Mayor Pete Attacks Trump's Faith...

[Cow Poke]

The taking only the parts you like and leaving whatever you don't like approach is sometimes known as Cafeteria Christianity over here.

Which is akin to "having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof".

[JimL]

He never said anything specific about incest, pedophilia or necrophilia either so I guess that means in your book He thought that they are okay

No, that's not what I said, what I said is that you don't know either way, because Jesus himself never mentioned it. What I said is that Buttigieg can disagree with you about the bible and still be a christian who believes in Jesus. You don't have to like it.

[Cow Poke]

No, that's not what I said, what I said is that you don't know either way, because Jesus himself never mentioned it. What I said is that Buttigieg can disagree with you about the bible and still be a christian who believes in Jesus. You don't have to like it.

You don't know squat about what Buttigieg really believes. Or do you have some special gift that allows you to read the minds of homosexual men?

[JimL]

You don't know squat about what Buttigieg really believes. Or do you have some special gift that allows you to read the minds of homosexual men?

Didn't say I did. Learn to read and comprehend there, CP.

[Cow Poke]

Didn't say I did.

Then stop pretending that you know what he's thinking or believing.

Learn to read and comprehend there, CP.

Ah, your standard idiot response when you've been caught again saying something really stupid.

[Tassman]

So what? In the process, he's making a lot better choices for SCOTUS, federal judges, religious freedom than Hillary ever would have..... We didn't hire him to be preacher-in-chief.

[Zara]

Which is akin to "having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof".

This risks a can of worms - but why exactly?

Here is what the Second Vatican Council, so for Catholics, said about the inerrancy of Scripture: "Since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation."[10] It added: "Since God speaks in Sacred Scripture through men in human fashion, the interpreter of Sacred Scripture, in order to see clearly what God wanted to communicate to us, should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words."

However, it is by no means certain that this is true - that is itself an act of faith. People are fallible. The form of godliness, which appears to stem from love at heart, does appear to come up against difficulties when it comes to persecuting people for their love of each other. I'm sure that the power thereof is felt in that love, more so than in the persecution.

[Tassman]

The taking only the parts you like and leaving whatever you don't like approach is sometimes known as Cafeteria Christianity over here.

[tabibito]

To the extent that it was done, yes, that would meet the criteria for "cafeteria Christianity."

The bible has long been misused to justify the social values of the day. And, in the West these values now include full civil rights for homosexuals.

fify.

Historically, Churches have always viewed the biblical text through the lens of their own culture and now the majority of Christian churches view this as including gay rights, as per the Episcopal Church. This is why it marries gay couples and ordains and consecrates gay priests and bishops.

fify. Gay rights are upheld by Christians - their legitimate rights don't extend to the point of having Christians endorse their choices as acceptable to God.

The Evangelical still utilize scripture to justify homophobia but this will inevitably change in time just as justifying slavery did.

Perhaps "homophobia" is not quite the word you mean. Unless by "evangelical" you don't mean Christian.

[Tassman]

To the extent that it was done, yes, that would meet the criteria for "cafeteria Christianity."

Gay rights are upheld by Christians - their legitimate rights don't extend to the point of having Christians endorse their choices as acceptable to God

Perhaps "homophobia" is not quite the word you mean. Unless by "evangelical" you don't mean Christian.

[tabibito]

If social mores direct a Christian's course, he is not following the course set by Christ.

I mean by Evangelical the brand of Christianity that notoriously rationalized slave ownership and the Jim Crow Laws via scripture,

The brand of Christianity that opposed slavery is the same that opposed the tendency to follow societal norms and pushed for emancipation. The movement arose first among Christians. Those points, you thoroughly miss.

According to some, anyone who opposes being drawn into endorsement of homosexual relationships is homophobic. That speaks more to the critics prejudice and bigotry than it will ever say about the people being criticised. These people that you term "other Christians" see people playing with a hand-grenade and encourage them to pull the pin. Christians won't do that - they didn't encourage people to continue being slave owners, they didn't encourage promiscuity, prostitution, wanton killing - all of which have been accepted by churches at various times in history (even to the point of churches in some places running brothels.) And Christians consistently have opposed that kind of acceptance, even if necessary at risk to their lives and freedoms. In Hong Kong right now, (as I have previously made mention of) Christians are defying the churches, to protect demonstrators protesting a change of law that would see political undesirables extradited to Mainland China.

[Cow Poke]

Meanwhile, Buttigieg continues to grapple with politics at home...





And this...

[Sparko]

The ancient world was generally "comfortable" with homosexuality, pederasty, abortion, infanticide, the gruesome Roman circus, and confessing that Caesar was Lord. The early church welcomed everyone, but didn't waver in it's position on these issues. Rather, it suffered persecution for it's unwavering views, and eventually it won people over for it's stand on the truth.

not always, I am reminded of Christ's letters to the churches in Revelation. When the church did get too lax and permissive, Christ had some harsh words for them.

[Cow Poke]

pro-choice rights for women. Orwell would be proud of you.

What a drama queen. Calling the willful termination of innocent lives "pro-choice rights" is exactly the kind of crap about which Orwell wrote.

[Sparko]

No, that's not what I said, what I said is that you don't know either way, because Jesus himself never mentioned it. What I said is that Buttigieg can disagree with you about the bible and still be a christian who believes in Jesus. You don't have to like it.

so you think we can only go by what Jesus said and nobody else in the bible on stuff?