- Joined
- 20 May 16
- Moves
- 41841
@Suzanne
I would like to try and understand one another more. By reading post like this that are pointless and void of logic, or any kind of knowledge of, would you actually like to talk and understand one another more for growth and better acceptance, brotherly/sisterly Christian love for each? The main thing it would require is honesty from you.
Stepping slightly at a tangent, I was intrigued with the idea of “Christian Republicans”.
By the same token we must therefore have “Christian Democrats”.
So bearing in mind the prohibition on taking life, how can any Christian vote (be no part if the world John 17) for a political party knowing full well that they will take the lives of civilians that could well be fellow Christians ( whoopsie doozie there goes some more collateral damage ) .
Surely the existence of Democrat/Republican “Christians” runs contrary to the message of the bible ?
@mike69 saidMy original post was as honest as it gets.
@Suzanne
I would like to try and understand one another more. By reading post like this that are pointless and void of logic, or any kind of knowledge of, would you actually like to talk and understand one another more for growth and better acceptance, brotherly/sisterly Christian love for each? The main thing it would require is honesty from you.
Apparently, you're not used to honesty. Wean yourself off Trump, man.
@medullah saidLet me know when you get to the point, k?
Stepping slightly at a tangent, I was intrigued with the idea of “Christian Republicans”.
By the same token we must therefore have “Christian Democrats”.
So bearing in mind the prohibition on taking life, how can any Christian vote (be no part if the world John 17) for a political party knowing full well that they will take the lives of civilians that could well be fel ...[text shortened]... Surely the existence of Democrat/Republican “Christians” runs contrary to the message of the bible ?
You do know the whole "pro-life" thing is just another con job, yeah?
@medullah saidI was under the impression that the correct translation of this commandment talks about the prohibition of murder as opposed to "taking life". To suggest that the two are synonymous would surely be a morally incoherent oversimplification?
So bearing in mind the prohibition on taking life
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29602
06 Oct 23
@medullah saidErrr, really? Prohibition on taking life? You get that from the bible?
By the same token we must therefore have “Christian Democrats”.
So bearing in mind the prohibition on taking life,
Take Hosea 9:16 - ' 'Ephraim is blighted, their root is withered, they yield no fruit. Even if they bear children, I will slay their cherished offspring.”
Or the test for an unfaithful wife in Numbers 5:11-31 causing the women to miscarry. Do either of these passages indicate God believes a fetus possess a right to life?
"“may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”
@mike69 saidWho is it that you want to give home and money? Private citizens who must give what they have, or government who must take away from private citizens to give anything to anyone?
@suzianne
Maybe give all the homeless homes and enough food for the hungry?
We know the "Christian" Republicans won't.
Shouldn’t charity be done freely without compulsion and at cost to one’s own self and not at someone else’s? That would remove the Republican and Democratic forces within government who when they give do it at no cost to themselves, but the taxpayers!
We should not call anyone generous who only wants to give someone else’s money, or greedy who doesn’t want to give away someone else’s money and property.
@kellyjay saidYou know, you could always go over to the thread where I said that and see what led up to that and my response to what followed. You know, instead of assuming.
Who is it that you want to give home and money? Private citizens who must give what they have, or government who must take away from private citizens to give anything to anyone?
Shouldn’t charity be done freely without compulsion and at cost to one’s own self and not at someone else’s? That would remove the Republican and Democratic forces within government who when they ...[text shortened]... ive someone else’s money, or greedy who doesn’t want to give away someone else’s money and property.
Thread 197670 Top of Page 4
06 Oct 23
@suzianne saidSo when God instructs Moses to write as the sixth commandment "thou shalt not kill" is that a con job too?
Let me know when you get to the point, k?
You do know the whole "pro-life" thing is just another con job, yeah?
What's point k? is that the one that goes in John 8:44 "You are of your father the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning " .............
The bloodshed has to stop !!
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29602
@medullah saidThey carry more gravitas out of context. 😀
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
maybe you would like to put some context behind those passages?