Look in the little boy's eye as he meets Barack. Tell me he's not looking at God's son.Yoko Kumada said...
Hello Mr. Denmark Vesey. Your blog is interesting. The imagery is rich and the people here are amazing. How old is Gray Conservative? Thank you, Yoko
Hello Mr. Denmark Vesey. Your blog is interesting. The imagery is rich and the people here are amazing. How old is Gray Conservative? Thank you, Yoko
49 comments:
To answer your question, an emphatic no. What I admire most about this whole campaign and what the popular media doesn't comprehend is the political astuteness that blacks have shown. Barack Obama is beside the point. What Obama's candidacy has done is what Craig Nulan calls expand the library of opportunity.
what i see is hope and awe. it is what prophets inspire....
[i'm always so amazed at how quick we are to shut down the reality that there could be a million prophets if a million people became still enough and silent enough to listen]
Prophets brought about great change in this world and left a lasting impact after their death. Barack Obama has had an impact on the U.S., but I'm not sure if he inpsires people outside of the U.S., besides in Africa and other countries like brazil with a large number of black people. A prophet also claims to speak the word of God. So far all I've heard from Obama is empty rhetoric about change and slogans like "Yes We Can". I'm happy Obama inspires us to break free from our limitations but I'm not sure I can agree with someone that praised Ronald Reagan.
"what the popular media doesn't comprehend is the political astuteness that blacks have shown."
um. i don't get it. elaborate please.
Right on jasai, that amazes me too.
Agree Jasai.
I've often thought about whether Barack is a prophet. I was kinda scared to say it out loud, so thanks to you DV.
Prophets are shaped learning and experience, so we can all let our light shine.
Here's what I mean. The voting public has shown a surprising degree of good judgment. While most of the black political leadership aligned with the Clintons and more than a few self-promoters were launching firebombs at Obama, the black electorate was giving overwhelming support to the brother. They were discriminating enough to see beyond the usual tropes. Blacks could have adhered to the same old narrative which says blacks can achieve only with white approval or we could have performed a version of Dave Chappelle's Keepin It Real skit where we adopt a language of brio and an exaggerated confrontational posture in order to be considered authentic. We could have done a Maxine Waters or Charlie Rangel and confuse patronage with power and access with influence. But that is not what happened. The intellectual indolence which plagued us for so long and which black conservatives unskillfully tried to rid us of has slid off our shoulders. Whites have been confronted with a highly qualified compelling figure. The ball is in their court but, so far, they've exceeded my expectations. They've resisted subtle and not so subtle racist codes used to demonize Obama. This is a real achievement on their part that was unimaginable even ten years ago. No matter what happens to Barack, Black people and the country have won. We have done what Craig Nulan calls expand the library of opportunity.
Word up, Sub.
Wow.
Incredible explanation.
You're absolutely right. What y our saying here has been on the tip of my tongue for weeks ;-)
Thank you.
Just read Obama in Prophecy: Divine Intervention - by Dr. J. Emmette Weir..very insightful.
Submariner opines,
The voting public has shown a surprising degree of good judgment.
You mean I, who refrained from voting, thereby, holding to the laws of supply and demand, made your vote more valuable, showed a "surprising degree of good judgement."
If what you mean by "good judgement" is that blacks felt empowered and whites felt absolved in both electing a black man then you must elaborate further. Why is that good?
But let us not get in the way of the facts about what was elected and how that is the true test of the voting public's "good judgement."
Barack Obama now stands elected as the most powerful and radical abortionist this country has ever seen. He is an undeniable purveyor of the "Promiscuity Principle." In addition, as a matter of biological and social realities, he is the lead abortionist of the black community. This means that he leads in the intentional excising of the American black community.
Such a thing in-and-of-itself demolishes any notion that this man is a Christian.
Secondly, he is, by all accounts, an advocate of Affirmative Action.
This mindboggingly psychological imprisonment teaches that those least responsible for the injustices and degradation of black slaves and their progeny are the most liable to those that are farthest removed from those actual injustices and degradations.
In conjuction, it teaches that those farthest removed from the real injustices of the past are entitled to such compensation as to be commensurate with those past injustices as though they were suffering equally to their ancestors.
This is good?
On these accounts alone, your statement needs greater elaboration.
"Barack Obama now stands elected as the most powerful and radical abortionist this country has ever seen." TD
Not quite.
Abortion in this country transcends the presidency. It is not an expression of political will. It is an institutionalized ritual of human sacrifice, secular mythology and devil worship disguised as "choice".
Whomever happens to be President at any given time is no more responsible for abortion than the Surgeon General is responsible for obesity.
No one can get elected in this country if he threatens to end the sacrifice to the Gods of money and will. Whatever posture Obama has assumed on abortion be assured it was a function of political expediency.
"Such a thing in-and-of-itself demolishes any notion that this man is a Christian." TD
Not a Christian? Maybe not. But who is? Point to a "Christian".
Whether he is Christian or not is besides the point. I say he is a prophet and a Son of God because of his unparalleled ability to in•spire (put the spirit in) people the world over.
If the most loved man on earth is not the Son of God, who is?
Affirmative Action?
Booby Trap.
Barack Obama destroyed affirmative action by proving that black in this country, in this world at this time ... is actually an advantage.
So, like I told you all before:
Global System of Black Supremacy
DV,
"Abortion" has no ability to transcend anything, let alone the presidency of the United States.
Abortion is the radical autonomist's greatest tactic in disintegrating human relations. It's justified by what I will is what is reality. These people sometimes become social constructionists who say if some parts of reality can be constructed then why not all of it...? And precede to attempt in doing so.
Obama is the chief executive. This means he has an inherent right of action that need not be justified outside of what we traditionally understand to be the constraints of the legislative and judicial branches. But even then, a true "executive" has an inherent right to act needing no outside justification.
Given these understandings and given Obama's known stance on abortion, he is the lead actor in the abortion industry. He will legitimize abortion within the black community like no one ever has... This is his reality.
And because we know his stance on abortion and we know he claims to be a Christian then we know he is a liar. Christians, by definition, are not radical pro-abortionists.
God does not have liars as prophets.
P.S. And he certainly has not repudiated the fundamental grievance underlying AA and its stupifying mental caging.
Hello Mr. Denmark Vesey. Your blog is interesting. The imagery is rich and the people here are amazing. How old is Gray Conservative? Thank you, Yoko
you give obama so much HEAD!
"Abortion" has no ability to transcend anything, let alone the presidency of the United States." TD
Evidently institutionalized abortion transcends reason. It transcends compassion. It transcends instinct.
The "Chief Executive" is an abstraction. An illusion. The Presidency is essentially a media event. A role inherently no more powerful than a hostage negotiator representing the captive masses.
Obama's power is personal. He makes the presidency. The presidency doesn't make him.
If he resigned tomorrow he'd still be more powerful than Joe Biden after Joe was sworn in, living in the white house and sitting behind the desk at the oval office.
DV,
Barack Hussein Obama, as a man and president, is an avowed proponent of abortion without restriction.
Barack Hussein Obama, as a man and president, claims he is a Christian.
Barack Hussein Obama, therefore, is an avowed liar as Christians CANNOT BE advocates of abortion. He is one or the other, but he cannot be both simultaneously.
Unless of course, he is of the radical autonomist mindset that destroys the meaning of all things?
DV..., Does God send liars as prophets?
Hello Mr. Denmark Vesey. Your blog is interesting. The imagery is rich and the people here are amazing. ... Thank you, Yoko
You run a hot fuckin' club here, DV.
Serious question, DV:
Where does the prophet,
Rev. Wright, fit in?
"Barack Hussein Obama, as a man and president, is an avowed proponent of abortion without restriction." TD
Purely political. Bet you Michelle aint having any abortions.
"Barack Hussein Obama, as a man and president, claims he is a Christian." TD
Many people claim they are Christians. Many people claim they are Jews. I don't believe a public position on "abortion" is an adequate litmus test of faith.
"DV..., Does God send liars as prophets?" TD
I don't know Thor.
But I'm sure he doesn't send 'Nobody's' without swag.
Who would hear their prophesy?
"Serious question, DV:
Where does the prophet,
Rev. Wright, fit in?" Kit
Fit in what Trill?
"You run a hot fuckin' club here, DV."
WhachUmean Black Man?
Yoko: I'm a 55 year old man stuck in the body of a person in his late 20s; the way I write just makes me appear old. I don't get a chance to post here much, but I've been pretty active recently which means that I've been more visible as of late. I agree, DV has the swankiest blog on the whole internet. It's like a Ritz™ cracker and other blogs are just regular saltines in comparison. The cast of characters who lurk here are all unique and I just play my little part in something big. Stick around and get to know some of them.
Okay I just have to share this:
http://obamasoundoff.com/
Epic LOL.
Ex-KGB Official's words on the demise of USA:....But he said the recent economic turmoil in the U.S. and other "social and cultural phenomena" led him to nail down a specific timeframe for "The End" — when the United States will break up into six autonomous regions and Alaska will revert to Russian control.
Panarin argued that Americans are in moral decline, saying their great psychological stress is evident from school shootings, the size of the prison population and the number of gay men..."
Thordaddy
It's funny that you're in the business of deciding who is and who is not a Christian.
And, allowing the laws regarding abortion to stand is not the same thing as advocating abortion.
When you use the word advocate you imply something much more heinous, and you distort the man's recorded comments. That's dishonest.
I'm also curious about why people who oppose abortion on a religious basis have made abortion their number one concern?
It can't be because they see the sin of baby killing as being any worse than any other sin, because the runs contrary to the word of God. After all, all sin is the result of disobedience to God's word, and therefore all sin is equal.
So, why the big fuss over abortion and why the insistence on using it to determine whether someone is a Christian?
Why not all sin? Why not divorce, or fornication or adultery? Why abortion?
I think that's a trick by those who would seek to use Christianity as tool to subjugate and diminish others, and I think it's crap.
Sho's you right Big Man.
Peep game on what Frank Schaeffer, the man who wrote the original insidious playbook on this polemical cannard, wrote to President Obama.
Big man,
I oppose abortion because I oppose radical autonomy. I oppose radical autonomy because my God is a god of relationship.
If your claim is that one can advocate (make and execute laws that support and facilitate abortion) and be a Christian then you are a supporter of radical autonomy. You are a unwitting destroyer of all meaningful things.
You are of the mind that one can will his own complete reality.
So if I say I am really a black girl then who are you to be in the business of telling me I'm not? I'm a black girl and all this hate that Nulan and Fisher spew is really towards a little innocent black girl. Take that!
Big Man...
Abortionists ARE NOT Christians.
Abortionists ARE Christians.
Which is true and which is false or does your radical autonomy allow you to will the reality of both to be true?
Big Man,
As you are probably already well aware, THERE IS NO BIBLICAL INJUNCTION AGAINST ABORTION.
Somebody ought to ask this "innocent little Black girl" exactly WTF she's trying to infiltrate;
Domain Name: infiltrationmedia.com
Created on..............: Wed, Jul 21, 2004
Expires on..............: Tue, Jul 21, 2009
Record last updated on..: Mon, Jul 21, 2008
Administrative Contact:
Josh T. Farst
Josh Farst
PO Box 91360
San Diego, CA 92169
US
Phone: 619-283-1082
Email: thor1323@aol.com
CNulan
I'm assuming Thordaddy is classifying abortion as murder and therefore using the biblical injunction against that.
Thor
I'm curious, are you a Christian?
Because, I'm wondering how you could be a Christian and be opposed to the concept of radical autonomy?
Does not God grant all of his children autonomy? Is not the bedrock of Christian faith that salvation is a matter of free choice a side effect of the free will granted to human beings by God at our creation? Was not that free will exercised by the very first man and woman, which in turn lead to the orginial sin?
Radical autonomy is just another way to describe free will, and you are on a website claiming that your God someone is against the idea of free will.
What God are you serving?
If you were going to rebut my assertion that you were out of bounds questioning another man's faith, you could have used some biblical basis. You know, you could have said God gave you a spirit of discermnet, or that your were testing the tree by the fruit it bears. Instead, you argued that radical autonomy is against the will of God, when that directly contradicts the Bible.
I am not arguing that abortion is right, and I have never heard Obama advocate that women get abortions. I have heard him advocate that women have the choice to have an abortion.
That is the same as men or women having the choice to fornicate.
Or divorce
Or lie
Or commit adultery.
These are all sins according to the Bible, yet our society allows us the choice to commit these acts and I have not heard you posit yet that the fact that we allow these choices means that all of us are not Christians.
I have yet to see you explain why abortion has topped your sin list and what your bibilical justification for this decision is. I would apppreciate it if you would provide it.
If your justification is not biblically based, then it would make sense to stop cloaking your opposition in religious terms and instead admit that you just disapprove of abortions more than other sins. And admit that is at odds with God's word.
Thanks.
And Thor
Your true or false questions was horrible.
Define Abortionist.
Until you define that term, then your question is invalid.
This is really a disturbing pattern among many folks on the right.
I see lots of folks twisting the Bible, a book I cherish and love, to suit political and personal gains.
That is bothersome.
I have not met a strident pro-lifer yet who has explained why they are so much more opposed to abortion than the myriad of other sins committed in the world, and why they have decided that someone's stance on abortion is a litmus test on whether they are a Christian.
Simply put, this is not biblical, there is no Godly basis for this stance.
Sure, I can see a stance for opposing abortion. I oppose the idea of abortion. What I do not oppose is the idea of allowing each individual person the right to choose whether they want to have an abortion and deal with the eternal consequences of that act.
That is the position God takes with all of us. He allows us free rein to make the decision we want to make and deal with the consequences of our choices.
I'm assuming Thordaddy is classifying abortion as murder and therefore using the biblical injunction against that.
Big Man,
Phuk Farce..,
My point to YOU is that abortion and safe abortifacient procedures were well known to women throughout the ancient world.
The bible and the early church fathers were not confused about the specificity of abortion, any more than the archangel Gabriel (Jibreel) was confused about the question of ensoulment when reciting to Muhammad the quite specific teachings on the subject of ensoulment documented in the Quran.
Big Man,
It matters not one wit whether I'm a Christian as it concerns your embrace of the truth.
You imply that I may not question Obama's faith and so perhaps your god dislikes free will? If his faith is false then I have every right to question it. And if his faith claims to be my faith all the while advocating abortion then my free will must kick in.
OTOH, radical autonomy and free will are not synonomous. The former is a belief system that gives one the idea that they are be able to create reality for themselves while the latter is merely our eternal disposition.
For example, a radical autonomist would claim that a legislator and executor of acts of abortion can be a Christian, simultaneously. He would then invoke the Bible and claim his free will to be such a thing as a "Christian abortion advocate."
The only question then is thus...
It is TRUE? Can Christians be advocates, legislators and executors of the acts of abortion?
You say they can be and I say it is because you believe in radical autonomy and NOT free will. Free will does not give one license to embrace falsity without consequence. Radical autonomy attempts such feat, but it is doomed to failure!
I asked about your faith becuase you seem to be operating under some misconceptions.
Also, I did not imply that you COULD not question Obama's faith. Once again, you're free to do what you please. I questioned the legitimacy and intelligence of you asking those questions. I would appreciate it if you would quote what I say accurately.
This term you're using, radical autonomy, is interesting. You're saying that it means that folks can create their own reality and you reject that notion.
One, I still hold that what you've done is create a new phraase for free will and then defined that phrase as you see fit.
But, your question of reality creation is interesting. If we're talking about "truth" much of the time in life we create our own truths based on our perceptions and what we decide to believe is accurate. There are some undeniable truths, but most truths involve a measure of belief, which is another form of reality creation.
Kind of like faith.
But, once again we come back to the crux of this discussion.
You have called Obama an abortion advocate. You and I both know he has never advocated for abortions, he has advocated for the right of women to have the choice to have an abortion. That is a KEY difference that you keep ignoring, which is beginning to feel dishonest to me.
Second, you have again refused to explain why you feel that lawmakers who support laws that allow women to have abortions cannot be Christians, but lawmakers who refuse to outlaw fornication, lying, adultery, gossip, a proud look, backbiting and whole host of other sins can still be Christians.
You have also refused to explain why you have placed abortion on a sin pedestal.
Your argument does not have a biblical leg to stand on, which was my original point.
I am not questioning your right to oppose abortion, and I do not think there is anything wrong with that opposition. I too would prefer if no one got an abortion.
However, I do think there is something wrong with challenging people's Christianity without bothering to provide a bibilical explanation for your decision. Just feels unjust to me.
But, I can see that you have no interest in discussing the religious underpinnings of your decision so I guess our discussion is not going to progress. Your decision to use abortion as a litmus test for Christianity is well within your rights as a human being, but you have to show how it alings with the Bible.
Thanks for the convo.
Let me add something.
I could see your argument that it would be impossible for a Christian to be an executor of abortions, particularly if you classify abortion as child murder.
(CNulan, I know that's a whole 'nother argument involving all the things you and others have discussed.)
Biblically, continually committing what could be defined as a sin without any sign of remorse would be evidence of a reprobate mind and bring your salvation into question.
However, I can't see the connection you're making to legislators.
See, while legislators may allow a situation to exist where sin can occur, that does not mean they have committed the sin.
So, why do you keep lumping legislators in with folks who advocate for abortions and those who execute abortions? Once again, that seems to be a dishonest grouping.
Big Man says,
Your argument does not have a biblical leg to stand on, which was my original point.
Thou shall not spill the blood of innocence.
It doesn't get a stronger leg than that.
Then you say,
So, why do you keep lumping legislators in with folks who advocate for abortions and those who execute abortions? Once again, that seems to be a dishonest grouping.
You have already conceded that Obama supports radical autonomy for woman. So much so, that he would consent to Nulan's idea that a child in utero is actually a "parasitic glob of cells."
This concept is nothing more than the radical thinking of a radical autonomous mind. You want to call that "free will" as though God didn't command us not to shed innocent blood.
Parasitic globs of cells don't really exist especially inside the womb of a woman.
So when I say that Obama is an advocator of abortion this is both his personal stand and his public stand. His public stance has taken the form of both a legislator (one who writes, affirms or rejects laws that legitimize or delegitimize abortion) and as an executive (one who executes those laws that concern abortion).
Now, you and DV want to act like he doesn't really have executive power to do anything about abortion. This is false and he has already signed an executive order re-establishing federal funding for abortions.
Now, you can keep pretending that Obama is a real Christian given his unequivocal stance on abortion and its clear transgression of God's commandment to not shed innocent blood, but then all you would show is that you are of a radical autonomous mindset where truth external to yourself does not exist. Or, at least, it does not exist in this instant. Therefore, you create your own reality about a Christian abortion advocate being real. In reality, you are left with the empty feeling that it's best just to pretend to not know what Obama really is.
Abortion advocates CAN'T BE real Christians. Real Christians abide by the commandment that thou shall not shed innocent blood.
Big Man, can YOU stand on that leg?
Big Man,
Wrap your head around this one.
I would look Mamma Obama right in her eyes and tell her she had no moral right to abort her two unique and beautiful daughters and Daddy Obama would turn and say, "Oh yes she did!"
This dude is a prophet?
Thor,
Obama is a Christian president of a Secular Nation.
He wasn't elected religious leader of the USA.
He was elected Commander and Chief.
If a Muslim were elected President and failed to pass a law forbidding people to eat Pork, would he no longer be a Muslim?
DV asks,
If a Muslim were elected President and failed to pass a law forbidding people to eat Pork, would he no longer be a Muslim?
No... But if he advocated the fundamental right to eat pork, would he still be a Muslim?
If you say yes, then Islam's prohibition against eating pork and Muslim's obligation not to eat pork is false.
"No... But if he advocated the fundamental right to eat pork, would he still be a Muslim?" TD
Yes,
He would still be a Muslim.
The practice of Islam is personal. The practice of Christianity is personal.
Advocating the fundamental right of non-Muslims to eat pork would not disqualify one from being a Muslim.
Advocating the fundamental right of non-Christians to have abortions does not disqualify one from being a Christian, any more than prohibiting non-Christians from having abortions MAKE one a Christian.
DV,
You're straight slippin' on this one.
The question is clear.
Can a Christian abortion advocate really exist?
You say yes and I say absolutely not.
One cannot abide by the commandment "Thou shall not spread the blood of the innocent" and simultaneously assert a mother's "fundamental right" to kill her child in utero.
Such an assertion is the equivalent of proclaiming a "fundamental right" to spill innocent blood. Not only do we lack such a "fundamental right," it is explicitly prohibited by God's commandment.
Therefore, a Christian abortion advocate must abide by his God's commandment prohibiting the spilling of innocent blood while simultaneously proclaiming that a mother has a "fundamental right" to spill innocent blood.
Doesn't fly homey unless you're also of the radical autonomous mindset that will now force you to assert that what is killed during an abortion isn't actually the spilling of innocent blood.
Or, you could take your radical autonomous mindset to Nulan's level and assert that something that doesn't really exist (parasitic glob of cells within a mother's womb) actually does and such a non-existent thing can be killed without any moral reservation.
Likewise, a Muslim who advocated the "fundamental right" to eat pork is proclaiming the falseness of an aspect of the Islamic religion and its teachings strictly prohibiting the eating of pork. Such an assertion by a "Muslim" would almost certainly be greeted with a fatwa justifying death for such apostasy. Such an assertion would render one an infidel worthy of submission or death.
"Can a Christian abortion advocate really exist?" TD
Is a man unwilling to use the state to prohibit women from having abortions ... necessarily an advocate of abortion?
Is a President unwilling to prohibit the consumption of corn syrup an advocate of obesity?
I wouldn't want to see the state prohibiting abortions, am I an advocate of abortion?
As far as I am concerned, abortion is a personal decision. Like suicide.
What I don't want to see is government money used to execute abortions or to market abortion via government sponsored propaganda.
Dismantling the abortion apparatus of this country exceeds the limits of President Obama's job description and is something he couldn't do in 5 weeks anyway.
What he can do ThorDaddy ... is leverage his tremendous and tangible spiritual wealth to motivate a nation of spiritually bankrupt people to no longer desire the slow collective suicide of institutionalized abortion.
He's the only cat on the planet who can do that. Thus God's Son.
"Likewise, a Muslim who advocated the "fundamental right" to eat pork is proclaiming the falseness of an aspect of the Islamic religion " TD
No. You misunderstand Islam.
A Muslim who advocates the "fundamental right" to eat pork for NON-MUSLIMS, is minding his own business.
DV
Dude is refusing to see this point because it invalidates his whole social theory.
You and I both know there is a difference between advocating for something and refusing to prevent people from doing something.
You and I both know which stance the Bible takes on how we should conduct ourselves in the world.
The Bible does not tell Christians to go around making sure everybody abides by the Bible. In fact, it damn near prohibits that. So, the fact that Thor has decided to adovocate that position proves his stance is not guided by the Bible, it's guided by the wishes of Thor.
Finally, Thor has never answered why abortion jumped to the top of his sin pedestal and why it's become the litmust test for Christianity. Nor has he addressed whether the refusal of legislators to force all Americans to live by every tenet of Christianity proves they are not Christians.
Why has he not addressed these points? Because they clearly invalidate his argument and spotlight that he is picking and choosing sins to serve and ulterior motive.
Anyway, this is my last comment. I made my points.
Wait, one last point.
Your assertions about fundamental rights are very flawed.
The Bible has guidelines and commandments, but as I've said before, God granted us free will. We have the RIGHT to take any action we want to take, but we also must be held accountable for our actions.
So this comment by you..."Such an assertion is the equivalent of proclaiming a "fundamental right" to spill innocent blood. Not only do we lack such a "fundamental right," it is explicitly prohibited by God's commandment..." is ridiculously flawed.
If contradicts scripture. Paul expressed to new Christians that belief in Christ requires a committment to following God's commandments, but told them that God will not compel them to behave. He may punish them, but he does not compel. Which proves we have a fundamental right to misbehave as granted to us by divine will.
Just because there are consequences for disobedience does not mean we do not have the right to disobey. By virture for our free will as human beings, we have that right.
Either you are purposely distorting scripture, or you do not comprehend a basic Christian tenet.
Big Man and DV,
Do homosexual men exist?
Do murderous saints exist?
If God gave us "free will" and ALSO commanded us not to shed innocent blood then it is CLEAR that "free will" does not mean the freedom to spill innocent blood without consequence.
So what is the consequence of Obama's assertion and belief that a mother has the "fundmental right" (universal and unimpeded) to spill the blood of her innocent child in utero?
The consequence is that he is not a real Christian and can't be by his own professed beliefs.
Both of you insisting that Obama can be a real Christian and advocate the "fundamental right" to spill innocent blood under the guise of "free will" is no different than claiming avowed homosexuals are men or a child in utero is actually a parasitic glob of cells.
Doesn't fly, fellas!
Only by renouncing his belief in the righteousness of abortion can Obama even conceive of becoming a true Christian. Until then, he is a charlatan.
If homosexuals aren't men, then what are they? There is nothing in the Bible that says that homosexuality invalidates manhood, it's just a sin. Where is this idea that being a homosexual means you're not a man?
Did not God define the sin of homosexuality as "men" turning against their natural use and giving in to unnatural lusts?
What Bible are you reading homie because you're misquoting it something fierce.
What I see is you dodging my question about whether you want the government to enforce all of God's guidelines are just some. I also see you dodging my question on what makes abortion the main item on your hit list.
And you're misquoting the Bible to do it.
Big Man asks,
If homosexuals aren't men, then what are they? There is nothing in the Bible that says that homosexuality invalidates manhood, it's just a sin. Where is this idea that being a homosexual means you're not a man?
Homosexuals are males. An essential aspect of any healthy man is heterosexuality.
To claim that a real man can have an aversion to a woman's sexuality and the act of procreation is like saying a Christian can openly profess his belief in a fundamental right to spill innocent blood.
Once again, we see someone under the spell of a radical autonomist mindset.
Then you say,
What I see is you dodging my question about whether you want the government to enforce all of God's guidelines are just some. I also see you dodging my question on what makes abortion the main item on your hit list.
And you're misquoting the Bible to do it.
What I see is someone that is attempting to change the subject.
This post rolled out in the following way.
DV claimed Barack Obama to be a prophet of God of the Bible.
Submariner claimed that the electorate showed "good judgement."
Thordaddy said Barack Obama CAN'T be a Christian abortion advocate. It's forbidden and contradictory. It's false and a lie. It is blasphemy.
A Christian abortion advocate would proclaim his faith in the Lord and his faith in the commandment that thou shall not spill innocent blood and in the very next breathe claim his firm belief in the "fundamental right" to spill innocent blood, i.e., his belief that a mother may abort her child in utero.
Obama is not required to overturn any laws or work to ban abortion to remedy his deception. He needs only declare on which side he resides. Does he reside on the side that says "thou shall not spill the blood of innocence" or does he reside on the side that claims a "fundamental right" to spill the blood of innocence?
You can't have both ways unless you are NOW and KNOWINGLY adopting a very radical autonomous mentality. One in which all common meaning and understanding is destroyed.
Barack Obama must renounce his belief in the "fundamental right" to spill innocent blood or the consequence is that he is not a real Christian, but rather, a deceptive charlatan that soils the Christian faith.
And he cannot even be considered a potential prophet until such a renunciation.
Once again, we see someone under the spell of a radical autonomist mindset.
rotflmbao...,
Like I said earlier, you're litmus test is ridiculous and hypocritical.
I didn't try to change the subject, I just pointed out your blatant hypocrisy. If supporting the right to have an abortion is proof that you're not a Christain, then supporting the right to fornicate, lie, commit adultery and gossip is also proof that you're not a Christian.
Now show me a politician, or even a run-of-the-mill Christian who thinks the government should make the sins I described illegal? Matter of fact, do YOU think those sins should be illegal and that the government should prevent people from committing them, or punish folks after the fact?
That's real talk.
But, if you want to check out what God has to say on our "natural rights" I would suggest Corinthians 6:12 or Galatian 5:13.
Both scriptures reiterate the point that Christians have free will to do anything, but that God wants us to subjugate our own free will to align with his commands.
You can keep on with this new social theory that you're in love with, but it's not biblically based, and I think you know that.
But, whatever works for you.
Post a Comment