I agree with that view. I’ve never been as thankful to be in Maryland as I was last year — I was able to vote my conscience without having to give any thought to a bigger picture.
YOu would think according to Marcos that President Trump and Moore were out there now abusing and degrading women.No I do not excuse any degrading of women. But I am logical enough to know that if many had not voted for Trump, you would have a much more Liberal Supreme court. Folks I was not voting for a General Overseer or a pastor. There were TWO logical candidates for President. Since I was voting for a Government Leader, I voted for Trump. Do I like him? I still do not know. He is a mouthy jerk at times. Just like the stupid ‘man talk’ recorded.I hope things ar changing. BUT for now you still have people in charge who use/used their position to get sex or rule over or demean the female.BUT to repeat a very worn statement, I prefer a person who is less admiral than I like, to Hillary Clinton who was the only other real electable choice. Oh yes I understand ‘voting your conscience’ fine. But for me voting or writing in a person who would not make it, did not set with me. SO I did vote Trump. At times I would not care if he resigned, but make all the great lectures you want. WE still had two choices in Logical reality TRump/Clinton. ________________Some facts but mostly just my [email protected]/
reformedmargins.com/romans-1-rebukes-excuse-sexual-harassment-sexual-abuse/Read the whole thing. I never have excused abuse.Hillary Clinton covered it up and attacked women who were abused.My Christian values said: No way she could be allowed to be President. I will vote for the better candidate next time as well________________
Again, both this and the statement NBF made are understandable positions. The article is talking more about the many, many evangelicals who are enthusiastically endorsing, supporting, and defending Trump on social media, in their churches, in their communities, etc.
Again, both this and the statement NBF made are understandable positions. The article is talking more about the many, many evangelicals who are enthusiastically endorsing, supporting, and defending Trump on social media, in their churches, in their communities, etc.I think one could reject Trump and still vote for him as the slightly lesser of two profound evils, but that does not seem to be the general view of Trump among evangelicals. Maybe TV evangelicals are huge supporters.I am around a lot of church people and most voted for Trump.None of them are happy with him – he makes us cringe.But we had no real choice________________
Preach brutha!!! My wife pointed something out this morning about President Trump….he is not and never was a politician. He has a past that does not meet up to the standards of your standard politician but he does have a past of running a business. He might be a one term president but I’d bet he gets more done in 4 years that Obama did in 8. In fact, he has already upset both the Democrat and Republican party and have you looked at our financial numbers? His White House staff is quite a bit smaller than the previous administrations, he is donating his paycheck to help the country, other countries are now viewing us differently…
I think this is kinda more along the lines of what the article was talking about.Sure, he does think it’s OK to grab women by the [ahem], but did you see those financial numbers? Also, I don’t condone sexual assault, but Democrats, am I right? No, I do not think that is what is being said here at all. Nor do I feel voting for Trump means I condone his sin. Really, I think the author of the article should start a movement to keep Christians from partaking in the political process at all, or to start running Christian candidates with a clean past. I hear a bunch of whining, but I do not see a grass-roots effort on the part of the Evangelical community to send our own people to State Houses or to the Federal Congress. Really, the latter is more of a shame than the former. We could truly dominate politics if we wanted to________________
That’s not the kingdom we were called to. Than why complain at all then?Your comment underscores another pet-peeve of mine. Why do Christians complain about immorality in politics and then refuse to become more active in the political process? Why do they spiritualize this inactivity under the guise of we are not called to that? You referenced a kingdom. Who’s talking about a kingdom? That’s like saying I should not strive to better myself in this life because I’m not of this world. I think God is going to judge the Evangelical community for not being good stewards of the country he gave us. We have the numbers and clout to make a huge difference, and we sit on the side-lines, yet daring to hurl stones at a President trying to keep the ship from sinking. I’m not referring to building some sort of theocracy. I’m referringto preserving the Constitution, the orginal blueprint of this republic. If I am a believer living in this world, and I have the power to to be a major influence, but instead choose to spiritualize my apathy, then I’m good for nothing. If influnce is within my power, then I’m called to it________________
That’s not the kingdom we were called to. Than why complain at all then?Your comment underscores another pet-peeve of mine. Why do Christians complain about immorality in politics and then refuse to become more active in the political process? Why do they spiritualize this inactivity under the guise of we are not called to that? You referenced a kingdom. Who’s talking about a kingdom? That’s like saying I should not strive to better myself in this life because I’m not of this world. I think God is going to judge the Evangelical community for not being good stewards of the country he gave us. We have the numbers and clout to make a huge difference, and we sit on the side-lines, yet daring to hurl stones at a President trying to keep the ship from sinking. I’m not referring to building some sort of theocracy. I’m referringto preserving the Constitution, the orginal blueprint of this republic. If I am a believer living in this world, and I have the power to to be a major influence, but instead choose to spiritualize my apathy, then I’m good for nothing. If influnce is within my power, then I’m called to it.
It was mostly the word dominate that I was responding to.Active participation in civil politics for the purpose of being salt and light to a dying world is certainly a lofty ideal. Dominate is a much better word, though, for the nationalist agenda that most evangelicals support.
It was mostly the word dominate that I was responding to.Active participation in civil politics for the purpose of being salt and light to a dying world is certainly a lofty ideal. Dominate is a much better word, though, for the nationalist agenda that most evangelicals support.An example: What’s the position of the American evangelical church on immigration? (Before it spirals into an argument, let me note that my position is pretty conservative and likely not too different.) And is that position founded in Christ and His commandments, or in my view of what the earthly kingdom of the US should look like? For me — being honest — it is the latter. I’m not advocating domination. I’m simply saying we could dominate if we chose to do so. As for immigration. Our standard laws are very generous. There is no justification in allowing people by the millions to break them. Furthermore, I see nothing in the commandments of Christ that in any way could be used to advocate a deviation from our laws on the books. There is nothing sacred about chaos and lawlessness. We have a responsibility to be good stewards of our country and to make sure we are not allowing people to enter who would actually try to undermine us through stressing ethnic division________________
This isn’t accurate. He said if you are a celebrity, you could get away with anything. You could grab ’em by the ______. He didn’t say he did that. He said he was a celebrity and a celebrity could do things like that. We don’t know that Trump every did walk up to a woman and do that to her. We just know the idea was at least in his mind and he talked about it.Then he greeted the female host in a somewhat affectionate manner________________
He is known to be married 3 times.In the past – that was a problem by itself.Where is the David was an adulterer defense for presidents?Or is that only for preachers that get caught?If Donald was a preacher of a large church – we’d be trying to figure out how to get him back in the pulpit next week – because he is so valuable to the kingdom. Some feel Trump is valuable to the kingdom. I just don’t get why preachers are given more leniency than Presidents________________
I agree with that view. I’ve never been as thankful to be in Maryland as I was last year — I was able to vote my conscience without having to give any thought to a bigger picture.
YOu would think according to Marcos that President Trump and Moore were out there now abusing and degrading women.No I do not excuse any degrading of women. But I am logical enough to know that if many had not voted for Trump, you would have a much more Liberal Supreme court. Folks I was not voting for a General Overseer or a pastor. There were TWO logical candidates for President. Since I was voting for a Government Leader, I voted for Trump. Do I like him? I still do not know. He is a mouthy jerk at times. Just like the stupid ‘man talk’ recorded.I hope things ar changing. BUT for now you still have people in charge who use/used their position to get sex or rule over or demean the female.BUT to repeat a very worn statement, I prefer a person who is less admiral than I like, to Hillary Clinton who was the only other real electable choice. Oh yes I understand ‘voting your conscience’ fine. But for me voting or writing in a person who would not make it, did not set with me. SO I did vote Trump. At times I would not care if he resigned, but make all the great lectures you want. WE still had two choices in Logical reality TRump/Clinton. ________________Some facts but mostly just my [email protected]/
reformedmargins.com/romans-1-rebukes-excuse-sexual-harassment-sexual-abuse/Read the whole thing. I never have excused abuse.Hillary Clinton covered it up and attacked women who were abused.My Christian values said: No way she could be allowed to be President. I will vote for the better candidate next time as well________________
I don’t think it’s been that long ago that Trump was degrading a particular female reporter who dared to challenge him on his record with women.
Again, both this and the statement NBF made are understandable positions. The article is talking more about the many, many evangelicals who are enthusiastically endorsing, supporting, and defending Trump on social media, in their churches, in their communities, etc.
Again, both this and the statement NBF made are understandable positions. The article is talking more about the many, many evangelicals who are enthusiastically endorsing, supporting, and defending Trump on social media, in their churches, in their communities, etc.I think one could reject Trump and still vote for him as the slightly lesser of two profound evils, but that does not seem to be the general view of Trump among evangelicals. Maybe TV evangelicals are huge supporters.I am around a lot of church people and most voted for Trump.None of them are happy with him – he makes us cringe.But we had no real choice________________
Preach brutha!!! My wife pointed something out this morning about President Trump….he is not and never was a politician. He has a past that does not meet up to the standards of your standard politician but he does have a past of running a business. He might be a one term president but I’d bet he gets more done in 4 years that Obama did in 8. In fact, he has already upset both the Democrat and Republican party and have you looked at our financial numbers? His White House staff is quite a bit smaller than the previous administrations, he is donating his paycheck to help the country, other countries are now viewing us differently…
I think this is kinda more along the lines of what the article was talking about.
I think this is kinda more along the lines of what the article was talking about.Sure, he does think it’s OK to grab women by the [ahem], but did you see those financial numbers? Also, I don’t condone sexual assault, but Democrats, am I right? No, I do not think that is what is being said here at all. Nor do I feel voting for Trump means I condone his sin. Really, I think the author of the article should start a movement to keep Christians from partaking in the political process at all, or to start running Christian candidates with a clean past. I hear a bunch of whining, but I do not see a grass-roots effort on the part of the Evangelical community to send our own people to State Houses or to the Federal Congress. Really, the latter is more of a shame than the former. We could truly dominate politics if we wanted to________________
Re: I’m with Cojak!
That’s not the kingdom we were called to. Than why complain at all then?Your comment underscores another pet-peeve of mine. Why do Christians complain about immorality in politics and then refuse to become more active in the political process? Why do they spiritualize this inactivity under the guise of we are not called to that? You referenced a kingdom. Who’s talking about a kingdom? That’s like saying I should not strive to better myself in this life because I’m not of this world. I think God is going to judge the Evangelical community for not being good stewards of the country he gave us. We have the numbers and clout to make a huge difference, and we sit on the side-lines, yet daring to hurl stones at a President trying to keep the ship from sinking. I’m not referring to building some sort of theocracy. I’m referringto preserving the Constitution, the orginal blueprint of this republic. If I am a believer living in this world, and I have the power to to be a major influence, but instead choose to spiritualize my apathy, then I’m good for nothing. If influnce is within my power, then I’m called to it________________
agreed.
That’s not the kingdom we were called to. Than why complain at all then?Your comment underscores another pet-peeve of mine. Why do Christians complain about immorality in politics and then refuse to become more active in the political process? Why do they spiritualize this inactivity under the guise of we are not called to that? You referenced a kingdom. Who’s talking about a kingdom? That’s like saying I should not strive to better myself in this life because I’m not of this world. I think God is going to judge the Evangelical community for not being good stewards of the country he gave us. We have the numbers and clout to make a huge difference, and we sit on the side-lines, yet daring to hurl stones at a President trying to keep the ship from sinking. I’m not referring to building some sort of theocracy. I’m referringto preserving the Constitution, the orginal blueprint of this republic. If I am a believer living in this world, and I have the power to to be a major influence, but instead choose to spiritualize my apathy, then I’m good for nothing. If influnce is within my power, then I’m called to it.
It was mostly the word dominate that I was responding to.Active participation in civil politics for the purpose of being salt and light to a dying world is certainly a lofty ideal. Dominate is a much better word, though, for the nationalist agenda that most evangelicals support.
It was mostly the word dominate that I was responding to.Active participation in civil politics for the purpose of being salt and light to a dying world is certainly a lofty ideal. Dominate is a much better word, though, for the nationalist agenda that most evangelicals support.An example: What’s the position of the American evangelical church on immigration? (Before it spirals into an argument, let me note that my position is pretty conservative and likely not too different.) And is that position founded in Christ and His commandments, or in my view of what the earthly kingdom of the US should look like? For me — being honest — it is the latter. I’m not advocating domination. I’m simply saying we could dominate if we chose to do so. As for immigration. Our standard laws are very generous. There is no justification in allowing people by the millions to break them. Furthermore, I see nothing in the commandments of Christ that in any way could be used to advocate a deviation from our laws on the books. There is nothing sacred about chaos and lawlessness. We have a responsibility to be good stewards of our country and to make sure we are not allowing people to enter who would actually try to undermine us through stressing ethnic division________________
This isn’t accurate. He said if you are a celebrity, you could get away with anything. You could grab ’em by the ______. He didn’t say he did that. He said he was a celebrity and a celebrity could do things like that. We don’t know that Trump every did walk up to a woman and do that to her. We just know the idea was at least in his mind and he talked about it.Then he greeted the female host in a somewhat affectionate manner________________
Re: Link,
He is known to be married 3 times.In the past – that was a problem by itself.Where is the David was an adulterer defense for presidents?Or is that only for preachers that get caught?If Donald was a preacher of a large church – we’d be trying to figure out how to get him back in the pulpit next week – because he is so valuable to the kingdom. Some feel Trump is valuable to the kingdom. I just don’t get why preachers are given more leniency than Presidents________________