re: Christians who somehow thought it wasn’t Christianlike to vote for Trump

quote:

---

FooManChoo

---

foomanblew aka foo cuck chew

sola sciptura and sola fide are FALSE you hack.

i hqve posted it to you AD INFINITUM

I'm a Christian who has voted for Trump all three times. But I'm not going to say that he's the most Christian president, when he still doesn't seem to understand what Christianity is. He understands the basic principles, and for the most part has upheld them in his policies, which is why I have voted for him. But when he's asked faith based questions, he fumbles the answers like a guy who hasn't read a word of the Gospel.

So I'll keep praying for his soul as well as for guidance in his role as president of this nation.

As for Christians who didn't want to vote for him because he has done some immoral things in the past: I think they need to understand that we don't have perfect choices, and you vote for the candidate who best represents your values in policy, whether or not he lives by those values.

That's my opinion. Some people treat elections as a purity test, and I just don't know who on this Earth can pass that test.

quote:

---

Good opinion. There really is no moral reasoning for setting up legal systems for humans on earth, because I dont think any national politician could pass the test.

Separate religion and earthly governance. They arent really related. One is individual, the latter is collective.

---

I'm on board with separating the two in the sense of not having a theocracy. Because the problem with theocracy, is you might (and most likely will) end up with the wrong kind of belief system running your country, and it can get way out of hand.

But I don't believe it is possible to entirely separate the two, nor do I think it should be entirely separate. And what I mean by that is that your political beliefs come from whatever moral standard you hold to, which has everything to do with your faith, or lack thereof. And it's why I say that I vote on the principles I believe will be best represented by whoever I vote for, even if I don't agree with everything that person stands for, or does. Trump may not understand Christianity, but seems to have been influenced enough by it to want to uphold many of it's values, which I think is essential in protecting what we have in this country. It's what our founding document was built upon, even if it wasn't perfect, because the founders weren't perfect.

Where I think people miss the point, again, is when they act like we're voting for president of the Saints (not the team). King David was a man of God, and yet he certainly committed some huge sins. Even still, his line was chosen as the one where Jesus would descend from.

Trump is not King David, and he certainly isn't Jesus. But the point is how quickly people lose perspective.

quote:

---

Not every “don’t do this” in the Bible is a sin. Some are “this isn’t good for you and can lead you to sin”.

---

Take Colossians 3:8, for example. The “filthy language” (NKJV) or “obscene talk” (ESV) is in a list of sins connected to the previous few verses that are all connected to explicit sins related to the 10 commandments and God’s wrath/judgement coming upon sin. You think obscene talk isn't intended to be avoided in the same way slander is?

Ephesians 1
13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.

What is Paul saying here?

quote:

---

The plain reading of the text doesn't suit your theology so you obfuscate to make it fit. But the answer Jesus gave would have made perfect sense to any Jew who heard it in the first century and it would make perfect sense to any Jew who heard it today. The idea that the Law is a curse is 100% a creation of Paul. Jesus understood the Law to be a blessing and repudiated the idea that he came to do away with the Law, insisting instead that his objective was to fulfill it. He also taught that heaven and earth would pass away before one single letter of the law would pass away (Matthew 5)

---

I didn’t say the law was bad, but the law cannot save because we cannot keep it perfectly. That was what James was getting at in 2:10 when he said if we fail even in keeping one law, we have broken the whole law. Ezekiel 18:4 says “the soul that sins shall die”. And when Paul said it was a curse in Colossians 3, he quoted from Deut. 27:26 saying that those who do not obey the laws given are cursed. Even Jesus said that we are to be perfect as our Father in Heaven is perfect (Matt. 5:48). That’s an impossible task for sinful humans.

The reason why the law is a curse is not because the law is bad (it reflects the character of God and pointed to Christ), but because no one can be justified before God by keeping the law, because even one sin deserves God’s wrath and judgment. Thats’s precisely why Paul says that Jesus became a curse for us. He was speaking of Jesus’ death for sinners after having kept the law perfectly where we cannot.

If you want to ignore Paul, you ignore God’s word, as even Peter said that his writings were scripture.

quote:

---

You dismiss that like it's nothing. Trust me, it's something. Two gospel writers, Luke and Matthew, writing independently of one another, years apart, with different sources, presumably in different locations and to different audiences both recount the exact same story decades after it occurred and both of them agree on what question was asked of Jesus and what his answer was. The fact that you don't like the answer Jesus gave doesn't make it any less remarkable.

---

I think you misunderstood my comment. I was explaining the stories about the law in their proper context and the same story was given twice, so I didn’t feel the need to explain it twice. Just take my comments from the first instance and apply it to the second.

quote:

---

foomanblew aka foo cuck chew

sola sciptura and sola fide are FALSE you hack.

i hqve posted it to you AD INFINITUM

---

Are you referring to that link from a few years ago where you linked to an article to show that sola fide was wrong? If so, every time you have posted it, I have called your attention to my response in that thread. You still haven’t addressed my comments there. Perhaps you should do that before posting that link again, otherwise you are just highlighting that you don’t have a response.

Foo, at some point you are casting your pearls before swine. Some of these are so biblically illiterate it's shameful. Only the spirit of God can open their eyes. I commend you for speaking up as we are to "earnestly contend for faith" which was once for all delivered unto the saints.

Salvation is by faith/belief alone in Christ alone in his finished work on the cross. If President Trump has ever believed the gospel then he is saved. If he thinks he can do good deeds to go to heaven then he isn't. I don't know if he is truly saved because I'm not his judge, but its clear from his comments that I've seen that he doesn't have a clear understanding of the gospel. Also, true born again believers place their focus on Jesus, not just God in general. This is generally a good sign of someone who is seeing the big picture of God's plan.

However, as someone else mentioned, we aren't electing a Savior in Washington, but a President. And God has used unsaved and imperfect people all throughout the bible to carry out his will.

quote:

---

Oh the metallic taste of irony we have on here with you standing in the Judgement seat of Christ issuing edicts on who is and is not a Christian.

---

I have been clear that I’m not judging anyone’s heart and that Trump may very well be one of Christ’s elect. I’m only judging the fruit, as all Christians are called to do. We are to call one another to repent of sin as we see the need, and I am not excluded from that. If you or others believe I have sinned, show me from the scriptures and I will repent.

However speaking out against sin, or in Trump’s case, evidence that he adheres to a false gospel, when someone here says he is the most Christian President we have ever had, is in alignment with what Christians are expected to do, as far as I can tell.

quote:

---

Please share more on how one is not a Christian for emphasizing that faith and works are inseparable and mutually reinforcing; faith without works is considered dead and ineffective, while works without faith are meaningless.

---

My contention is not that faith and works are not closely related (I’ve even said that works are a necessary evidence of a true faith), but that good works cannot merit God’s grace or justification from God. Only faith in Christ’s good works on our behalf receives justification.

Anyone who trusts in anything but the finished work of Jesus Christ on their behalf for their salvation is trusting in a false gospel.

quote:

---

Your diatribe sounds like something from a heretical, self-loathing Calvinist…if I’m wrong, please explain how you can set yourself up as the arbiter of such a claim.

---

My “diatribe” is a biblical defense of the gospel. Whatever it sounds like to you, I’ll leave to you to think as you wish.