Caffeinated Thoughts - Latest Comments

Re: Christian Rhetoric and Engagement in “Culture Wars”

Baltimatt — Wed, 16 May 2012 10:41:27 -0000

Brittany--

That's one of the things marriage is for: the nurturing of children.

If marriage is to be something one does to follow God's plan, that is something done through one's church or other religious institution. As far as state-issued marriage licenses, that should have no religious requirement.

Don't marry same-sex couples in your church if that's what you believe, but I see no reason to apply religious restrictions to the broader population.

Re: Christian Rhetoric and Engagement in “Culture Wars”

Baltimatt — Wed, 16 May 2012 07:10:25 -0000

Again, same-sex marriage was not legal in North Carolina, so this amendment went far beyond "preserving" marriage. Even if same-sex marriage was one day approved, it would not change the fact the opposite-sex couples would still be able to marry and would still be able to continue what they see as God's plan.

Some say marriage illustrates the relationship between Christ and his Church. Should that mean we deny marriage to non-Christians, since they can't fully understand the nature of marriage (as Christians see it)? When are Christians going to get serious about protecting marriage from divorced people, as Jesus commanded (well, there's a little ambiguity depending on which Gospel you're reading)? You yourself said marriage is an exclusive, live-long covenant, yet we are not enforcing that.

Sorry, Shane, but it don't think it's our government's job to enforce your religious precepts.

Re: Christian Rhetoric and Engagement in “Culture Wars”

Baltimatt — Wed, 16 May 2012 06:54:47 -0000

Shane--

Would you say Muslims, Jews, atheists, and other non-Christians are living a lifestyle contrary to God's design? If so, should we use the power of the state to set them straight?

Re: Christian Rhetoric and Engagement in “Culture Wars”

Shane Vander Hart — Wed, 16 May 2012 01:24:02 -0000

I mourn as well that homosexuals are involved in a lifestyle that is contrary to God's design and the consequences that come with it. My hope is that they would find their identity in Christ through a relationship with him instead of wrapping it up in who they are sexually attracted to.

Re: Christian Rhetoric and Engagement in “Culture Wars”

Shane Vander Hart — Wed, 16 May 2012 01:16:43 -0000

I like how Pastor Greear described the amendment (link above in post):

"I think it is crucial for us to speak up–again, as an act of love for our neighbors–for the preservation of this institution in our society. The loss of something so fundamental to human flourishing would yield devastating consequences: how we perceive God’s image; how we understand God-like love; how kids understand their own gender identity; the building block of society and statistically-proven healthiest environment for the rearing of children—all this would be affected by the loss of God’s design in marriage.

Now, some of you won’t hear this as love. You might even hear it as bigotry. I hope you’ll understand our heart more than that, and, if you can, give us the benefit of the doubt. Nobody is arguing that homosexuals are lesser people or ought to be ostracized in our society, or that they ought not to enjoy the same freedoms or protections that the rest of us enjoy. The point is simply that you don’t rewrite the nature of God’s designs based on contemporary cultural mores. Again, marriage was not invented by government; it was merely recognized by the government. God is the designer, and God established it as the union of a man and woman in an exclusive, life-long covenant."

Re: Christian Rhetoric and Engagement in “Culture Wars”

Brittany Rae — Tue, 15 May 2012 23:40:07 -0000

Here via Mere-O and Matt's FB: I would add, in addition to mourning because the amendments are necessary, we mourn because they're difficult for homosexuals.

@ Baltimatt: Man, you're so right - the amendment does hurt! As Evans' wrote in her post: "...like hell". But that doesn't mean it's not a healthy amendment for society. A really, really hard one, yes, but maybe healthy too.

Also, wouldn't it be great if the social support was a separate issue from the marriage one? I wish the tax breaks could be for any deemed competent to raise a kid. Helping parents to raise kids seems to be a legitimate gov't role; at least more so than defining marriage.

Re: Christian Rhetoric and Engagement in “Culture Wars”

Baltimatt — Tue, 15 May 2012 23:26:57 -0000

You keep referring to this as a marriage amendment in North Carolina when it was much more that that. It was telling homosexuals that their relationships are utterly and totally worthless. It was a mean-spirited attempt to hurt them and their families (yes, some homosexuals are raising children, but I guess those families don't deserve any kind of societal support).

Re: Christian Rhetoric and Engagement in “Culture Wars”

Shane Vander Hart — Tue, 15 May 2012 23:22:35 -0000

Not fining them, nor am I picking on anybody in particular. It should grieve us that such an amendment is even necessary. Also we should consider how "spiking the ball" impacts our personal witness. The Gospel is offensive enough will our rhetoric put up a wall? I am by no means saying we shouldn't put forth an amendment, I think you read my stuff often enough to know I'm an avid defender of our values. We just need to consider is there a right way and a wrong way to go about doing that?

Re: Christian Rhetoric and Engagement in “Culture Wars”

David Keys — Tue, 15 May 2012 21:53:31 -0000

Although one must eventually come back to reality, and back to the ongoing contest of ideas, I would not "fine" the defenders of our values for "excessive celebration" over a battle fairly won. Well done, North Carolina. Yet the campaign is not over, and we ultimately "wrestle not against flesh and blood."

Re: Obama’s Name Dropping

Shane Vander Hart — Tue, 15 May 2012 19:16:07 -0000

I'd prefer the next President elevates the office of the Presidency beyond this.

Re: Obama’s Name Dropping

tommy — Tue, 15 May 2012 18:42:12 -0000

The next administration ought to
add this sort of thing to Mr. Obamas official biography.

Re: Fear of Obama vs. Hope in God

David Shedlock — Tue, 15 May 2012 14:27:15 -0000

Of course.

Re: Obama’s Losing to Romney Among Women; Same Sex Marriage a Losing Issue

Jason Disbrow — Tue, 15 May 2012 12:26:44 -0000

Listen to what he said "for me, personally..." see that, he hasn't come out and said he'll be pushing for legalization even if he did nothing would come of it. It's like the abortion issue, a candidate can say their pro-life but nothing will change. Let's assume for a second that by some miracle Obama does get gay marriage legalized is it worth the cost of having Obama for another 4yrs? Are you going to reminisce about how Obama got gay marriage passed as you wait 4hrs on the breadline because his policies ran this country and economy into the ground?

Re: Obama’s Losing to Romney Among Women; Same Sex Marriage a Losing Issue

Shane Vander Hart — Tue, 15 May 2012 11:44:49 -0000

Jack, that is anecdotal. I doubt you are the only person either, but polling suggests Obama will lose more votes than gain over this issue.

Re: Fear of Obama vs. Hope in God

Kansas Bob — Tue, 15 May 2012 08:55:20 -0000

Perhaps it is good that some Christians do not vote?

Re: Obama’s Losing to Romney Among Women; Same Sex Marriage a Losing Issue

Jack63 — Tue, 15 May 2012 08:11:02 -0000

Not doing him any favors? He'll get my vote that I had been planning on using for Romney. I doubt I'm the only person who has changed their mind and decided to vote got Obama because of this HUGE issue.

Re: Fear of Obama vs. Hope in God

David Shedlock — Tue, 15 May 2012 07:11:18 -0000

Neither of our two party leaders qualify according to Micah 6:8.

Re: Cult is the Wrong Word to Describe Mormonism.

Tornogal — Mon, 14 May 2012 15:30:43 -0000

Jon,

"Faithful members pay a full 10% of their income, which is used to further the Lord's work in the world."

How do you know what the tithing you pay is used for?

Re: Fear of Obama vs. Hope in God

Kansas Bob — Mon, 14 May 2012 09:47:01 -0000

I agree with you that God is in charge. It is why I trust the Holy Spirit to lead me in the voting booth. Yet I respect the idea that the Holy Spirit may lead a person to cast a non-vote by staying home on election day. Many Christians seem to do it.

Doubtful that you and I will agree on what qualifies a person to be president. Even so, perhaps we can agree that Micah 6:8 is a good starting place for any leader?

Re: Fear of Obama vs. Hope in God

Becca — Sun, 13 May 2012 21:37:31 -0000

Whether he win or lose that is the plan of God for the nation.In everything there is a purpose.

Re: Cult is the Wrong Word to Describe Mormonism.

David Shedlock — Sun, 13 May 2012 21:22:51 -0000

Mormons claim that infallibility in the Book of Mormon, however (without the caveat of "as far as it is translated properly") thereby giving Joseph Smith more authority than the Bible itself.

Where in the Bible does it teach that Adam is God?
Where in the Bible does it teach that God has a father, let alone a wife?
Where does it teach that Jesus is a created being?

Re: Cult is the Wrong Word to Describe Mormonism.

David Shedlock — Sun, 13 May 2012 21:18:34 -0000

Childless?

Re: Fear of Obama vs. Hope in God

David Shedlock — Sun, 13 May 2012 21:12:35 -0000

"Obama will not win if I have anything to say about it"
Do you, Bob? You are going to decide who is our next president?

Re: Fear of Obama vs. Hope in God

David Shedlock — Sun, 13 May 2012 21:11:13 -0000

I'm not complaining. Just putting out the facts. God is in charge. He has my best interest at heart. He will give Christians the leaders that will bless them most (even if it means chastisement). And, of course, clearly, voting for Obama would be a clear violation of Scripture. Don't you agree, Bob? By what standard does a person qualify to be president? Are there minimum qualifications?

God just calls on us to do what is right, and that is, vote for Godly leaders who will Fear Him and Kiss the Son.

Re: Republicans Encouraging GOP Voters to Vote Twice for Romney? (Why Once is One Too Many)

Kansas Bob — Sun, 13 May 2012 18:48:52 -0000

Yes on the national level. Unless the goal is for Republicans to get a bunch of Democrats in Congress.