Posted on 01/18/2016 10:26:35 AM PST by BuckeyeTexan
Donald Trump, speaking to a religious crowd at Virginia's Liberty University on Monday, turned to scripture.
"We're going to protect Christianity. I can say that. I don't have to be politically correct," he said. "Two Corinthians, 3:17, that's the whole ballgame ... is that the one you like?"
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
They did love him. And they also laughed when he “bungled” the verse. One does not preclude the other.
Fun?! Who’s having fun. There are rules during primary season at FR and having fun is not allowed. ;)
And Mussolini made the trains run on time...
“Revelations” wears me out.
No, I don’t need to read the bible again.
Although, at times I do as I’m not all knowing on it, far from it.
But I don’t need to read it on this. But thank you kindly for the arrogance nonetheless. It’s so becoming.
And I know, I responded “in kind” to your initial attack of calling others “naive”.
It’s an original intent thing, much like we say of the constitution, imo.
You framed it in terms of the government that GOD set up, or that GOD wanted, well, what was the first government that God set up?
It was however you want to look at it. It was God speaking through Moses to all the people, and all the people did as God spoke- well, ideally. Obviously many times not.
Or, it was set up through the levitical priests as well, in the time in the wilderness, when they had oversight, and Moses, whom again God spoke to, served as basically chief judge over the people, with lesser judges appointed by him, out of “able men, such who fear God,men of truth, hating covetousness” (Exodus 18:21)- but the chief standard of all these judges again being “men who fear God”.
Which, I believe our entire judicial concept of lesser and the highest court is based on that one verse and concept.
But from there they go into the promised land and have what- not a man king, but judges, hand selected by God (save Abimelech, who sought power being one son of Gideon), who’s chief duty more than anything else was end the idolatry and get the entire nation once again right with God.
Like I said, man cried for a man king to rule over them like the other nations. That was MAN, not God. God always wanted to rule over His people because He is our God. He is our Creator. He is our Father. But because we have free will, if man wants to go their separate way from God, and if man wants to be totally ruled over by man, God will allow that.
You speak of New Testament government- who set up governments at that point? It wasn’t God. It was man.
Then to throw Muslim countries and Sharia law into it, it’s a completely illogical point to even make because you’re talking about a man made religion and a fictitious man made god. No one in this discussion hopefully would advocate for a Sharia law based system. Note that I even said that I’m not advocating for a philosophy. I said that as secular humanists work harder and harder to separate God from government and from the people themselves, which our FOUNDERS DID NOT DO, our government and our entire culture has suffered as a result. If you would argue differently than either you’re at the wrong place or I am, because I’m pretty sure most conservatives would agree with me on that.
YOU can what “separate government and separate church all you want. But that’s not the way you laid out your point. You said that God wanted it that way. I disagree. God ALLOWED it to go that way because MAN decided he wanted it that way- and God respects that.
I know that in the OT the people didn’t want God to rule over them - they wanted a king -so He gave them a king - Saul, who turned out to be a disaster. However, in the NT, there are numerous Scriptures where government duties and church duties are defined. Jesus never told the government officials to go into the world and preach the gospel - he did say, render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars, and unto God the things that are Gods. We also know that when the righteous are in charge - the people rejoice. However, only God knows the heart of men - not you, not me. Words can be deceiving and I believe St. Cruz is deceiving people using his “faith” to pull the wool over people’s eyes.
Yes he did and he was with the Allies before he was against them and that has what to do with the price of eggs in Ireland?
Good one. LOL
Yep, forgot that one. Precisely.
Just because Trump gives a pittance of his wealth to charity doesn't make him a good man. So does Billy Gates.
The misuse of “cast the first stone” drives me nuts. Jesus was asking the men to cast a stone (a vote) if the had been sinned against(witnessed the act of sexual misconduct). No one saw the act, therefore no one would cast a stone.
He could be. I don’t think he is. I think Cruz is a legitimate Christian man.
But you’re right that for the most part only God knows that- though we can judge and see fruits and I haven’t seen any rotten ones from Cruz yet.
But honestly, we’re at an impasse. You think Cruz is using his faith to pull the wool over people’s eyes.
I think Donald Trump, who immediately after Hillary Clinton stepped out of the SoS office, he was still a fan of hers, and he still respected Bill enough to call him for advice in June- now Hillary is the worst Secretary of State ever and Bill is no different than Bill Cosby, when Bill hasn’t raped, assaulted, or harassed any new women in the last 6 months- well, that we’ve heard about.
I think he’s pulling the wool over people’s eyes while being an enemy of the Clintons, conveniently enough after he runs for President as a Republican but not before, and while telling us he’s a transformed conservative without nothing but his own rhetoric, spoken or written, as “evidence” that such is the case.
But obviously, when all this is done we’ll probably find out who was right, or if either of us was right.
Sorry to disagree. Benjamin Franklin ordered three copies of Vattel. Doesn’t mention Blackstone. Years later, after the constitution, Congress ordered for the congressional library one copy of Blackstone and one copy of Vattel. Vattel was referenced by the First chief justice of the Supreme court in a letter to George Washington. Washington borrowed two copies from the library and never returned them. A member of the Constitutional committee stated openly that English common Law was NOT the law in America. English law dealt with subjects to the king. We were free men, no longer subjects to the king. The full title of vattel’s book is all about natural law. Vattel has been taught at the university of Virginia since its founding by Thomas Jefferson. i still side with Vattel.
A pittance? My oh my. And just how much should he give......according to you, since it’s not your money???????????
I’ve heard plenty of Christian believers call it “Two Corinthians”.
It’s not a flub, but an alternative version!
“This is primary season at FR. Pups should stay on the porch”
Could please get that word out to Limbaugh, and especially, Levin, before he strokes out.
I don't give a crap about his money, nor what he does with it. It was you that brought it up. As a matter of percentage of his wealth, YES, it is a pittance.
As far as his good deeds being an offset to his lifestyle and business dealings, it isn't true for Trump, any more than it is true for Bill Gates.
I think you just told ‘em.
I always thought it was “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”
How about 1 Samuel 16:7 then?
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.