@philokalia saidI haven't used the term "paradigm of Christian morality", as you well know. I've simply asked a couple of questions that you seem keen not to answer.
It's like you don't even want to bother looking like the original point you made is relevant.
Zero effort here, FMF.
You agree with me, then, and accept my analysis of the situation, that he was voted for as the conservative candidate, and not as a paradigm of Christian morality or anything, right?
@philokalia saidThis is what I have put to you: "The majority of American Christians voted for and got the Christian president they wanted in 2016." This you said this is "not true" even though they chose Christian Trump over Christian Clinton.
Yes, it is. I would contend that atheist Britons are generally less informed in the American Christian conservative electorate.
And you're the proof.
Then I put this to you: "The majority of American Christians voted for Trump. He was their choice. He is now the president." Ignored. Is it "not true"?
Then this: "The majority of American Christians either voted for Trump or for Clinton or they abstained." Ignored. "Not true" again?
The problem here is not how "informed" I am. it's you hopping around trying to ignore things that are true.
@philokalia saidAs a conservative American Christian, you presumably believe that the power that Trump wields is ordained by God and that he was placed there in government by God.
Yes.
Just as how all things are interconnected, sure.
I believe in occasionalism.
@philokalia saidThis is nonsensical. Neither the author of the article nor I said that the NIV paraphrased the KJV.
The NIV is a completely new translation. It doesn't paraphrase the KJV.
The HuffPo article,while advancing the wrong perspective, noted that the Catholic and Orthodox have long been noting this difference as they have been using the Greek Septuagint which lines up with our traditional interpretation making the post by Cassiad even more off base.
What I wrote quotes the article:
<<The author further explains that "these passages clearly indicate that the killing of an unborn child is not considered as murder." The author continues by explaining that "the Christian tradition disputing this view goes back to a mistranslation in the Septuagint, the early Greek translation of the Bible that sometimes contains significant errors".>>
The only thing that is "off base" is your typical nonsensical ramblings. You don't seem to have understand the article you cited nor what I wrote - never mind your non sequitur about the "traditional interpretation making the post by Cassiad even more off base" .
Once again here's the bottom line:
You then cite the NIV which is a paraphrase of the mistranslation that gets one even further from the word of God as originally stated.
Interesting that in your mind, your conclusions drawn from a paraphrase of a mistranslation trump conclusions drawn by reading the text simply as written in the original Hebrew.
The article you cited makes caissad4's case for her.
10 Dec 18
@fmf saidWhy would it be difficult to admit that we voted for a morally flawed person because they are more representative of our world view and politics than that of the other morally flawed person who isn't representative at all of what we believe?
I haven't used the term "paradigm of Christian morality", as you well know. I've simply asked a couple of questions that you seem keen not to answer.
Where's the trepidation?
You are pretending there is such a trepidation and painting it in that color when no such color really exists.
It's throwing around bad arguments and hoping that they stick.
11 Dec 18
@fmf saidAw, but you are a native English speaker, and you know what an implication is...
This is what I have put to you: "The majority of American Christians voted for and got the Christian president they wanted in 2016." This you said this is "not true" even though they chose Christian Trump over Christian Clinton.
Then I put this to you: "The majority of American Christians voted for Trump. He was their choice. He is now the president." Ignored. Is it "not true" ...[text shortened]... blem here is not how "informed" I am. it's you hopping around trying to ignore things that are true.
If you identify them as Christians voting for Pres. Trump, you are implying that there is some hard correlation between their voting for Pres. Trump and their Christianity, or else their Christianity would not be otherwise relevant.
Or did I read too far in and you were just throwing out a sentence that wasn't supposed to carry weight... Just an observation of pure fact with zero implications or judgments within it..?
Were you saying something that wasn't even a contribution to the thread, or is there the implications that normally accompany this sort of statement..?
11 Dec 18
@fmf saidNot exactly true.
As a conservative American Christian, you presumably believe that the power that Trump wields is ordained by God and that he was placed there in government by God.
I would not have said that Pres. Obama is ordained by God in some positive aspect where it is as if he was God's chosen to do something great.
In the abstract sense that all authorities have been risen up by God, and in the abstract sense that all authorities also fall by the will of God, everyone from Trump, to Obama, to Gaddafi, to Macron, to Putin, are leaders and authorities within the will of what God has planned.
Just as Pope Francis is the will of God, and just as Pope Alexander VI was.
@philokalia said"The majority of American Christians voted for and got the Christian president they wanted in 2016."
Where's the trepidation?
Yes or no?
"The majority of American Christians voted for Trump. He was their choice. He is now the president."
Yes or no?
"The majority of American Christians either voted for Trump or for Clinton or they abstained."
Yes or no?
"As a conservative American Christian, do you believe that the power that Trump wields is ordained by God and that he was placed there in government by God."
Yes or no?
@philokalia saidDo believe that the power that Obama wielded was ordained by God and that he was placed there in government by God? It's a yes or no question triggered by Romans 13.
I would not have said that Pres. Obama is ordained by God in some positive aspect where it is as if he was God's chosen to do something great.
@philokalia saidSo you believe it is the will of your God that Trump is your president?
In the abstract sense that all authorities have been risen up by God, and in the abstract sense that all authorities also fall by the will of God, everyone from Trump, to Obama, to Gaddafi, to Macron, to Putin, are leaders and authorities within the will of what God has planned.
@philokalia saidWhat does me being "a native English speaker" have to do with this?
Aw, but you are a native English speaker, and you know what an implication is...If you identify them as Christians voting for Pres. Trump, you are implying that there is some hard correlation between their voting for Pres. Trump and their Christianity, or else their Christianity would not be otherwise relevant.
He self-identified as a Christian. He courted American Christians. A majority of Americans voted for him. He was endorsed by countless American evangelical churches, organizations, groups. American Christians prayed for him - ostentatiously in many cases. American Christian preachers preached about him in Christian churches.
He was voted into office. American Christians believe this power he now has is ordained by God. They believe it was God's will that he be elected. They believe that God put him to office. The prayers of the majority Americans appear to have been answered.
Do you have some sort of No True Scotsman smokescreen you wish to put around this example of what you and millions and millions of other American Christians believe is the will of your God in action?
@philokalia saidIf there is some sort of "advice" in amongst all this posturing stuff you are typing, thank you, but it's not necessary.
Or did I read too far in and you were just throwing out a sentence that wasn't supposed to carry weight... Just an observation of pure fact with zero implications or judgments within it..?
Were you saying something that wasn't even a contribution to the thread, or is there the implications that normally accompany this sort of statement..?
@thinkofone saidAs an aside, do you believe that the Bible contains "the word of God" as "originally stated"?
You then cite the NIV which is a paraphrase of the mistranslation that gets one even further from the word of God as originally stated.
11 Dec 18
@fmf saidOh, wait, so now you are making the case again that Pres. Trump was favored by the Christians and that he is viewed very, very positively by Chrsitians again... Right?
What does me being "a native English speaker" have to do with this?
He self-identified as a Christian. He courted American Christians. A majority of Americans voted for him. He was endorsed by countless American evangelical churches, organizations, groups. American Christians prayed for him - ostentatiously in many cases. American Christian preachers preached about him in Chr ...[text shortened]... ou and millions and millions of other American Christians believe is the will of your God in action?
You flipped on this very quickly.
The answer is:
Yes, of course he is favored by them as he fights for what they believe in and does it with a lot of gusto and attitude, something that has been utterly alien to mainstream conservatives in national level politics in America.
... And every conservative Christian personality that I know has extensive reservations about his personal life and openly talks about it.
But, sure, I bet you can find some conservative version of Suzianne and obsess over the fact that the lowest common denominator of the conservatives will say ugly things or some such. Is that what you are gong for here, my British-Indonesian moral relativist compatriot?