As a 76 YO white Christian

  • Thread starter Thread starter 4heels4evr
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 128
  • Views: 2K
  • Politics 
Christian? yes Does he practice his Christianity? No You don't have to be a good person to be a christian. Simply believe in Jesus Christ as the son of God is your savior. Not much required. Personally that is the cop out. You can be a christian without practicing its values. Some hypocrisy baked in.
Such bullshit. I know that evangelicals are the Faith alone type ,part of why they are heretics, but listen to Jesus 's brother. Btw, that asshole John Calvin hated this passage because it proved him a liar.


James 2:14-26

14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?

15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,

16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?

17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?

26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.
 
how can I justify the evangelical Christians voting for president who a judge has stated is guilty of Rape, tried to overthrow our constitutional government, and all the other stuff he has done and said about groups of people. How could a Gracious God allow this to happen with all the love of the Christian Right? HOW?
I understand. It's frustrating. I'm not at all sure "God" is "allowing" much of anything to happen on this pea-sized planet. It's like trying to explain to the mother of a still-born child that "God allowed" this to happen because: x,y and z. Or "how did God allow HItler and the Nazis to murder all of those people?" How does a "Gracious God allow" anything horrific to happen on earth?

I pulled a muscle in my back getting up from kneeling in prayer to "Gracious God". How can a Gracious God allow this to happen to such a faithful follower... kneeling in prayer for gosh-sakes!? "Please, make it make sense!"

Obviously I'm being facetious to make the point.

As far as "evangelicals" go? They have their own problems and issues. But if I were intent on "evangelizing" I would practice what I preach, and I would "preach the Gospel" using words only when necessary. In other words, I wouldn't "say" anything to anybody. Rather, I would simply live that good and gracious life, doing right by other living things and I surely wouldn't try to "tell" anybody what to do or how to do... simply lead be example.

"Life is short, and we haven't much time to gladden the hearts of those who travel with us. So be swift to love, and make haste to be kind." Amen
 
Jesus feed the poor and healed the sick.

You want in Christianity in government but just in silly superficial ways (like the 10 Commandments in schools and Christmas Trees in libraries, but not in ways that actually help people.
Honestly - and I say this as someone who was raised in an Evangelical Christian church - I long ago came to the conclusion that far too many conservative Christians favor the superficial, public appearances Christianity while not really practicing or favoring the ways Christ helped people. So make sure you go to church every Sunday and hold that KJV Bible and say "Amen!" when the preacher preaches on Jesus healing the sick or feeding the poor, but then spend the other six days of the week supporting people who are opposed to the teaching of Jesus. It's the Evangelical way.
 
ban school prayer
not allow the 10 commandments to be posted in schools
Remove "In God We Trust" from schools and currency
Ban Christmas trees (ala UNC in Davis Library but forgot the year)


We all want to feed the poor and comfort the oppressed. We just disagree on how to do it. I understand how it can get out of hand and become discriminatory and all of that. But the left would like to see it completely removed from overt daily life. Harris never talked about promoting Christianity while trump did. Hence, one candidate seemingly would be the choice if that were important to you.
Who is talking about banning prayer in schools? Any student who wants can pray in school. The only thing that's banned is school officials leading prayers, though the Supreme Court has been doing their best to roll that back as well.
 
ban school prayer
not allow the 10 commandments to be posted in schools
Remove "In God We Trust" from schools and currency
Ban Christmas trees (ala UNC in Davis Library but forgot the year)


We all want to feed the poor and comfort the oppressed. We just disagree on how to do it. I understand how it can get out of hand and become discriminatory and all of that. But the left would like to see it completely removed from overt daily life. Harris never talked about promoting Christianity while trump did. Hence, one candidate seemingly would be the choice if that were important to you.
Nobody is banning anyone's right to prayer and if you mean having school sanctioned prayer time, then I'm guessing you wouldn't be in favor of allowing all the other religions to pursue their beliefs in a similar manner. Same thing with the ten commandments. Why would Christians be the only ones to get their teachings posted? People are free to pursue their own religions best as they see fit, but it doesn't belong in school since we are a multi-cultural secular society. This whole line of argument is just more Christian nationalism trying to turn this country into the American version of the taliban. Why do you need overt symbols plastered all over the place to follow your religious beliefs?

And if you are interested in feeding the poor and comforting the oppressed you sure have a funny way of showing it when you vote down any programs to help those in need.
 
Christian? yes Does he practice his Christianity? No You don't have to be a good person to be a christian. Simply believe in Jesus Christ as the son of God is your savior. Not much required. Personally that is the cop out. You can be a christian without practicing its values. Some hypocrisy baked in.
Galatians 5:22-23 undercuts this contention that faith or belief is some purely internal state. Your position is, in fact, a filthy modern innovation, and it's unbelievably sad that you know so little about your religion.

22 By contrast, the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, and self-control. There is no law against such things.
 
Last edited:
As opposed to further erosion of Christianity in the US. Do you think harris was going to champion Christian values?
My Christian values of love, acceptance, caring for the abused and the prodigal son and the good samaritan. Yes I do.
 
This seems simple to me. Which candidate would do more to propagate the values of Christianity in our society? It isn't complicated. It's simply a choice. either harris is going to do more for Christianity or trump is. trump sucks and is mean but Christianity will grow under him and that is what's important Or, Her side would like to kill christianity altogether as a part of our society. Its the most elementary decision possible.
not the Christianity that I read in the Bible. You might ought to read it for yourself and FIND who Christ was and Did.
 
Such bullshit. I know that evangelicals are the Faith alone type ,part of why they are heretics, but listen to Jesus 's brother. Btw, that asshole John Calvin hated this passage because it proved him a liar.


James 2:14-26​

14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?

15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,

16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?

17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?

26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

I actually don't think your take on James is correct, not because I'm an expert, but because I recall Bart Ehrman discussing the complexities of the apparent Paul-James beef:

 
Last edited:
I hate to tell you this, but Christianity in an overt form has been out of schools for generations now, so that's not exactly something new. And why should Christianity be overtly placed in government buildings? You do know that non-Christians pay taxes too, so why should government buildings feature only Christian phrases to the exclusion of everything else? And you most certainly said that Trump would propagate and promote Christianity. How exactly do you do that when your entire life has been a rejection of nearly everything that Christians (and Christ) supposedly stood for? Being Anti-Christian is certainly an interesting way to promote Christianity.

ETA: And liberals are not in favor of removing Christianity from daily life, that's absurd. Not allowing blatant Christianity into schools and government buildings isn't going to remove it from daily life. I guess since more and more people aren't going to church conservatives are just going to force it on people everywhere, whether they want it or not. You say that liberals want it removed from public life, but it seems to me that conservatives are just the opposite - they want their version of Christianity to be forced onto everyone, whether they want it or not.
Henry David Thoreau even went to jail rather than the government pay for a traveling preacher and I agree with him.
 
not the Christianity that I read in the Bible. You might ought to read it for yourself and FIND who Christ was and Did.
I wonder if they've ever read the Bible or just spoonfed a few blurbs from the Bible and a load of BS. I've actually read it 3-4 times (although after the first time I skipped a lot of Numbers) and it doesn't seem to say what they think it says.
 
The idea that someone could actually believe that Trump is the best person to advance Christianity is baffling to me. He wants to cut taxes for the richest people in the country and cut services for the most needy. The way he has led his life is diametrically opposed to the teachings of Christ. He never goes to church and recently told an interviewer he has never asked Jesus for forgiveness, which is pretty much the most important part of being a Christian. I guess it's actually on brand for the MAGA crew to think that putting up a few signs in public places would make up for all of the above, but it's just another reason why I don't understand these people.
 
I understand. It's frustrating. I'm not at all sure "God" is "allowing" much of anything to happen on this pea-sized planet. It's like trying to explain to the mother of a still-born child that "God allowed" this to happen because: x,y and z. Or "how did God allow HItler and the Nazis to murder all of those people?" How does a "Gracious God allow" anything horrific to happen on earth?

I pulled a muscle in my back getting up from kneeling in prayer to "Gracious God". How can a Gracious God allow this to happen to such a faithful follower... kneeling in prayer for gosh-sakes!? "Please, make it make sense!"

Obviously I'm being facetious to make the point.

As far as "evangelicals" go? They have their own problems and issues. But if I were intent on "evangelizing" I would practice what I preach, and I would "preach the Gospel" using words only when necessary. In other words, I wouldn't "say" anything to anybody. Rather, I would simply live that good and gracious life, doing right by other living things and I surely wouldn't try to "tell" anybody what to do or how to do... simply lead be example.

"Life is short, and we haven't much time to gladden the hearts of those who travel with us. So be swift to love, and make haste to be kind." Amen
My faith which is growing in truth appears to be changing. I do agree that becoming the change I hope to see is slow and sometimes painful, as Gandhi showed us through his life of nonviolent courage proved as the English eventually walked out of India, but damn it is tough.
 
I actually don't think your take on James is correct, not because I'm an expert, but because I recall Bart Ehrman's discussing the complexities of the apparent Paul-James beef:


I respect Ehrman and read several of his books. However, would you discuss with an evangelist with presumably a literalist POV, the nuances of theology or the literal words of his Bible? I like my way here.

I'm an agnostic only because in a universe as old and large as ours the only thing close to a certainly is the unlikeliness of a close personal relationship with any creator that might exist.
 
The idea that someone could actually believe that Trump is the best person to advance Christianity is baffling to me. He wants to cut taxes for the richest people in the country and cut services for the most needy. The way he has led his life is diametrically opposed to the teachings of Christ. He never goes to church and recently told an interviewer he has never asked Jesus for forgiveness, which is pretty much the most important part of being a Christian. I guess it's actually on brand for the MAGA crew to think that putting up a few signs in public places would make up for all of the above, but it's just another reason why I don't understand these people.
I think you just misunderstand how evangelicals think of "advancing" Christianity. They want the Christian religion to be politically and culturally favored, not to have everyone behaving like Jesus said. It's about power and glory to them just as much as it was to the Crusaders, who went to the Middle East to kill and dominate the infidels, not to make them follow the teachings of Christ. The fundamental principle behind the evangelist brand of Christianity has always been cultural dominance, not religious piety. That's why they celebrate Trump - not because he embodies what Christ taught, but because he enables the cultural dominance of Christianity and promises to defeat its "enemies" (which is how they see the cultural left).
 
I respect Ehrman and read several of his books. However, would you discuss with an evangelist with presumably a literalist POV, the nuances of theology or the literal words of his Bible? I like my way here.

I'm an agnostic only because in a universe as old and large as ours the only thing close to a certainly is the unlikeliness of a close personal relationship with any creator that might exist.

I'd prefer to actually understand and communicate what James and Paul are talking about, literalists be damned.
 
to the discussion of Paul vs James I believe since Paul left Jerusalem and took the gospel to the gentiles that he is my priest and Faith is proven by my actions not actions prove my faith. The process is Faith comes first and the works follow. Love is the key, If I first Love then I should ought to want to show Love to others. The 10 commandments are not part of my life, I am called to a much higher standard of loving others. I AM NOT A JEW, I AM A GENTILE AND i HOPE TO BE ONE LIKE jESUS TOLD THE PARABLE ABOUT.
Jesus didn't come to destroy the law but to fulfill it and he did so by being crucified to death he paid the price for every sin that was committed, iis being committed and will ever be committed. IT IS DONE. I simply need to do my best and be humble when I do my worst.

Gal 2:21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"
 
I'd prefer to actually understand and communicate what James and Paul are talking about, literalists be damned.
But you care. Paul disgusts me and so do the standards of his followers. It was a hard break to make because of the devoutness of my family but I came to terms with the fact that I just don't like what modern Christianity stands for. In a way, that is grossly unfair to many wonderful people but you whispered on the sidelines too much while they became the face of Christianity. Ecumenicalism be damned. They don't believe in it. Why wasn't there a louder challenge and who else was believable doing it?
 
But you care. Paul disgusts me and so do the standards of his followers. It was a hard break to make because of the devoutness of my family but I came to terms with the fact that I just don't like what modern Christianity stands for. In a way, that is grossly unfair to many wonderful people but you whispered on the sidelines too much while they became the face of Christianity. Ecumenicalism be damned. They don't believe in it. Why wasn't there a louder challenge and who else was believable doing it?
Fair enough. I'm mostly interested in this stuff as an intellectual exercise. And an exercise in spite: I like knowing more about Christianity than self-professed Christians.
 
Back
Top