making sure im not blinded from emotions when standing by Truth

[Sevenseas]

numenian

sevenseas, sorry, I find it difficult to reply to your comments. It's a syntax-stylish-spacing-thingy.

Actually you are dodging my questions. It has nothing to do with syntax and everything to do with the fact that you have hijacked

the thread, once again, by inserting your political views.

[Sevenseas]

The elections have passed and we know the outcome.

I talked to a deacon friend from a small church that I used to attend regularly and found out that their pastors urged the members to vote Obama.

I know that the nation is suppose to go downhill. But this really surprised me because there is meat in their sermons; it's not

a feel good church. The reasoning behind their support is because Romney was "anti-Christ-like." I get it (2 Cor 11:3)

However, God has used non-believers to bring forth His plan for His people.

So I let that church go from "a place to go to." We will be friends but I feel they went off path somewhere.

An important note is because they've always stressed how the world is going downhill and we need to be a reflection

of God's glory. They cracked the whip but still felt that Obama and his party are the right choice.

I'm wrestling with the disappontment. any wise words for me, for or against, my decision?

The above is the op. Perhaps you could show us how your reply actually had anything to do with this.

He said he was wrestling with disappointment.

You said this:

I have let this be known before but arguing and complaining about politics should not ever be a point to break fellowship over. Our sole (and soul) purpose is to be about the business of advancing the kingdom, for God's glory and those in need of Christ, and not dallying in the entanglements of worldly affairs. We are in the world for God's ends, not of the world in service to earthly powers. The motto of America is "In God we trust" and that is where all our trust should go; if all the people did this with their whole heart, this nation would be an Eden. Changing laws does not change hearts. The Law was not enough for the Jews. As a citizen of heaven--and heaven alone, I need to add--our reliance is on spirit and grace through a total commitment on the love of God. Pagan Rome was a tyrannical rule of sin and cruelty: what did Jesus have to say? "Render unto Caesar..." God is in control

You paid no attention to the actual op. You see, it is not a problem of my syntax or your lack of using the handy quote feature

It appears to be a lack of wanting to discuss the actual op and veering the topic off course

The only view that appears remotely close to the views you express would be Gnosticism but I don't think that is what

you are expressing. It certainly is not to be found in scripture, so it is either your own interpretation or a teaching

that undermines the power of the gospel by stating that everything is spiritual so don't worry about anything else....

just get ready for heaven

For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. Isaiah 9:6

​The Bible states that God sets up governments. You are just plain wrong when you state that everything is spiritual. This is identified with

Gnosticism, not the gospel.

[Sevenseas]

Numenian

Fourth, I do not see marriage that well-defined in the Bible. The fact life is produced through a mating of male and female and that would be a necessity for a beginning on this planet, this is not an argument to define marriage. What about the concubines and harems? For me, in what I see as the spirit of life as God gave it, marriage between male and female is the best designed. Yet what constitutes male and female? Is an outward appearance all that is to be considered? Denying the physiology involved in our make up as a person, does not make the true nature of our gender change. I by no means think that this physiological orientation comprises even half of homosexuals. For most it is a choice counter to nature but in favor of lust. For others is the warping results of horrific childhoods. But this is mostly conjecture. How we treat those who live this lifestyle is, to me, all that matters. It is up to God to make any and all changes to their being; we respect them as imago dei.

Actually marriage is so well defined that Paul calls it a picture of Christ and the church

Yet you do not see that.

The Bible also defines homosexuality as a sin and those who practice it will be sent to the lake of fire with the devil and his angels

Homosexuality is not a lifestyle ... it is a sin. Abortion is a sin...it is murder. Twisting scripture is false teaching

I would never treat a homosexual the way God is going to treat a homosexual who flaunts his sin in God's face

Do you believe that? Or do you not see that either?

The Bible also defines heresy and false teaching

[Sevenseas]

Following is a quote from a site addressing the question of Christians voting. We are not yet ascended and become

spirit only and to state that we should have no care for anything on earth is a distortion of Jesus words.

VOTE! From a Biblical point-of-view, here's why. Jesus says, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's" that is, give to government what it requires (as long it is not in violation of God's will).

What does our government require from her citizens? We live in a republic whose form of government requires the involvement of its citizens for its success. So part of our Christian obligation to Caesar as citizens of the USA is that we participate in the political process, at least by voting for the candidates we think will be best for our country. We should vote because it it part of our civic responsibility to Caesar.

Of course, one could envision a scenario when all candidates were so repulsive that one might choose to not vote at all. But keeping in mind that there never have been or will be any perfect candidates for office, one should nearly always be able to at least vote for the lesser of two evils.

We ought to vote because the Christian voice is actually the most valuable voice for the preservation of our country. Jesus says to his disciples, "You are the salt of the earth, the light of the world." It is we Christians who especially act as salt to our culture, preserving it from rot and decay.

John Adams, one of the signers of the Consitution and one of our early Presidents, wrote, "We have no government armed in power capable of contending with humans passions unbridled by morality and religion...Our consitution was made only for a moral and religious people." (quote from Kingdoms in Conflict by Charles Colson, p. 120)

George Washington asserted, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to a political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports." (ibid)

The founding Fathers of our country recognized that morality and religion are necessary supports to the success of our form of government and to the survival of the Constitution itself! Christian people in particular therefore are needed to let their religion and morality come into play for the good of our country. So we, especially of all people, need to vote!

If we abdicate our responsibility here, if we fail to vote, if we neglect to vote, it is the same as if we had been forbidden to vote. We give the voice and power and direction of our government to the non-religious and to the immoral.

So it's very simple, voting does not mean you are turning your back on God. As the ballot is secret, no one even needs to know

who you voted for

Not voting and just 'letting things happen' sounds more like those who passed the injured man on the road and would not

help him. You do what you can and trust God that the outcome is in His hands. Doing nothing means that you have a

troubled view of God's interaction in the affairs of mankind

[Guest]

The Early Church did not think that the redistribution of wealth was wrong; most were communist enterprises. Not Marxism, Christism. They shared in everything. Take the scene where in Acts a couple are struck dead for their failure to redistribute their wealth. In such close and closed communities the slackers and corrupt officials were easily identified. This communal style of living was necessary for Christians were seen periodically as enemies of the state and this was a way to survive the prejudice and persecution.

You might want to read that passage again, numenian. You'll find it in Acts 5: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%205&version=KJV Those folks died because they kept back a portion of the proceeds, but were deceptive about it. They made it appear they were "giving all" when they were not. It had nothing to do failing to redistribute wealth. Peter would not have asked the questions he did otherwise.

[Guest]

I don't agree with the concept of redistribution of wealth on the government level, the people were called to share all they had with others - directly - not through gov't intervention. The difference would be having a relationship with those who shared all, it was an obedience on the part of the givers, not a forced edict of any wordly gov't.

We are the Body of Christ and we were called to care for the poor and the widow - not the gov't - we're just doing a really bad job in America, we are too comfortable in our western lifestyle here to step out in faith to actually look like the Church in Acts.

Exactly.

[Sevenseas]

Hey there numie....I don't have any questions but one, which is why you just keep misunderstanding...you keep looking for

my questions.

My only question is:

Why can't you stick with the op? He didn't ask for your political views! LOL!

[Sevenseas]

numenian

sevenseas, sorry, I find it difficult to reply to your comments. It's a syntax-stylish-spacing-thingy.

Actually you are dodging my questions. It has nothing to do with syntax and everything to do with the fact that you have hijacked

the thread, once again, by inserting your political views.

sevenseas, I answered all your questions: post #21. You appear to have this adversarial stance with me. If I have done something to cause this attitude, please be honest and let me know. I was asked direct questions and responded; that is not hijacking.

"Following is a quote from a site addressing the question of Christians voting. We are not yet ascended and become

spirit only and to state that we should have no care for anything on earth is a distortion of Jesus words.

No one I know of here and especially not me, ever stated what is in bold above, and if it is directed at my stance on political involvment, it a gross distortion of my view.

sevenseas, There is something in TOS you should read that involves your constant accusations about me.

As to that opinion piece, isn't that the hijacking you accused me off? And it comes from a place of preserving America; that is not our purpose on earth. All nations will turn against Israel as well as turn to dust.

"Actually marriage is so well defined that Paul calls it a picture of Christ and the church."

You got this backwards. And it is how one acts in marriage that is well attended to and defined.

Many people end up calling any discussion of worldliness, said to be next to the doctrine of law and grace, the most commonly misunderstood or known doctrine in the Church. It has confused the vast amount of people since the time of Paul. Do not call me a gnostic or anything else you decide is wrong with me because you may not undertsand my view. You are accusing me of being a false teacher. I am in what I once thought was an easy-going loving forum trying to present what I understand as truth to the best of my ability. I may put things badly or even wrongly at times, yet I am not practicing to deceive. Correct me, fine, I want that, but stop accusing me of all these charges.

"You are just plain wrong when you state that everything is spiritual. (This is yet another TOS violation) This is identified with Gnosticism, not the gospel."

I re-stated, Christ stated we live in the spiritual realm. Our kingdom, like his, is not of this world. But it appears that you have not read all that I have written on this topic, or maybe you have forgotten it, and take what I am saying as sit in your prayer closet, lock the door and wait for the end. That is far, far from what I have constantly and consistently stated in these threads. Check for yourself. And you need to read up on gnosticism.

And finally, please just correct me where you believe either I have misspoken or misapplied scriptural truth. I am eager to know. But I ask again stop the accusations and innuendo that I practice to deceive. You know that being tired or having other things on your mind can produce the darndest things. Being under your microscope on every jot and tittle I write is okay; it's the other stuff you do with that which hurts. Or have you not considered that point.

Quite a read. Fiction.

Stick to the op

[enoob57]

Know this in the simple reality... when there was no choice and still under obligation to choose~ NOT...

The render to Caesar the the things of Caesar and To God the ability to make that which is not to BE!

I am glad for the simple life of Childlike repose to love God in the light for those around me to see and

believe-SCORE...

Jn 18:36

36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight,

so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here."

NKJV

Mt 25:34

34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, 'Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared

for you from the foundation of the world

NKJV

Love, Steven