Posted on 03/11/2015 8:39:53 AM PDT by knarf
Still, Mr. Lane underscored the advantage Mr. Cruz has with some evangelicals. Asked about the Texas senator’s faith, he responded, “Cruz is obviously born again and goes to First Baptist Houston.”
I’m not implying anything about Cruz.
I’m questioning the wisdom of questioning Cruz’s (or anyone else’s) “true” Christian bonifides. There can be ENDLESS levels of questioning every candidate on this issue.
It is not helpful.
And yes, I'm not a particularly religious person. but that certainly doesn't make me anti-religious, anti-Christian or anti-Evangelical.
I've been having a lot of conversations with a very close friend on these topics, who is Protestant, and perhaps I've generalized some of his views inappropriately onto most Protestants.
Weird, that doesn’t seem to be your point at all, instead, when someone praised Cruz as a Christian, you made the argument that “”Anyone can claim to be a born again Christian. Anyone.””, which seems to be questioning Cruz’s authenticity.
Is TNoldman “the other guy”?
Ted Cruz Meeting David Lane's Religious Test For The Presidency
You seem to be looking for another (and inaccurate) approach to get off of Cruz, you started on the thread going after someone about “born again” and trying to stir up a Catholic/Protestant battle on this Cruz thread.
He did do well in some states. But no so well in others.
In Michigan he got 51% of Evangelical voters, and finished a strong second overall. In Nevada and Florida he got 15 and 19 percent, and finished poorly. (4th of Romney, Gingrich and Paul in Nevada - a distant 3rd in Nevada.
But the fact that in some states he did well does validate your point, in my opinion.
As a Christian, when I see someone profess the faith, I often hear other Christians making judgments about the reality of it. So no, Christians are not the best people to rely on regarding this as we as a group don’t agree 100% on what determines salvation and what it means.
I see Protestants condemning Catholics and vice versa. I see Protestants condemning each other based of things like baptism practices and other denominational technicalities. Who am I to trust is this discussion? This is why I leave it only God.
As for the comment about non-Christians, I am not sure what you are talking about as I never made such a statement or claim.
Oh, pure baloney. I understand that is YOUR stipulated definition, one that you wish to force on others. Sorry, but I will not accept you as a religious or philosophical authority.
So, let's examine YOUR little cult's definition. Since the Catholic confessional is secret, they are a cult. That's a practice that involves some amount of secrecy, as per YOUR definition.
Here's another definition: Cult is a word used to name a group. Some people use it as a pejorative; e.g.: All religions, except their own, is a cult.
Yes, Catholic candidates did fine with Evangelicals as Catholics seemed to favor Romney, and as I pointed out, freerepublic endorsed a Catholic in that primary.
Freerepublic will probably endorse Evangelical Ted Cruz, this time around.
I do not agree with you.
Virtue is independent of religion. Not all religious people are virtuous, not all virtuous people are religious.
But you’ve gone to an extreme to make your point: Atheism. The original argument had nothing to do with that concept.
You really think that non-Christians are better on telling you which candidates are the more likely to be true Christians?
That is bizarre.
Please explain yourself.
I meant, are you aware of how the non-Christian voters are overwhelmingly democrat voters, and Christian voters are majority Republican voters, and in the case of active Christians, (church goers), they are overwhelmingly conservative/republican voters.
“Anyone can claim to be a born again Christian.”
You can get an idea about them by their friends, virws on abortion, how they vote in Congress, love of Country, openess, etc. The current resident of the WH does NOT pass the test.
Corrected by me in CAPS. Sorry!
Really interesting stuff! Here is the Pew Survey.
Your top line point is absolutely correct: Jews went 69% for Obama (down from their more traditional level of about 77% support for the Dem probably due to his obvious anti-Israel policies}.
Other failths (Muslims, Hindus) went 70% for Obama. Religiously unaffiliated went 70% for Obama. In general non-Christians strongly favor the Democrats.
Protestants, lumped all together as giant group, went for Romney decisively. (57%) Catholics went for Obama by 50% to 48%, a very slim margin. But if you keep digging you notice something else:
Race trumps religion, as in indicator. What I mean by that is that if you tell me you are black, then you voted for Obama. Black Protestants are overwhelmingly Democratic: voting for Gore at 92%, Kerry at 88% and Obama at 94/95%. When you select the Black Protestants out of all Protestants Romney's margin is very large. (69%)
If you are a White Catholic chances are you voted for Romney (59%). If you are an Hispanic Catholic chances are you voted for Obama. (75%).
Mormons and Evangelical Christians are the two most reliable Republican segments of the American voting public, routinely hitting almost 80% support of the GOP Presidential candidate.
Obviously you know all this, but I thought the stats were compelling, so included them for others who might be interested.
I take Cruz as HIS word.
But then you have other people, people who are not Cruz, saying things about Cruz that they cannot know and no one can know. Only Cruz can know. I’m not taking their word at face value because THEY CANNOT KNOW what they are claiming to know.
What are they claiming about Cruz and his being a born again Christian, is someone disputing him on his faith?
I apologize if my words have upset you. All I want to point out is that my understanding of the occult is that it refers to religious groups which use secrecy. And you’re right, it would include Catholicism.
As far as I know, Bible based Christianity is the only faith doctrine which teaches against secrecy.
The Bible does not differentiate between Protestant and Catholic, but it does layout the path to salvation, or being Born Again, and the process is open to all, no matter what the denomination or lack thereof.
Well that's interesting. Is that commonly held belief of Evangelical Christians?
I have to say that the terms seem to exclude Catholics in many of my readings, or at least Catholics interpret the term a little differently.
Oh my, YES, Jack Black .... in fact it is THE common belief and understanding of "WHOSOEVER".
And God will bless you for your last, very honest and objective sentence
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.