Difference between liberal & conservative

[Zoii]

Calling names just proves the weakness of your case.

As far as your analogy goes both are wrong because neither is stationary.

To the question of “who owns the truth” (taken out of context) but the question is good. God does. Hoping and praying that you might grow in all wisdom and knowledge and understanding for than you won’t be so quick to judge someone who speaks the truth.

“For wisdom is justified by her children “

Much love Not me

I never said which was moving - that was your assumption. AND thats my point - again you presumed to hold the truth - and the thing is either boy could have been right. Just as the liberal could be right - or the conservative - or both

 

[Not me]

It appeared to me and others you were making the following connections: Conservative = Truth = Good
Liberal = Untruth = Evil
I doubt I misinterpreted but Id be very glad to hear if I did. Are you saying you dont believe liberals to be untruth and thus Evil.

I’m am saying that those that want to “conserve” the definition of “truth” are conservative. Those that want to be freed from such constraints are “liberals.” For they want to be freed from the constraints that “truth” has put on them. Which is good or evil? You judge.

Much love in Christ, Not me

 

[Not me]

I never said which was moving - that was your assumption. AND thats my point - again you presumed to hold the truth - and the thing is either boy could have been right. Just as the liberal could be right - or the conservative - or both

By saying one was stationary you were saying by default one was moving. Do you not see this? It is not I that presumes here.

In Christ, Not me

 

[Not me]

I have tried many ways. Nothing.

If there is a God like you claim, it knows how to find me. But based on the lack of interaction and other evidence, I don't think it is there.

Doesn't mean I am not a good person. Doesn't mean that I can't work others to a better solution to things.

Well God DOES wait in righteousness, so if you want to meet Him do righteousness in all things and He will make you to know Him. For it is sin that hides His face.

Much love and prayers in Christ, Not me

 

[Zoii]

By saying one was stationary you were saying by default one was moving. Do you not see this? It is not I that presumes here.

In Christ, Not me

voila you proved my point - think about it and enlighten

 

[Not me]

voila you proved my point - think about it and enlighten

Be careful that you do not fall off the cliff. But regardless of what you think of me, please feed your personal relationship with Christ, as I will also, so we can both get our “well done thou good and faithful servant”


Much love in Christ, Not me

 

[essentialsaltes]

I've been reading Jonathan Haidt's book The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. There are indeed striking differences in the strength of the different moral axioms liberals and conservatives use to make judgments, but this is not the same as the liberals moving away from some hypothetical historical ideal.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

On the contrary I am suggesting the opposite. I'm suggesting you move forward with integrity.

Treading water is whats frequently happening in your politics (and here too in Australia) Treading water occurs when both sides of the political divide take a totally opposite view to the point of being combative, refusing to acknowledge the values in each others arguments. It results in an incapacity to move forward with any significant change. Every step forward is fought out - and that fight spills into the population with each side of the political divide verging on hate towards one another

I see it expressed here even on CF. The level of vitriol thrown around from one fellow american to another, simply because they vote for another party...its incredulous to me.

You call it compromise. I'm calling it bloody-minded and expressed in a manner to your fellow Americans that intends to be derogatory (calling them evil for example - what rubbish is that really) and that will only deepen mistrust, division and lack of co-operation.

By all means carry on with the language that you like to use. Call anyone who disagrees with you evil or bad. But that infantile language is whats weakening your democracy.

I have to admit that the wheels are coming off of our democracy here. That said evil exists, and has to be called out.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Is the truth excluded from Democrats. Does truth only belong to those who vote republican. And if truth is good and untruth is evil, is it still your contention that 50% of the USA is evil?

If you still hold to that then once again - and a) I know Im just a teen and b) I know Im Australian and as such an outsider; my view is that any line of thinking that leads you to believe that half of your fellow Americans are evil is not only wrong but its mean spirited, divisive, vitriolic and really its essentially deluded.

Our problems stem from sinfulness, if not outright evil by many.

 

[ViaCrucis]

As far as what Jesus taught or was about. I can’t speak to your relationship with Him but to encourage you to press in that you might know Him in all reality and truth.

I think this helps exemplify a major difference between us. See the Jesus I believe in and worship isn't a "Jesus" that I have a "personal relationship" with, but the Jesus which the Evangelists and Apostles spoke about in their writings as recorded in the New Testament, the Jesus who was born of the Virgin Mary, who suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried, and who rose from the dead on the third day, as the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds declare--which the Christian Church has always believed.

So when I want to understand what Jesus says or commands of me, I don't look to myself, to my own feelings--or at least I try not to, I'll freely admit that I am a fallible, broken sinner and so I fail frequently--I instead look to what has been written, believed, received, and confessed by the historic Christian Church. So if I want to know what Jesus' will is for how I should interact with other people, I should go and read the Sermon on the Mount.

Perhaps you consider yourself holy and righteousness enough to be able to divine the will of God because of the "Jesus" that you imagine, but I certainly don't. I know my own unrighteousness, my own sinfulness, and that I have to look outside of myself because in me there is nothing but death. I can only look to Jesus, the Author and Finisher of my faith, and I can encounter His word where He has spoken in the Gospel accounts. So when He says, "Do not resist evil, but whoever strikes you upon the right cheek, turn and offer the other as well." I have a direct command from the Son of God on how I ought to act and behave; that when someone comes against me instead of returning an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, to instead act in a way which is loving and compassionate. To also read, for example, in St. Paul's epistle to the Romans that I ought to act peaceably toward all insofar as I am able, that even if my enemy is hungry to feed them, if thirsty to give them drink. And that ultimately, when I stand before my God and Judge on that future Day, the thing I shall be judged on is how I treated other people, He shall say "I was hungry" and "I was thirsty" and "I was naked" and "I was sick" and "I was a foreigner" and "I was in imprison", and that how I treated the "least of these" is how I treated Him; because when I hear the commandment to Love the Lord my God and to love my neighbor, I can understand, as St. John does in his epistle, that whoever says they love God, but hates their brother, is a liar.

What kind of person do I want to be? Who do I want to be in relation to my neighbor? I know that before God I am freely justified by His grace and that all my sins are forgiven on Christ's account because of His death and resurrection, and that in Him and with Him I am God's child, by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit on account of God's indelible promises to me through the Gospel. But grace is not an excuse for recklessness, the Apostle though saying that where sin abounds grace abounds all the more is clear when he says, "Since grace abounds shall we go on sinning?" Because this Christian life exists at the crossroads of God and neighbor, my works will profit me nothing before God and that I belong to God because God is kind and gracious to sinners; but I still dwell in this world where my neighbor is hungry, where my neighbor needs a roof over their head, water to drink, medicine and medical care to treat their sickness and injuries, my neighbor still needs love. And what does it profit me if I gain the whole world but forfeit my soul, what good is it for me if in cleaving to my own life I lose it?

The command of God sets me before my neighbor as a servant, to humble myself, to forsake myself, pick up my cross, and follow the Son of God in the way he has set before us. For this life is not a life of glory, but a cross. The greatest in God's kingdom is the slave, the least, the lowly, the downtrodden, and the despised. God shows Himself to be King through the foolishness and weakness of this world: the King of kings wore a crown of thorns.

So no, I probably don't know your "Jesus". Not if it's a different Jesus than the One proclaimed by the Apostles and Evangelists.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Not me]

I think this helps exemplify a major difference between us. See the Jesus I believe in and worship isn't a "Jesus" that I have a "personal relationship" with, but the Jesus which the Evangelists and Apostles spoke about in their writings as recorded in the New Testament, the Jesus who was born of the Virgin Mary, who suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried, and who rose from the dead on the third day, as the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds declare--which the Christian Church has always believed.

So when I want to understand what Jesus says or commands of me, I don't look to myself, to my own feelings--or at least I try not to, I'll freely admit that I am a fallible, broken sinner and so I fail frequently--I instead look to what has been written, believed, received, and confessed by the historic Christian Church. So if I want to know what Jesus' will is for how I should interact with other people, I should go and read the Sermon on the Mount.

Perhaps you consider yourself holy and righteousness enough to be able to divine the will of God because of the "Jesus" that you imagine, but I certainly don't. I know my own unrighteousness, my own sinfulness, and that I have to look outside of myself because in me there is nothing but death. I can only look to Jesus, the Author and Finisher of my faith, and I can encounter His word where He has spoken in the Gospel accounts. So when He says, "Do not resist evil, but whoever strikes you upon the right cheek, turn and offer the other as well." I have a direct command from the Son of God on how I ought to act and behave; that when someone comes against me instead of returning an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, to instead act in a way which is loving and compassionate. To also read, for example, in St. Paul's epistle to the Romans that I ought to act peaceably toward all insofar as I am able, that even if my enemy is hungry to feed them, if thirsty to give them drink. And that ultimately, when I stand before my God and Judge on that future Day, the thing I shall be judged on is how I treated other people, He shall say "I was hungry" and "I was thirsty" and "I was naked" and "I was sick" and "I was a foreigner" and "I was in imprison", and that how I treated the "least of these" is how I treated Him; because when I hear the commandment to Love the Lord my God and to love my neighbor, I can understand, as St. John does in his epistle, that whoever says they love God, but hates their brother, is a liar.

What kind of person do I want to be? Who do I want to be in relation to my neighbor? I know that before God I am freely justified by His grace and that all my sins are forgiven on Christ's account because of His death and resurrection, and that in Him and with Him I am God's child, by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit on account of God's indelible promises to me through the Gospel. But grace is not an excuse for recklessness, the Apostle though saying that where sin abounds grace abounds all the more is clear when he says, "Since grace abounds shall we go on sinning?" Because this Christian life exists at the crossroads of God and neighbor, my works will profit me nothing before God and that I belong to God because God is kind and gracious to sinners; but I still dwell in this world where my neighbor is hungry, where my neighbor needs a roof over their head, water to drink, medicine and medical care to treat their sickness and injuries, my neighbor still needs love. And what does it profit me if I gain the whole world but forfeit my soul, what good is it for me if in cleaving to my own life I lose it?

The command of God sets me before my neighbor as a servant, to humble myself, to forsake myself, pick up my cross, and follow the Son of God in the way he has set before us. For this life is not a life of glory, but a cross. The greatest in God's kingdom is the slave, the least, the lowly, the downtrodden, and the despised. God shows Himself to be King through the foolishness and weakness of this world: the King of kings wore a crown of thorns.

So no, I probably don't know your "Jesus". Not if it's a different Jesus than the One proclaimed by the Apostles and Evangelists.

-CryptoLutheran

It is most bewildering that a simple statement of encouragement such as;

“As far as what Jesus taught or was about. I can’t speak to your relationship with Him but to encourage you to press in that you might know Him in all reality and truth.”

Would elicited such a desire to condemn someone and justify oneself.

As far as the statement “as far as what Jesus taught or was about” was a quote from what you said in post 112. I made no judgement on it, other than to use it as a stepping stone for the words of encouragement “to feed ones personal relationship with Christ”. Which is what Christianity is, as the Apostles and Prophets testify to. “that I might know Him” And how are we to know Him? By feeding ones personal relationship with Him. For Jesus did warn that there will be many that said “did we not do such and such in your name” and Jesus will response to them by saying “away, for I never knew you” So how are we to “know” that we are one of the “known”? By feeding ones “personal relationship”. So it would seem “knowning Jesus personally” is the heart of Christianity.

I do agree with alot that you wrote, so, once again I would wish you all the “growth and increase in your knowledge of Him”

I do realize that you do not see that someone’s “personal relationship with Christ” is the heart of Christianity, may I prepose a solution? Why don’t you go to Him and ask?

Much love in Christ, Not me

 

[Paulos23]

Well God DOES wait in righteousness, so if you want to meet Him do righteousness in all things and He will make you to know Him. For it is sin that hides His face.

Much love and prayers in Christ, Not me

Funny you say righteousness. I find many people that say they are righteous yo be single-minded. It is they way or else and they don't want to see other solutions.

Having been like that once, I would not go back to that. I do not like blinding myself to harm I am causing. I would rather care for my fellow humans and work out solutions that help them help themselves rather then requiring them going down a narrow path they can't stay on.

 

[Dave-W]

You really expect people here to use the dictionary? WOW!!!

I expect a certain level of education - yes.

 

[Not me]

Funny you say righteousness. I find many people that say they are righteous yo be single-minded. It is they way or else and they don't want to see other solutions.

Having been like that once, I would not go back to that. I do not like blinding myself to harm I am causing. I would rather care for my fellow humans and work out solutions that help them help themselves rather then requiring them going down a narrow path they can't stay on.

Have we not come full circle. Did you not say in a prior post that you believe righteousness does exist?

Just because many evil things have been done in the name of righteousness doesn’t mean righteousness doesn’t exist.

It is righteousness, as it in itself, that God waits in.

For is it not true that there are many versions of many things in this world. But are they not exactly that, a version of something and not the thing itself? Let us not concern ourselfs with the version of the thing, only the thing itself.

For it is true; that God waits in righteousness for those willing to do righteousness. Be one willing, and you will meet God.

Much love and prayers, Not me

 

[Paulos23]

Have we not come full circle. Did you not say in a prior post that you believe righteousness does exist?

Just because many evil things have been done in the name of righteousness doesn’t mean righteousness doesn’t exist.

It is righteousness, as it in itself, that God waits in.

For is it not true that there are many versions of many things in this world. But are they not exactly that, a version of something and not the thing itself? Let us not concern ourselfs with the version of the thing, only the thing itself.

For it is true; that God waits in righteousness for those willing to do righteousness. Be one willing, and you will meet God.

Much love and prayers, Not me

I do not confuse righteousness with Good. That is the problem.

Let use another example to bring it back to the OP. The War on Drugs.

This was done to stop the use of drugs in the US. Most everyone would agree that drugs are bad. But the War on Drugs was not good and did not achieve its goals. Drug use was still high and for every bust they did, more came in. And not every drug is as equally bad.

Many countries have had more success with treating the drug users, rather than jailing them or going after the dealers. Or legalizing some of the drugs, the ones that are not addictive. These solutions come from people not being narrow minded on the problem, but willing to explore the entirety of the problem to find something to make it better.

In my experience, a righteousness person that believes all drugs are bad would not even look at these solutions. Drugs are bad, they need to be stopped. But they are ignoring all the suffering they cause in pursuing getting rid of the drugs, i.e. the War on Drugs.

That is why just calling the other side evil in righteous anger does not help. It doesn't look at what both sides could agree on doing, or looking at the data and seeing what is possible. It just vilify those you think are wrong and ignoring everything else.

To put it in gaming terms: It is like playing a Paladin and wiping out a large camp of bandits, but not addressing the local economic conditions (high taxes, blight in the fields, etc.) that led them to it so more show up as they lose their farms.

 

[Not me]

I do not confuse righteousness with Good. That is the problem.

Let use another example to bring it back to the OP. The War on Drugs.

This was done to stop the use of drugs in the US. Most everyone would agree that drugs are bad. But the War on Drugs was not good and did not achieve its goals. Drug use was still high and for every bust they did, more came in. And not every drug is as equally bad.

Many countries have had more success with treating the drug users, rather than jailing them or going after the dealers. Or legalizing some of the drugs, the ones that are not addictive. These solutions come from people not being narrow minded on the problem, but willing to explore the entirety of the problem to find something to make it better.

In my experience, a righteousness person that believes all drugs are bad would not even look at these solutions. Drugs are bad, they need to be stopped. But they are ignoring all the suffering they cause in pursuing getting rid of the drugs, i.e. the War on Drugs.

That is why just calling the other side evil in righteous anger does not help. It doesn't look at what both sides could agree on doing, or looking at the data and seeing what is possible. It just vilify those you think are wrong and ignoring everything else.

To put it in gaming terms: It is like playing a Paladin and wiping out a large camp of bandits, but not addressing the local economic conditions (high taxes, blight in the fields, etc.) that led them to it so more show up as they lose their farms.

I thought we were talking about how someone could know for sure if God exists?

Much love in Christ, Not me

 

[stevenfrancis]

From the standpoint of the authentic Christian thing, liberalism and conservatism are secular terms applied to political activity. I pray for a day when Christians, (myself included) live out their lives as closely as possible in an imitation of Christ, (who was not liberal or conservative, but rather God, and the Truth), and when properly lived out and viewed will step on the toes of all secular political ideologies. I am personally working hard from this goal, and to the extent that I am able at this point. I am in active disavowal of the American Republican and Democratic party platforms. For me, it's Christ first (my heart/and obedience), then His Church (my heart and obedience), then my family (my heart), then my friends (my heart), then my local Government (my obedience if not a violation of Christian conscience), then my State Government (my obedience, if not a violation of Christian conscience), and finally my Federal Government (my obedience, if not a violation of Christian conscience).

The "news", political spin, Tweets, social media, and political parties have neither my heart, nor my obedience unless they are individuals currently actually serving in an office which is in authority over myself or my family, in which case they have my obedience so long as they are in a position of authority over me, and so long as what they are requiring of me does not violate my Christian conscience.

Having said this, I DO use my secular right to vote, and my constitutional right as an American to at least attempt to elect leaders who live their own lives knowing that they are subject to God themselves, and are obedient to God themselves as closely as possible within their positions. Once I have cast my vote, (which is almost always disregarded and overridden in a big way by secular partisan voters), then I am simply a Christian American subject who must live in respect and obedience to those elected, until such time as I have a voice again ('ish) in the next election. In the daily living out of my life, it is counterproductive for me to spend all my time complaining about the duly elected authorities over me, and thinking of ways to thwart them.

 

[SilverBear]

Calling names just proves the weakness of your case.

That's almost as bad as saying liberals reject the true definition of right and wrong

 

[SilverBear]

Those that want to be freed from such constraints are “liberals.” For they want to be freed from the constraints that “truth” has put on them.

and what "constraints" are those?

 

[Go Braves]

We "hear" of a lot on both sides, but the only video I have actually seen is that one I mentioned. It almost knocked me off my seat when I heard those words.

Would you please post the videos you are talking about? (I'll try to find the one I mentioned if you missed it.)

From 10/2010
The GOP's no-compromise pledge

Here’s John Boehner, the likely speaker if Republicans take the House, offering his plans for Obama’s agenda: “We're going to do everything — and I mean everything we can do — to kill it, stop it, slow it down, whatever we can.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell summed up his plan to National Journal: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

The Republicans’ Unprecedented Obstructionism By The Numbers
170-Plus Days And Counting: GOP Unlikely To End Supreme Court Blockade Soon

I'm not posting videos on account of being in public atm but I'm sure you can find them.