Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Bernie Sanders vs Traditional Christianity

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
    That's fair. I would still come to the same conclusion of beliefs inherently disqualifying about a radical Muslim, though (not that one would likely ever be nominated to any position).

    I don't think this is unfamiliar ground for Christians. Wouldn't most evangelical Christians on here argue that a pro-choice belief is disqualifying?

    Maybe, but they'd be wrong. There's a big difference between choices of the electorate and rules of the government. The latter, not the former, is prohibited by the Constitution in this instance.
    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

    "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

    My Personal Blog

    My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

    Quill Sword

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Jin-roh View Post
      I think Sanders overstepped his bounds here. It's religious test for office, even if he wants to code it as a bigotry test.

      Seriously, the guy is in the running for a budget office. What he thinks about religion is seriously far off from his daily duties.
      Funny how the MSM and the Democrats (increasingly one and the same) went absolutely bat poop over Trump's supposed "religious test" concerning his "travel ban" but don't seem to mind one applied to Christians.

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
        That's fair. I would still come to the same conclusion of beliefs inherently disqualifying about a radical Muslim, though (not that one would likely ever be nominated to any position).

        I don't think this is unfamiliar ground for Christians. Wouldn't most evangelical Christians on here argue that a pro-choice belief is disqualifying?
        "Pro-Choice" and "Pro-Life" are not about religion. Many atheists and agnostics are Pro-Life because of their interpretation of the science: They believe that unborn humans are indeed humans, and as such should be afforded at least the most basic protections set out in our founding documents.
        Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

        Beige Federalist.

        Nationalist Christian.

        "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

        Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

        Proud member of the this space left blank community.

        Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

        Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

        Justice for Matthew Perna!

        Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
          What Bernie said is deplorable, however, I think Christians are making a mistake by arguing that asking such questions about religious beliefs inherently violates the Constitution. There are times such a question would be relevant. It would be proper to ask such questions of a Scientologist, who would probably be forced to do the bidding of the CoS. It would be proper to ask questions of a Quaker who was up for a position that required the authorization of military force. And so on... It just so happens that there is no good reason for Bernie to be asking what he asked here.
          It is not a matter of asking such questions being inherently unconstitutional. What is unconstitutional is applying it as a religious test, which is just what has he has done.
          Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

          Comment


          • #20
            I would have said, "Mr. Sanders. as a jew who rejects Jesus as the Messiah, I think you are just as condemned as the Muslims, as are the atheists, and buddhists, and any other person on earth who doesn't put his faith in Jesus for their salvation. The muslim would tell you the same thing, that anyone who doesn't follow the 5 pillars of Islam is condemned."

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              I would have said, "Mr. Sanders. as a jew who rejects Jesus as the Messiah, I think you are just as condemned as the Muslims, as are the atheists, and buddhists, and any other person on earth who doesn't put his faith in Jesus for their salvation. The muslim would tell you the same thing, that anyone who doesn't follow the 5 pillars of Islam is condemned."
              So you would've taken the bait, and made yourself look bad?

              Comment


              • #22
                I checked this with a leftist source, and both agreed on what happened. Given his support for firing a tenured professor, I don't think it would have been out of line to ask questions. The problem is that Sanders asked the wrong questions. A religious institution is free to interpret doctrine as they like. The questions should have been about how the candidate treats Muslims in non-Church contexts. It doesn't appear that Sanders asked the relevant questions.

                I actually agree with Sanders' understanding of Christianity. But we've got enough walls in the US and in Christianity without liberals trying to remove religious conservatives from government.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Jin-roh View Post
                  So you would've taken the bait, and made yourself look bad?
                  The guy just floundered there and never explained that "condemned" was a theological term referring to the judgment, not how we treat people who are still here with us.

                  He let Sanders make it sound like he was condemning muslims personally, now.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    The guy just floundered there and never explained that "condemned" was a theological term referring to the judgment, not how we treat people who are still here with us.

                    He let Sanders make it sound like he was condemning muslims personally, now.
                    That would assume he knows the context. Most don't.
                    1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                    .
                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                    Scripture before Tradition:
                    but that won't prevent others from
                    taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                    of the right to call yourself Christian.

                    ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                      That would assume he knows the context. Most don't.
                      who? The guy Sander's berated? He knows the context. He just didn't explain it. Or maybe Sanders didn't give him a chance.

                      I would have also said, "No Senator, I didn't say they were condemned. Jesus did" and then quoted, John 3:18 "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Watching the video again, it is clear that Sanders has already made up his mind, is using the quote as an excuse and doesn't even let Vought explain himself. He keeps cutting him off.


                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I probably wouldn't have used the word "condemned" at all, but would've said: "Senator Sanders, you put in the uncomfortable position of answering religious question for public office...." and maybe "Senator, I am uncertain how my understanding of my own religion influences my ability to perform duties on this budget..."

                          So on and so on until it was obvious to everyone that Sanders was asking about religion.

                          Only then would I answer the question with something. "My religion, like all others, has a degree of exclusivity. This will no more influence my fair treatment of my Muslim neighbor, than his or her condemnation of a the Trinity would influence their dealings with Christians."

                          But I'm not nearly 'wise as a serpent' enough to get into public office anywhere. So what do I know, right?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Jin-roh View Post
                            I probably wouldn't have used the word "condemned" at all, but would've said: "Senator Sanders, you put in the uncomfortable position of answering religious question for public office...." and maybe "Senator, I am uncertain how my understanding of my own religion influences my ability to perform duties on this budget..."

                            So on and so on until it was obvious to everyone that Sanders was asking about religion.

                            Only then would I answer the question with something. "My religion, like all others, has a degree of exclusivity. This will no more influence my fair treatment of my Muslim neighbor, than his or her condemnation of a the Trinity would influence their dealings with Christians."

                            But I'm not nearly 'wise as a serpent' enough to get into public office anywhere. So what do I know, right?
                            That would have been a good strategy, if Sanders would have let him actually speak. Watching the video it is clear that Sanders just wanted to (ironically) condemn Vought by grandstanding, and didn't care what Vought said.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I finally realized one of the reasons this troubles me.

                              In Christian circles there is a lot of advocating for live a good Christian life and people will see how good Christians are. Variations on life-style evangelism.

                              Yet Senator Sanders attacks someone not on the basis of how they live their life but because of their beliefs. No matter how good that guys life was, it doesn't matter - his beliefs are reprehensible.

                              No matter how good we are, our beliefs disqualify us. This actually fits the Bible's warning that the world hates us.

                              Its possible that I'm overreacting. Yet as I look around this seems another indicator that society is slowly turning against Christians. Society is like a big ship, it turns very slowly but eventually it turns.
                              "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6

                              "Theology can be an intellectual entertainment." Metropolitan Anthony Bloom

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                                It is not a matter of asking such questions being inherently unconstitutional. What is unconstitutional is applying it as a religious test, which is just what has he has done.
                                I think it was unconstitutional. It might be reasonable to verify that someone with strong religious views against Islam would be able to treat Muslims properly. But I don't see how quizzing him on his religious views to the extent that Sanders did is constitutional. Now and then I hire people. I'm pretty sure our HR department would be upset if I had a similar conversation with a candidate.

                                What's worse, Sanders didn't seem to ask the one question that was relevant, how the person would treat Muslims in official duties. He volunteered the answer, however

                                "Thank you for probing on that question. As a Christian, I believe that all individuals are made in the image of God and are worthy of dignity and respect regardless of their religious beliefs. I believe that as a Christian that’s how I should treat all individuals . . ."

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Thoughtful Monk, 03-15-2024, 06:19 PM
                                35 responses
                                166 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by KingsGambit, 03-15-2024, 02:12 PM
                                4 responses
                                49 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
                                Started by Chaotic Void, 03-08-2024, 07:36 AM
                                10 responses
                                119 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post mikewhitney  
                                Started by Cow Poke, 02-29-2024, 07:55 AM
                                14 responses
                                71 views
                                3 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Cow Poke, 02-28-2024, 11:56 AM
                                13 responses
                                58 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Working...
                                X