I know some think I am too critical of Baptists on here....

1,756 Views | 40 Replies | Last: 7 yr ago by FlyFish95
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
but major kudos to the Baptist Churches of Puerto Rico for this move. They've withdrawn support for Franklin Graham's upcoming rally in Puerto Rico, but did say that individual member churches/clergy are free to participate if they wish.
Quote:

The executive minister and the president of the Baptist Churches of Puerto Rico issued a statement Feb. 4 saying Graham's endorsement of Trump's policies "are for us contrary to the values of the Kingdom."

Pro Sandy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Seeing so many Evangelical leaders soil the gospel for the sake of Trump was quite disheartening.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Pro Sandy said:

Seeing so many Evangelical leaders soil the gospel for the sake of Trump was quite disheartening.
Indeed, but when talking with others, one silver lining I always tried to cling to was that we should see this as an opportunity to finally break from this Americanized Christianity and really present an alternative way to the world. I think we're starting to see some of that begin to occur.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Given the options available, it was difficult for me to take issue with anybody's personal choice this time. However, the open endorsements were over the top. Trump likely did very well with the blue collar/union people who self-identify as Christian. He also likely did very well with the prosperity gospel types. However, I don't think he would have won without the white, suburban, bachelor's holding, Liberty/Baylor types that were eager to be persuaded by Jerry Falwell, Jr., Franklin Graham, and scores of other evangelical leaders.

Very few of them seemed to say, "It is with a heavy heart and great ambivalence that I am casting my vote for Donald Trump." They were too eager to put the word "American" in front of "Christian." They were jovial in their endorsement, in turning over their lecterns and pulpits, in making analogies to Cyrus of Persia, etc. It was so bizarre, but also somewhat expected. I felt the same sense of betrayal when I saw Houston's FBC allowing Glen Beck to speak.
Frok
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Franklin Graham is definitely way too political. His father always seemed pretty good at not picking sides and supporting whomever was in the office.



PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Frok said:

Franklin Graham is definitely way too political. His father always seemed pretty good at not picking sides and supporting whomever was in the office.
Yeah, he is definitely not his father.
Solo Tetherball Champ
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The only thing that I can recall my senior pastor saying is that the lease on religious liberty has been extended by four years.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We've just been too self-absorbed on so many things...not biblically thinking. In retrospect, it's so easy to see how we were late to the game on Civil Rights. On Roe v. Wade. On being co-opted by shady politicians and not seeing through them. On adoption of orphans. On human trafficking.

The secular SJW's want us to get on board with gay rights, free birth control, needle exchange programs...you name it - things that we know will only bring long-term harm to our society.

However, if we'd just do the things that we all know to be correct - protect the unborn, care for orphans and the elderly, end child slavery, not let our ears be tickled so readily by the ungodly and the fear-promoters...sigh.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

The only thing that I can recall my senior pastor saying is that the lease on religious liberty has been extended by four years.
That's bad enough. My daughter's teacher came into class (home school) the morning after and declared "We won!"
Solo Tetherball Champ
How long do you want to ignore this user?
94chem said:

Quote:

The only thing that I can recall my senior pastor saying is that the lease on religious liberty has been extended by four years.
That's bad enough. My daughter's teacher came into class (home school) the morning after and declared "We won!"
How is that bad at all? We are not of this world, but we are in this world. He has made it clear that he is no trump fan, but he considers Hilary far worse for the ministry.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

The secular SJW's want us to get on board with gay rights, free birth control, needle exchange programs...you name it - things that we know will only bring long-term harm to our society.
But, I think it's dangerous to just chalk these up to "secular SJW's". The push for gay rights is borne from a society that overwhelmingly calls itself "Christian" marginalizing and abusing gay people for the bulk of our history. And, as far as I'm aware, needle exchange programs are effective in cutting down disease transmission. There are many Christians that, with pure intentions, can be for these things. While I don't agree with "free" birth control, I also don't see birth control as inherently wrong.


Quote:

However, if we'd just do the things that we all know to be correct - protect the unborn, care for orphans and the elderly, end child slavery, not let our ears be tickled so readily by the ungodly and the fear-promoters...sigh.
Absolutely agree. Protect all life from womb to tomb, even the lives of our enemies.

Our pastor kind of touched upon this the other day when discussing the refugee issue. He basically holds the same view I do. Government's going to do what government is going to do. As a church, we should welcome them with open arms. I think the same applies to various other issues. We, as the church, need to be a witness to an alternate way. Part of me loves when the government goes too far, not because people suffer, but because it's an opportunity for the church to distinguish itself.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Solo Tetherball Champ said:

94chem said:

Quote:

The only thing that I can recall my senior pastor saying is that the lease on religious liberty has been extended by four years.
That's bad enough. My daughter's teacher came into class (home school) the morning after and declared "We won!"
How is that bad at all? We are not of this world, but we are in this world. He has made it clear that he is no trump fan, but he considers Hilary far worse for the ministry.
Given the level of admiration he seems to hold for someone like Putin, I'd be wary considering this a victory for religious liberty. Especially considering the hostility that Putin and the Russian government has towards evangelism.

But, I don't see how it makes it easier for the ministry when the world sees much of the church getting into bed with someone whose worldview is so antithetical to the teachings of Christ. Yeah, we may not face more restrictive laws, but our credibility is diminished which can be far more damaging to ministry.
BusterAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't like Franklin Graham.

But this?
Quote:

Franklin Graham, who succeeded his father as CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association in 2002, recently defended Trump's executive order blocking refugees from Syria from entering the country and barring immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim nations deemed high risk by the White House, saying for him it is "not a Bible issue."

"It's not a biblical command for the country to let everyone in who wants to come, that's not a Bible issue," Graham said in a Huffington Post article published Jan. 25.
I think that this is a little nit picky and overly political to throw a tantrum over.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

How is that bad at all? We are not of this world, but we are in this world. He has made it clear that he is no trump fan, but he considers Hilary far worse for the ministry.
Religious liberty wasn't going to end under Hillary. My 8 year old came home before the election and said the "Hillary was going to take our guns." I should have told him that Donald Trump was going to take our puppies. I just laughed and wondered what some people are telling their kids. Then I remembered the stuff my dad told me. Then I didn't laugh so much. We had to eat a lot of expired freeze-dried food when we realized the commies weren't coming...
Solo Tetherball Champ
How long do you want to ignore this user?
94chem said:

Quote:

How is that bad at all? We are not of this world, but we are in this world. He has made it clear that he is no trump fan, but he considers Hilary far worse for the ministry.
Religious liberty wasn't going to end under Hillary. My 8 year old came home before the election and said the "Hillary was going to take our guns." I should have told him that Donald Trump was going to take our puppies. I just laughed and wondered what some people are telling their kids. Then I remembered the stuff my dad told me. Then I didn't laugh so much. We had to eat a lot of expired freeze-dried food when we realized the commies weren't coming...
No, but at the very least it would be continued to be chipped away at. Same thing with guns.

BusterAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RetiredAg said:

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

94chem said:

Quote:

The only thing that I can recall my senior pastor saying is that the lease on religious liberty has been extended by four years.
That's bad enough. My daughter's teacher came into class (home school) the morning after and declared "We won!"
How is that bad at all? We are not of this world, but we are in this world. He has made it clear that he is no trump fan, but he considers Hilary far worse for the ministry.
Given the level of admiration he seems to hold for someone like Putin, I'd be wary considering this a victory for religious liberty. Especially considering the hostility that Putin and the Russian government has towards evangelism.

But, I don't see how it makes it easier for the ministry when the world sees much of the church getting into bed with someone whose worldview is so antithetical to the teachings of Christ. Yeah, we may not face more restrictive laws, but our credibility is diminished which can be far more damaging to ministry.
OK, so I agree here.

I think 1,000% of any of Trump's Christianity is fabricated and fake, and did vote for him, but not for religious reasons.

But, let's please reserve criticism against him related to Christianity for things that he does that are actually religious issues. I don't see border control / national safety as a religious issue.

I would not want a president who would completely open our borders, allow citizenship to any human being that asked for it, and completely disassembled our armed forces, firing every soldier that works for the U.S. That would be bad for all of us. Given that is the case, where do we draw a line where stronger borders become sinful?

I kind of agree with Franklin. This is a governance issue, not a religious one.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

I would not want a president who would completely open our borders, allow citizenship to any human being that asked for it, and completely disassembled our armed forces, firing every soldier that works for the U.S. That would be bad for all of us. Given that is the case, where do we draw a line where stronger borders become sinful?
Well, that's where we differ. I want open borders, to completely disassemble the armed forces and fire every soldier working for the US.

To me, if it doesn't look like Christ, I can't support it. I get that governments will do what they do, but that doesn't mean that I have to endorse their actions, no matter how "just" we may believe they are. I can't call for government to do something that I, as a Christian, could not do without violating the teachings of my faith. I get the call for limiting immigration. I can't support it though because, IMO, it is an impediment to the church being able to do it's mission here on earth. We can't be a place of refuge for the broken fleeing for their lives if we call for government to shut the doors and keep them out.

But, I'm also a voluntaryist so clearly this is something we will probably just have to agree to disagree on.
Solo Tetherball Champ
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

+ 1 more quotes (click to expand)
94chem said:
That's bad enough. My daughter's teacher came into class (home school) the morning after and declared "We won!"
Solo Tetherball Champ said:
How is that bad at all? We are not of this world, but we are in this world. He has made it clear that he is no trump fan, but he considers Hilary far worse for the ministry.
Given the level of admiration he seems to hold for someone like Putin, I'd be wary considering this a victory for religious liberty. Especially considering the hostility that Putin and the Russian government has towards evangelism.
Given who the alternative was and what we were likely to get (plus a liberal supreme court), I'll pick the lesser of two evils because that is what we have to choose from.

Quote:


But, I don't see how it makes it easier for the ministry when the world sees much of the church getting into bed with someone whose worldview is so antithetical to the teachings of Christ. Yeah, we may not face more restrictive laws, but our credibility is diminished which can be far more damaging to ministry.
I hardly see anything that I've said as "getting into bed". Have some ministers? Yeah. However, the same people who despise Christians for voting trump are the same people who would despise you for voting Bush, or potential Cruz or even a libertarian. Short: They're going to despise you regardless.

I frankly see some validity to the Cyrus comparisons, but it is not a comparison I would use.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

Given who the alternative was and what we were likely to get (plus a liberal supreme court), I'll pick the lesser of two evils because that is what we have to choose from.
See, I have an issue w/ the "lesser of two evils" approach as a Christian. We are never called to be a "lesser of two evils" people. We are called to choose good, to choose His path. Our faith isn't a "lesser of two evils" endorsing faith.

Quote:

I hardly see anything that I've said as "getting into bed". Have some ministers? Yeah. However, the same people who despise Christians for voting trump are the same people who would despise you for voting Bush, or potential Cruz or even a libertarian. Short: They're going to despise you regardless.

I frankly see some validity to the Cyrus comparisons, but it is not a comparison I would use.
Oh, I think the Cyrus comparisons are silly, at best. But, to your other comment, perhaps they would despise them either way because they see them choosing leaders that look nothing like Christ. It diminishes the credibility of the church. How would those people feel if, instead, they saw the church reject this false dichotomy of "lesser of two evils", and instead said that regardless of what happens, we are going to be missionaries of His Kingdom here on earth? Would we get mocked? Sure. Would laws get passed that may restrict us or we find evil? Yes. It's in those times, though, that we become that light in the darkness. We seek political power, with the pure intent of providing security, but in the end we damage our credibility because we end up getting into bed with evil. We try our hardest to prevent persecution, even at the cost of our credibility, when we forget that it's the blood of martyrs that is the seed of the church.
Solo Tetherball Champ
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Deleted the post - was a little confrontational and I know you tire of arguing about Christian pacifism.
Solo Tetherball Champ
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Quote:


See, I have an issue w/ the "lesser of two evils" approach as a Christian. We are never called to be a "lesser of two evils" people. We are called to choose good, to choose His path. Our faith isn't a "lesser of two evils" endorsing faith.
I get that you have a problem with it. I don't like it either. But while we are not of this world, we do live in this world. We should be living every day like the trumpet may sound at any time while setting aside money for our childrens college fund and saving for retirement.


Quote:

Oh, I think the Cyrus comparisons are silly, at best. But, to your other comment, perhaps they would despise them either way because they see them choosing leaders that look nothing like Christ. It diminishes the credibility of the church.
We're choosing from the options given. That is a wise thing. The foolish thing is to walk away.

Quote:

How would those people feel if, instead, they saw the church reject this false dichotomy of "lesser of two evils", and instead said that regardless of what happens, we are going to be missionaries of His Kingdom here on earth? Would we get mocked? Sure. Would laws get passed that may restrict us or we find evil? Yes. It's in those times, though, that we become that light in the darkness. We seek political power, with the pure intent of providing security, but in the end we damage our credibility because we end up getting into bed with evil. We try our hardest to prevent persecution, even at the cost of our credibility, when we forget that it's the blood of martyrs that is the seed of the church.
This may not be your intent but it seriously reads as if you desire to be persecuted.


PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

The problem with your perspective is you actively avoid looking at all of God. Remember Christianity 101? God = Christ + Father + Spirit. You willfully ignore the times that the same God, who you believe to be a pacifist, explicitly told people to go out and kill 'em all. Revelation paints a pretty clear picture of Jesus being not quite so peaceful when he returns.

You can feed the hungry while still protecting your own. If a man does not provide for his family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an infidel. I consider protecting them part of my role. If that means violence or killing to protect my wife and child, I will do that without a seconds hesitation and sleep the rest of the righteous.

If I may apply your perspective on the nation to your own life: If you have locks on any of your doors I consider you a hypocrite.


Well, first, I wholeheartedly disagree with your understanding of OT and Revelation violence. Here's a good write up on reading Revelation: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thepangeablog/2013/05/07/corrective-strategies-and-themes-revelation/

As for the OT, I think they believe God told them to commit genocide. Whether or not He did, I'm not sure. I'm not actively ignoring anything. I am just reading it in a way that doesn't lead to horribly flawed contradictions of the nature of God. A good example to illustrate what I mean by that is Abraham being told to sacrifice Isaac. The Bible makes it clear that human sacrifice is sinful. Also, God would not command man to sin. So, either God commanded Abraham to sin, He was lying about what He wanted Abraham to do, or Abraham was operating on his understanding of God which, given the prevalence of human sacrifice in the surrounding cultures, included a belief in human sacrifice. Man in the OT was operating on a severely limited understanding of God's nature. It wasn't until Christ came as the exact revelation of His nature do we get the full picture. I look to Christ because Christ is the full revelation of God's nature, not David, Abraham, the OT, etc

Oh, and we don't lock our doors. Well, we lock our bedroom doors sometimes, you know, so the kids don't walk in on me and the Mrs. But, we never lock our doors to our home, even if we're gone for an entire weekend.
Frok
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

We can't be a place of refuge for the broken fleeing for their lives if we call for government to shut the doors and keep them out.


I may be wrong but wasn't it just a 90 day pause? If so then that doesn't sound all that unreasonable to me. Maybe that makes me a bad christian.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

I get that you have a problem with it. I don't like it either. But while we are not of this world, we do live in this world. We should be living every day like the trumpet may sound at any time while setting aside money for our childrens college fund and saving for retirement.

Living in the world doesn't mean we get to choose evil.
Quote:

We're choosing from the options given. That is a wise thing. The foolish thing is to walk away.

I'm not saying walk away. And we have more than those 2 options. I chose neither because I don't believe in lesser of two evils. That doesn't mean I've walked away. It just means I chose a cross-centric approach.

Quote:

This may not be your intent but it seriously reads as if you desire to be persecuted.


Desire? No. Would I count it a blessing? Absolutely. Am I going to choose evil just to avoid it? Absolutely not. Choosing evil to avoid persecution is not "Christian".
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Frok said:

Quote:

We can't be a place of refuge for the broken fleeing for their lives if we call for government to shut the doors and keep them out.


I may be wrong but wasn't it just a 90 day pause? If so then that doesn't sound all that unreasonable to me. Maybe that makes me a bad christian.

Please don't take my comments as me saying a person is a bad Christian of they disagree with me on this. That's absolutely not what I'm saying. I think intentions for most are pure. I just disagree and personally have a hard time reconciling it with my faith. But, we can disagree without either being a "bad Christian".
Frok
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This isn't directed at you. I just keep hearing about a muslim ban that Trump wants. When I read the actual bill it was a 90 day pause to assess the current situation. Am I missing something or is this all hyperbole?
Solo Tetherball Champ
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
We're choosing from the options given. That is a wise thing. The foolish thing is to walk away.
I'm not saying walk away. And we have more than those 2 options. I chose neither because I don't believe in lesser of two evils. That doesn't mean I've walked away. It just means I chose a cross-centric approach.
But for all practical purposes, you are.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Frok said:

This isn't directed at you. I just keep hearing about a muslim ban that Trump wants. When I read the actual bill it was a 90 day pause to assess the current situation. Am I missing something or is this all hyperbole?

If I'm not mistaken, it's a 90 halt on all immigration from the 7 specific countries he included, including all refugees. Syrian refugees, though, are banned indefinitely.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Solo Tetherball Champ said:


Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
We're choosing from the options given. That is a wise thing. The foolish thing is to walk away.
I'm not saying walk away. And we have more than those 2 options. I chose neither because I don't believe in lesser of two evils. That doesn't mean I've walked away. It just means I chose a cross-centric approach.
But for all practical purposes, you are.

No, I'm not. Walking away would mean I do nothing. That is not what I've chosen. I've just chosen not to go the Trump or Hillary route. We don't need government coercion to live out Kingdom lives here and now.
Solo Tetherball Champ
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Quote:

No, I'm not. Walking away would mean I do nothing. That is not what I've chosen. I've just chosen not to go the Trump or Hillary route. We don't need government coercion to live out Kingdom lives here and now.
But you are doing nothing. You're avoiding the options given - assuming you didn't go third party.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Solo Tetherball Champ said:


Quote:

No, I'm not. Walking away would mean I do nothing. That is not what I've chosen. I've just chosen not to go the Trump or Hillary route. We don't need government coercion to live out Kingdom lives here and now.
But you are doing nothing. You're avoiding the options given - assuming you didn't go third party.


"Not voting for evil or lesser evil" is not the same as "doing nothing".
Solo Tetherball Champ
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

Well, first, I wholeheartedly disagree with your understanding of OT and Revelation violence. Here's a good write up on reading Revelation: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thepangeablog/2013/05/07/corrective-strategies-and-themes-revelation/

As for the OT, I think they believe God told them to commit genocide. Whether or not He did, I'm not sure. I'm not actively ignoring anything. I am just reading it in a way that doesn't lead to horribly flawed contradictions of the nature of God. A good example to illustrate what I mean by that is Abraham being told to sacrifice Isaac. The Bible makes it clear that human sacrifice is sinful. Also, God would not command man to sin. So, either God commanded Abraham to sin, He was lying about what He wanted Abraham to do, or Abraham was operating on his understanding of God which, given the prevalence of human sacrifice in the surrounding cultures, included a belief in human sacrifice. Man in the OT was operating on a severely limited understanding of God's nature. It wasn't until Christ came as the exact revelation of His nature do we get the full picture. I look to Christ because Christ is the full revelation of God's nature, not David, Abraham, the OT, etc
I'm not in favor of a literalist reading, but often times a rock is a rock, a tree is a tree, and an order to wipe 'em out is an order to wipe 'em out. That is some nice gymnastics you have going on to believe that when he literally says "kill them all" God does not mean that and the Israelites misunderstood.

If God didn't tell them to wipe em out. then why would Saul get in trouble and have the kingdom stripped for disobeying?

Jesus drove people off the temple grounds with a whip. I don't know if you have been around business owners before, but generally, I've found that when people's businesses are attacked and damaged, they will defend those businesses. It stands to reason that there were some people that day who found were whipped by Jesus.

Violence is not inherently bad. But there is a time and a place, and there is also sanctioned violence.
Quote:

Oh, and we don't lock our doors. Well, we lock our bedroom doors sometimes, you know, so the kids don't walk in on me and the Mrs. But, we never lock our doors to our home, even if we're gone for an entire weekend.
#Respect - for being consistent. I'm not trying to scaremonger, but I hope nothing ever happens to your children because of that policy.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Jesus drove people off the temple grounds with a whip. I don't know if you have been around business owners before, but generally, I've found that when people's businesses are attacked and damaged, they will defend those businesses. It stands to reason that there were some people that day who found were whipped by Jesus.

Jesus absolutely did not use violence in the Temple incident. Had He done so, Isaiah's prophecy in Is 53:9 would be an error and not about Christ. If you look at the original language, it becomes clear He did not use violence. Here's a great paper on the original language from Andy Alexis-Baker on this subject: http://www.academia.edu/1563662/Violence_Nonviolence_and_the_Temple_Incident_in_John_2_13-15
Quote:


Violence is not inherently bad. But there is a time and a place, and there is also sanctioned violence.

I disagree. Not to mention, we are called to be imitators of Christ. We are called to be imitators of the One that Isaiah prophesied would commit no violence. How can we imitate our nonviolent Messiah while committing acts of violence. Not to mention His teachings on nonviolence, and the fact that none of His closest followers ever used violence to defend themselves despite all, minus John, suffering violent deaths.

Violence may be "just", at least according to man, but it's never Christ-like. I know we will disagree on this, but glad we can do so with respect and worth a realization that we are both coming from a pure intent.

Fyi, home now and the kids are wanting to hang out, so I'm going to gladly oblige them. This is fun, but not "cage match with a 10 yr old" fun. Have a great night.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well, one of his closest followers did cut off a dudes ear... but Christ fixed it.
Line up and wait 18L
How long do you want to ignore this user?
94chem said:

Quote:

The only thing that I can recall my senior pastor saying is that the lease on religious liberty has been extended by four years.
That's bad enough. My daughter's teacher came into class (home school) the morning after and declared "We won!"
Not following you here. Your daughter is homeschooled and she has a teacher, you or your wife?
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.