long as we all work for the betterment of our fellow citizens.

 

[Ronald]

Obama is painted with brushes of other people's beliefs regardless of how little he himself has expressed them!

You comment about the movie 2016 Obama's America, as if you've seen it.
He quoted Obama from His book, "Dreams of My Father", saying you wanted to fulfill his father's (a Muslim) dreams. Obama is recorded reading from the book. What that a lie of deception?
He went to where he lived and interviewed his brother who confirmed these idiologies. He went to Hawaii, Idonesia, Kenya and spoke to these people who have had influence in his life. Where those lies?
He was raised around Muslims and that shaped who he is. It's obvious he is sympathetic to them
Frank Marshall Davis is a communist > he influenced Obama.
Bill Ayers is a terrorist, anti-American > he influenced Obama.
Jeremiah Wright, a racist anti-American who damns America > 20 years in his church does something to people
Robert Unger, a communist.
Obama supported partial birth abortion where a 9 month fetus can be terminated as it comes out of the womb, scissors are stuck into the brain and it's brains are sucked out ... most likely as the baby is crying. Really humane!
Back in 2008, he stated that he would negotiate with terrorists ... dialogue will do it ... let's be nice. To show how respectful and nice he is, he bowed down to the Saudi King and kissed his ring! Do you think any other president in history would do that? Would you do it? I wouldn't.

Obama has done nothing to show himself to be a muslim secret or otherwise!

He would have never gotten elected if He outwardly showed that He was. However, by their fruit you will know them. He has mocked portions of the New Testament and showed his lack of understanding concerning the Old. He's another one that likes to pick and choose scriptures that he approves of and discard the rest. Mocking the Sermon on the Mount is not demonstrating your faith in Christianity. Of course you would approve of such behavior!

Obama has done nothing that is truly anti-American in his policies!

You are not only blind to God, you are blind to the big picture ... just wait awhile longer and it will hit you!

Take Obamacare as a prime example! It is founded on a REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR'S PLAN HASHED OUT FOR MASSACHUSETTS. It utilizes a core concept ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED BY THE CONSERVATIVE HERITAGE FOUNDATION IN THE 1990's!

I don't approve of being fined for not having medical insurance, they got around the Constitution by calling it a tax.

Obama withdrew for Iraq on Bush's timetable

It was expected of him, part of the Democratic platform was to get out of Iraq ASAP. Iraq made it clear theywanted us out. Some decision!

The Conspiracy Theories are so intellectually vapid that they end up stepping on themselves and have to violate common sense!

We're are about to see our rights and freedoms violated and the Constitution trashed, not abruptly of course but when a president over extends the bounds of the executive branch and starts telling the Judicial and Legislative branches how they should do their job, and strong arming them, then watch out. More to come. But that's not really my concern. What's coming is more than anyone can handle!

 

[TeddyReceptus]

You comment about the movie 2016 Obama's America, as if you've seen it.

Yes I have. I have also been watching the last 4 years worth of American history and I see no "anti colonialism" or destruction of America through Presidential policy.

He went to where he lived and interviewed his brother who confirmed these idiologies.

I'm far more interested in what Obama has actually himself done. Couldn't care less what his half-brother halfway around the world says in an interview.

I'm interested in what OBAMA HAS ACTUALLY DONE.

He went to Hawaii, Idonesia, Kenya and spoke to these people who have had influence in his life. Where those lies?

Again, I am only interested in what Obama himself has done. He has a 4 year track record and a while before that as a Senator from Illinois.

America still exists and no signs of destruction of the US through Obama policies.

He was raised around Muslims and that shaped who he is. It's obvious he is sympathetic to them

"sympathetic" to them? You mean as in understanding that they are real people and we have to remember they have their own countries and our country has a lot of them?

Other than that he's no more or less "sympathetic" to them than he is to Rastafarians, Catholics and Buddhists.

Or are you yearning for a GUILT BY ASSOCIATION dream America?

Frank Marshall Davis is a communist > he influenced Obama.

And there are no Communist policies put forth by Obama. Not even marginally.

Bill Ayers is a terrorist, anti-American > he influenced Obama.

And Obama has done NOTHING that is "terrorist" against the US. He has not bombed one US facility!

Jeremiah Wright, a racist anti-American who damns America > 20 years in his church does something to people

And yet Jeremiah Wright isn't a lead advisor in the White House and no policy has been put forth that keeps white people down .

Robert Unger, a communist.

What is this McCarthy Era 1950's?

Back in 2008, he stated that he would negotiate with terrorists ... dialogue will do it ... let's be nice. To show how respectful and nice he is, he bowed down to the Saudi King and kissed his ring! Do you think any other president in history would do that? Would you do it? I wouldn't.

You are not only blind to God, you are blind to the big picture ... just wait awhile longer and it will hit you!

Ummm, yeah.

I don't approve of being fined for not having medical insurance, they got around the Constitution by calling it a tax.

Miss the big picture much?

It was expected of him, part of the Democratic platform was to get out of Iraq ASAP. Iraq made it clear theywanted us out. Some decision!

He left on Bush's time table.

We're are about to see our rights and freedoms violated and the Constitution trashed, not abruptly of course but when a president over extends the bounds of the executive branch and starts telling the Judicial and Legislative branches how they should do their job, and strong arming them, then watch out. More to come. But that's not really my concern. What's coming is more than anyone can handle!

Certainly reality doesn't really seem to do much heavy lifting in this particular event.

 

[Ringo84]

I'm interested in what OBAMA HAS ACTUALLY DONE.

Search Google for "What Obama has done so far", and you'll have your answer - first search result.

(Pardon the language contained in the URL - I'm not responsible for the name of the website)
Ringo

 

[Ronald]

Ironic, no? This from the guy who wanted to tell me how my faith was not real and then accused me of thinking salvation came through works vs grace.

Salvation is by grace through faith as stated. There is division among Protestants on this topic as well. They point to James: "faith without works is dead". And Catholics are legalistic. The faith being a gift and supernatural is not the argument. It's the holding on to it that is. And perseverence is required of course. But when the Holy Spirit is in you helping you empowering to persevere, enabling you, counseling you, empowering you, it is not irrational to think that the "works" aren't generated by human strength and efforts, they are generated by God, who works all things through us ... FYI!

But more to the point: do deists fall into the same category?

"A deist thinking that God is not directly involved in his creation today as he was in the Old Testament days or even in the days of the writing of the New Testament, does not necessarily mean he denies the deity of Christ, or that salvation is by grace through faith, or any of the other essential doctrines." unknown author
"For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools,"Romans 1:20-22
This is a reference to all men --not strictly those who have heard the gospel story.

Unless you think "all paths in Christianity lead to God".

You don't care for God or what I think, in your mind God doesn't exist and so what does it matter what I think.

I find it intersting now that you are so ecumenical!

I respect all who put the their in Jesus, Catholic or Protestant. We all believe that he died for our sins and rose on the third day according to the scriptures, that's the essential belief. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but through Me."John 14:6

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Salvation is by grace through faith as stated. There is division among Protestants on this topic as well. They point to James: "faith without works is dead". And Catholics are legalistic. The faith being a gift and supernatural is not the argument. It's the holding on to it that is. And perseverence is required of course. But when the Holy Spirit is in you helping you empowering to persevere, enabling you, counseling you, empowering you, it is not irrational to think that the "works" aren't generated by human strength and efforts, they are generated by God, who works all things through us ... FYI!

See, your soteriology is quite detailed and well worked out. That seems to be indicative of a very detailed set of understandings. Ergo if someone disagrees with your view of salvation, are they likely to enjoy salavation?

You don't care for God or what I think, in your mind God doesn't exist and so what does it matter what I think.

Ahhh, but here you have again have me all wrong! I'm fascinated by religion! I'm fascinated by the various sects and differences in philosophy. Much of it may not seem real to me, but I'm fascinated in your thought process and logic.

You wish to claim the Founding Fathers as co-religionists of yours yet it seems that in many ways they would not fit into your previously established faith details.

I respect all who put the their in Jesus, Catholic or Protestant.

So you respect people who may find that salvation is in part through works?

We all believe that he died for our sins and rose on the third day according to the scriptures, that's the essential belief.

Then that is sweeping under the rug the very real painful schism between Catholicism and Protestantism in the past.

Furthermore, while I am glad you are so ecumenical in your views, need I remind you that many in Christianity's history have not been so sanguine. I assume you are familiar with the Albigensian Crusade, correct? A crusade in southern France against an heretical Christian sect. Rather bloody.

Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but through Me."John 14:6

And again, I am struck by your earlier detailed descriptions of how I had failed to achieve "faith" yet here you seem to be open to just about any and all interpretations so long as someone winds up with some sort of belief in some sort of version of Christ and God.

Is the Trinity important to you? How about heresies such as that of Arius that resulted in the Nicaean Creed's necessity?

How do you align this with Jefferson's earlier point about the Trinity?

 

[Ronald]

Ergo if someone disagrees with your view of salvation, are they likely to enjoy salavation?

A child can be saved and understand very little. It does not require 20 or 30 years of study. I can't know a person's heart, only what they say. Adults can enjoy God and their salvation with minimal knowledge.

I'm fascinated by religion! I'm fascinated by the various sects and differences in philosophy. Much of it may not seem real to me, but I'm fascinated in your thought process and logic.

I am fascinated too, but I thought you gave your resignation as a seeker?
And I thought I was so wrong, sanctimonious, denegrating and chilling ... to mention a few?

You wish to claim the Founding Fathers as co-religionists of yours yet it seems that in many ways they would not fit into your previously established faith details.

You haven't experienced that faith I described; a relationship, a new spirit, etc. How do you know what our founding fathers had, knew, experienced or didn't other then what was written?
"Christian oaths were required of officials in North Carolina, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Vermont before they could take their seats in the legislatures. The other six states provided no similar requirement in their constitutions. Section 9 of the Vermont Constitution, adopted on July 8, 1777, required the following oaths:
" I ____ do solemnly swear, by the ever living God, (or, I do solemnly affirm in the presence of Almighty God) that as a member of this assembly
And each member, before he takes his seat, shall make and subscribe the following declaration, viz.
" I ____ do believe in one God, the Creator and Governor of the Diverse, the rewarder of the good and punisher of the wicked. And I do acknowledge the scriptures of the old and new testament to be given by divine inspiration, and own and profess the protestant religion."

"XXXII. That no person, who shall deny the being of God or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State." N.Carolina Constitution 1776



I do believe they had the same faith as I.


Atheists were never allowed to give an oath in a courtroom, because you had to put your hand on the Bible and swear to tell the truth.

So you respect people who may find that salvation is in part through works?

What faith they have does not necessitate understanding. Sometimes people don't understand love, it doesn't mean they don't experience it.
Unconditional love is pure, it doesn't expect anything in return --no works!

Then that is sweeping under the rug the very real painful schism between Catholicism and Protestantism in the past.

I just don't make an issue. I read a book by Pope John Paul II called "Crossing the Threshold of Hope" and I was blown away by the intellect and wisdom of this man. His vast understanding of history and speaking and reading ten languages. He was genius. I had a great respect for him and all the priests and nuns who serve the Lord. There's a schism but I don't pay attention to that. I consider them brothers and sisters. God will straighten out all our misunderstandings when we get to heaven. Misunderstanding does not invalidate your faith or disqualify you.

I assume you are familiar with the Albigensian Crusade, correct? A crusade in southern France against an heretical Christian sect. Rather bloody

No. I'm aware of lot of misguided tradegies in history due to misunderstanding the primary message, which is love your neighbor, not burn them at the stake after a witchhunt.

And again, I am struck by your earlier detailed descriptions of how I had failed to achieve "faith" yet here you seem to be open to just about any and all interpretations so long as someone winds up with some sort of belief in some sort of version of Christ and God.

You're stretching and distorting what I've said. "...open to just about any and all interpretations" --NEVER SAID THAT! "...some sort of belief" DID NOT SAY THAT!
You distort and then try to get me to agree to your exaggerations. Sorry I won't. I accept if people tell me that they have a relationship with God through Jesus, based on the gospel... PERIOD Other misunderstandings, doubts, confusion, etc. is par for the course. Errors can be corrected, doubts can be resolved, people are rebuked, we fall down but we get up and move forward while learning and growing towards the likeness of Christ with God's help.

Is the Trinity important to you?

Firmly.

How about heresies such as that of Arius that resulted in the Nicaean Creed's necessity?

I'm more concerned about where we are today and where we are headed.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

I am fascinated too, but I thought you gave your resignation as a seeker?
And I thought I was so wrong, sanctimonious, denegrating and chilling ... to mention a few?

Oh, you appear as that to me, no doubt! But this sudden turn for ecumenical even handedness sounds more like the "enemy of my enemy is my friend".

You don't seem able to understand that after post after post telling me how I had failed to understand the nature of faith you seem to be flinging to the door wide to just anyone who believes in just anything!

Just so long as they don't express "doubt". Doubt seems to be the worst thing for you to be able to handle.

You haven't experienced that faith I described; a relationship, a new spirit, etc. How do you know what our founding fathers had, knew, experienced or didn't other then what was written?

Well, I can't know someone's soul or heart (as you seem able to do), so I can only go on what is written.

"XXXII. That no person, who shall deny the being of God or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State." N.Carolina Constitution 1776

So yeah, I already knew there were several states that discriminated against people based on faith or lackthereof. Not something one should actually be proud of, but indeed there are Christian Bigots out there.

I just don't make an issue.

It is understandable. Usually I find that people who are members of particularly fundamentalist of evangelical sects have little appreciation of history of the faith. YOU may not make an "issue", but rest assured the countless people who suffered through that kinda did.

I read a book by Pope John Paul II called "Crossing the Threshold of Hope" and I was blown away by the intellect and wisdom of this man.

Well, the Catholic Church actually does have a long history of incredible thinkers. This is something that many Protestant sects (especially fundamentalists and evangelicals) have given up. There is a distinct anti-intellectualism in the Christian Faith today. Not the least of which is a lack of knowledge of the development of the faith and its history.

But it's also bolstered by adherents who think their narrow view of the world is the only one out there.

Misunderstanding does not invalidate your faith or disqualify you.

I actually am quite happy to hear that from you. You see I so often see people of strong, narrow faiths with little understanding of what others think and feel to be very intolerant. I congratulate you on your position! That's actually quite honorable.

No. I'm aware of lot of misguided tradegies in history due to misunderstanding the primary message, which is love your neighbor, not burn them at the stake after a witchhunt.

BRAVO! I am very glad to hear that!

You're stretching and distorting what I've said. "...open to just about any and all interpretations" --NEVER SAID THAT! "...some sort of belief" DID NOT SAY THAT!

So what is the "cutoff" for "misunderstanding" you mentioned just a paragraph ago?

Which heretics will make it into heaven under the "Misunderstanding" clause? Will the Gnostics? How about the Manichaeans? Adoptionists? Docetists? Audianists? Ebionites? Marcionites? Cathars? Bogomils? Waldensians?

You distort and then try to get me to agree to your exaggerations. Sorry I won't.

My apologies. Would you like to tell me which heretics will make it into heaven then? And which ones won't? And what is the difference?

I accept if people tell me that they have a relationship with God through Jesus, based on the gospel... PERIOD Other misunderstandings, doubts, confusion, etc. is par for the course.

Which Gospel? Specifically?

Errors can be corrected

Oh this is quite true! The Church has spent millenia "correcting" errors. The short list of heresies there is a good indicator.

I do believe they had the same faith as I.

...

Firmly.

Then what do you think about the man who wrote:

"In fact, the Athanasian paradox that one is three, and three but one, is so incomprehensible to the human mind, that no candid man can say he has any idea of it, and how can he believe what presents no idea? He who thinks he does, only deceives himself."

"The hocus-pocus phantasm of a God like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and thousands of martyrs."

"I confidently expect that the present generation will see Unitarianism become the general religion of the United States. "

Because that man was one of the founding fathers....and he largely wrote the Declaration of Independence.

Do you think your faith is so much like his?

I'm more concerned about where we are today and where we are headed.

Drat! I can never get a fundamentalist/evangelical to talk about religion if it actually gets into details around the history of the faith or the core principals!

I always kind of hope that Christians know where their faith's ideas come from. But usually I'm met with a brick wall.

Too bad!

But do you ever wonder why some churches (yours possibly) say the Nicene Creed? Or the Athanasian Creed?

Ever wonder where the idea of the Trinity comes from? Ever read about the Johannine Comma?

It's all so very interesting!

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Yes I have. I have also been watching the last 4 years worth of American history and I see no "anti colonialism" or destruction of America through Presidential policy.

I'm far more interested in what Obama has actually himself done. Couldn't care less what his half-brother halfway around the world says in an interview.

I'm interested in what OBAMA HAS ACTUALLY DONE.

Personally, I'm amazed at how others have been referencing Obama 2016 as if it was anywhere remotely close to evidence when it has often been repeatedly proven false.

If interested, as much of the film comes from the book "The Roots of Obama's Rage", there are are some excellent resources as seen in D'Souza's The Roots of Obama's Rage rooted in lies, The Roots of Obama's Rage and the honor code and here. They were very helpful in addressing point for point nearly every objection brought up - from the false claims of anti-colonialism/not knowing what American Life is about (despite the fact that he lived in American soil/experienced life abroad ..more discussed here and here) to the claims that he's a "secret Muslim" (despite the fact that he has disagreed with them multiple times while noting where he appreciates Muslims while also being a Christian) to the false claim of Obama living out all things his father desired to the claims of his Kenyan brother being stuck in poverty (as the man even spoke out on it in correction of what D'Souza claimed) to the claims of Obama supporting Wright (despite the fact that Obama disagreed multiple times when at the church and never advocated fully as he did - with many still clueless on the issue of what Black Liberation was about/why Obama went to a church advocating it and what Biblical prophets did) or the claims of Obama supporting aspects of abortion when the context of his claims are vastly different than what many make it out to be....and the claims of Frank Marshall Davis being a a communist who influenced Obama - with that one being amongst the most foolish since Frank Marshall Davis was a friend of President Obama&#8217;s maternal grandfather, Stanley Dunham. ..and because the black Davis was married to a white woman and had mixed race children, and the black Obama was being raised in an all white household, Obama's white grandfather introduced Obama to Davis and his children so Obama would have some connection to the African-American experience ..and later on President Obama consulted with Davis about racial issues.

There are many other things that have often been said at the cost of ignoring the significant amount of accomplishments done by the president throughout his 4 years that others on all sides have been thankful for...and truthfully, I do wonder if so much of it being done in the name of God is actually something that ticks the Lord off since it goes against what scripture notes on not slandering anyone, especially those in authority.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Very interesting article! I too have wondered why evangelicals would fight against welfare programs in preference for some nebulous "localized" charity.

True.

I've often argued that even if others are against any type of government spending for charity, there still needs to be a clear reality check in letting others know that charity is NOT an option ..and others against welfare programs have actually advocated that the government instead mandate that faith based organizations/individuals able to do give to charities of their choice that are addressing needs rather than allow for not charity whatsoever to be done..

Seems we can do more good if we all pull in the same direction.

Agreed...although there can be room for variation, I think.

Personally I voted for Obama because I believe that Progressive ideals are truly more "decent" and "good".

A lot of people, even those disagreeing with him, voted for him as well. I didn't vote for him this election but I do see much merit in the things he has sought and think it's the responsibility of citizens/believers to help him out in supporting what he does ...not agreeing with all things and certaintly not choosing to avoid holding him responsible/challenging him (as Fredrick DOuglass did with Lincoln in policy debates ) - but definately in seeking to have his back/help the nation do well.....and when you don't take care of the "least of these" or the less fortunate, be it the disabled or the elderly or the orphans and the foreign, you'll never do well in a nation.

One of my brothers in Christ has done many good articles/reviews on the issue which I've been thankful for when it comes to seeing what many advocate:

• Interesting definitions of poor | OrthoCuban
• What our response ought to be | OrthoCuban
• Where we can agree about the poor | OrthoCuban
• The bottom line of the healthcare debate | OrthoCuban</DIV>
• A disturbing story about laissez faire capitalism | OrthoCuban
• The reality of unplanned pregnancy and the unreality ... - OrthoCuban

Obviously I don't believe in it from a supernatural standpoint, so I don't have to wonder what Jesus would like to vote for, but in general I feel that our primary goal should be to help one another.

Understandable..

I don't have to be a Christian to have a solid moral compass and behave in an ethical manner. So why do we need to have people demand we call ourselves a "Christian Nation" when so many of these same people are repelled by progressive ideals that work to help everyone?


We are only a "Christian Nation" for those who think that being a Christian is necessary to be a good person and an admirable nation. For the rest of us we realize that a Christian can be good, so can a muslim, so can a hindu and so can an atheist, so long as we all work for the betterment of our fellow citizens.

More than understand. You don't have to be a Christian in order to be a "good person" (as Christianity doesn't make the argument, to my knowledge, that being a CHristian makes you a "good person" above others since the focus is on being redeemed/sanctified rather than being moral alone) and that compared to the absolute goodness of God (as Christ noted in Matthew 19 in conversation with the Rich Young Ruler when he said "No one is good except God" ...and what he noted in Matthew 7 when noting that even the good things done by parents for their children pale in comparision to what the Father is about ), all of our goodness is moot/incomplete.

If aware of what Christian Humanism is about (more shared here), the concept is easier to understand. One need not go any further than the Renaissance era to see in action the reality of working with others. The Renaissance era is something that stands out on several levels when it comes to seeing development of artistic thought..and differing constraints broken from previous eras while new ones were shaped in their place as the standards (as the bar was raised high). Seeing the developmental history is very fascinating, in light of Christian Humanism precedding it..some feeling that it may have begun as early as the 2nd century, with the writings of St. Justin Martyr, an early theologian-apologist of the early Christian Church who suggested a value in the achievements of Classical culture in his Apology (here ) --and later, influential letters by Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa confirmed the commitment to using pre-Christian knowledge, particularly as it touched the material world. Other periods experienced times of educational emphasis as illustrated by the Carolingian and Ottonian Empires. These early emphases, however, rested squarely on ecclesiastical authority and support. New views and discoveries were often stifled when in conflict with official dogma. The church officially interpreted Scripture and declared its Latin texts infallible. They allowed no alternate interpretations.

And by the time the Renaissance began, people were beginning to see the concept of how all men were made in the image of God..being worthy of respect/dignity and capable of making good decisions. There was greater focus on the asethics and indivdual thought, focusing on the earth rather than Heaven alone. Some Renaissance humanists held church offices and almost all faithfully supported the church, but their support was not an uncritical gullible acceptance since Humanists attacked many abuses but remained devout, orthodox and sincere.

 

[Ringo84]

Let me pipe in here...

"Christian oaths were required of officials in North Carolina, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Vermont before they could take their seats in the legislatures. The other six states provided no similar requirement in their constitutions. Section 9 of the Vermont Constitution, adopted on July 8, 1777, required the following oaths:
" I ____ do solemnly swear, by the ever living God, (or, I do solemnly affirm in the presence of Almighty God) that as a member of this assembly
And each member, before he takes his seat, shall make and subscribe the following declaration, viz.
" I ____ do believe in one God, the Creator and Governor of the Diverse, the rewarder of the good and punisher of the wicked. And I do acknowledge the scriptures of the old and new testament to be given by divine inspiration, and own and profess the protestant religion."


"XXXII. That no person, who shall deny the being of God or the truth of the Protestant religion, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the State, shall be capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil department within this State." N.Carolina Constitution 1776

All unconstitutional.

I do believe they had the same faith as I.

We can argue until Jesus returns whether or not the founders were Christian, but I think the entire debate misses the point about whether the founders wanted to merge separation of church and state. Regardless of their religious beliefs, or lack of them, they did not.
Ringo

 

[TeddyReceptus]

We can argue until Jesus returns whether or not the founders were Christian, but I think the entire debate misses the point about whether the founders wanted to merge separation of church and state. Regardless of their religious beliefs, or lack of them, they did not.
Ringo

Agreed! I think it is quite clear the Jefferson was a "Christian" in that he believed in Jesus and God, but I believe his "faith" was quite different from someone who would decree this to be a "Christian Nation" and not a lot like someone with Ronald's belief system.

 

[Ronald]

Let me pipe in here..
All unconstitutional.

Just information about the hearts of statesmen back then.

We can argue until Jesus returns whether or not the founders were Christian, but I think the entire debate misses the point about whether the founders wanted to merge separation of church and state. Regardless of their religious beliefs, or lack of them, they did not.

Many came to America to escape Papal control and influence. King James was Prostestant. Europe was predominantly Christian, other religions weren't even considered as part of this movement of religious freedom, every other religion was frowned upon for that matter. The separation of church and state was for that primary purpose, so government could not dictate and control their religio (Catholic, Protestant denomination or other), not the other way around like many believe

 

[bricklayer]

All that is is because God is actively willing that it be.