Cory over at the Madville Times (aptly named) disagrees with my statements concerning Barack Obama's denial of Biblical truth about eternal salvation. He does in the same manner he typically uses to disagree with me theologically: bereft of Biblical support.
Obama "doesn't even understand the most basic and foundational tenet of Christianity," Bob fumes, and thus won't appeal to too many "serious" Christians. "Serious," of course, is Bob's code for folks who agree with him that "God doesn't provide an "Oh but I'm not a Christian" excuse to get out of Hell."
So, Cory, can you point me to the Scripture reference where that "Get-Out-Of-Hell-Free" card is found? Or the "Oh but I'm not a Christian" excuse for rejecting God's only provision for salvation?
It doesn't matter what Obama or Bush or the majority says on this issue: what does the Bible say? It doesn't matter whether someone agreed with me, either; do they agree with the Bible?
If you disagree with the Bible, you're disagreeing with the Creator of the universe and the savior of humanity. Even if I was siding with the majority, I wouldn't want to be on the wrong side of that one.
On another post at the Madville Times, Cory hypes a group called Matthew 25 Network. This group provides the following as their reason for supporting Barack Obama, a candidate who stands opposed to Biblical positions in almost every area:
We come together as individual believers to support candidates for public office who share the values of the Matthew 25 Network: promoting life with dignity, caring for the least of these, strengthening and supporting families, stewardship of God's Creation, working for peace and justice at home and abroad and promoting the common good.
Since there is no doubt that Obama supports abortion, support euthanasia, socialistic legal plunder, the concept of homosexual "marriage," environmental extremism including the fantasy of anthropogenic global warming, and opposes a strong national defense, it is fairly easy to cut through the Liberalspeak in this statement and discern what they support. Let me reword their statement with some much-needed transparency and honesty:
We come together as individual believers to support candidates for public office who share the values of the Matthew 25 Network: promoting euthanasia and killing defenseless disabled people we find inconvenient, a welfare state that takes money from one person and gives it to another, counterfeiting marriage by allowing homosexuals to use that distinction for their unions, environmental extremism that worships the earth and cuts the legs from under our capitalist economy, working for appeasement of terrorists and other evildoers at home and abroad in promotion of our fantasy that if we prostrate ourselves before tyrants, they will leave us alone.
What a pity that both Obama, Cory and these other mixed-up Christians are so lacking in understanding of the Bible they profess to believe. If they pursued God's truth instead of attempting to wrap Christianity around their Marxist philosophy like Christmas wrap, they would understand that it and socialism, its cousin, are incompatible with the truth about human nature: that humans are fallen, sinful creatures who are predisposed to do evil without the regeneration of Jesus Christ.
They would also understand that killing unborn human beings and the ill and the disabled is murder of innocent human life, created in the image of God.
They would also understand that nowhere in the Bible does God command the GOVERNMENT to take money from one person against their will and give it to another person...but the Bible does command PEOPLE to help other people, and to do so with a discretion almost impossible for government bureaucracies.
They would also understand that God's design for human sexuality is to be expressed between a man and a woman in marriage for life, and that God strongly disapproves of homosexual behavior.
They would also understand that while humans are to be good stewards of the earth, God gave them dominion over it and it is not to be worshipped or served. They might also have faith in a God intelligent enough and powerful enough to create a self-sustaining planet, rather than a fragile one hanging on the razor's edge of cosmic chance as non-Christians believe.
They might also understand that God has delegated authority to human government, both to punish the evildoer within society and to defend citizens from external threat. God expects PEOPLE to be kind to one another and live in peace with one another; when some refuses to do that, government has the duty, obligation, and God-given authority to protect innocent human life from danger, both at home and abroad. This is a doctrine also fleshed out in some depth in the "Just War" doctrine by Augustin and Thomas Aquinas.
If this group of liberal Christians wants to support Barack Obama, despite his anti-Biblical positions, that's their right in a free society. But they really ought to get into their Bibles and find out how God wants them to live...and vote.
By the way, Cory seems to think things like protecting innocent human life and protecting marriage--a fundamental institution ordained by God--from being hijacked by activists are "wedge issues." "Wedge issue" is usually Liberalspeak for "issue we're wrong on and want to minimize in people's minds."
Here's a hint, Cory: opinion doesn't count for anything with God. Not mine, not yours, not anyone's. If you're going to theologically disagree with a Biblical contention, you really need to provide Biblical evidence to the contrary. Otherwise your argument sounds pretty hollow and empty.
Like this one does.
Like Obama does.
4 comments:
...like Bush does...and, evidently, like the faith of the majority of the country sounds to you.
I agree: your theology isn't wrong just because a majority (including Obama and Bush) disagree with it. I simply observe that your theology is going to leave you with no one to vote for in practical politics. Have fun behind your hedge of protection; the rest of us will take care of running the country for you.
If you'd rather be wrong and in power, then that's your choice.
I'd rather be in the minority and with God--because he's going to win in the end, long after liberals even America are gone.
Pick your side with care; you may just spend eternity there.
You Americans are so fundamentalist, you talk about the life of the unborn child, do you have the same care for the thousands who die in the Middle East. Are you there to help the Mother who is decides to have the baby and lives in poverty? You guys don;t worship God, but the dollar.
While some might say that the Middle East is none of our business, we actually do care for the suffering there.
One of the ways that's being illustrated is the American blood we're spilling in Iraq to protect innocent Iraqi civilians and help the country be stable. That, and all the humanitarian efforts going on there, by our troops and by American civilians.
We are also there to help the mother who has the baby. There are Christian adoption agencies that can give the child a good home if the mother doesn't want to keep the baby. We also operate free pregnancy centers to provide sonograms, referrals, free diapers and baby clothes, and many other goods and services.
We do the best we can, even when the baby was conceived in less than ideal circumstances.
Post a Comment