Does God Want Bush (re)Elected

HKRockChick · No More Peas! Joined: 25 Nov 2003 Posts: 1513

DT, I post stuff for discussion. Period. I don't see why I have to say whether I agree with it or not. But apology accepted, thank you.

And if I post something written not written by me, I am NOT the author, and by NOBODY's standards can I be the author. That's why we PUT the author's name and post links. That's also why rules against plagiarism exist. So that proper people get credit for their ideas.

Why should I be or not be "responsible" for posting it? Whats to get out of??? I posted it, I didnt pretend to be anyone else.

What is WRONG with the article???? If you cannot tell me that then all other arguments you make are moot.

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

Some of the problems I have with your first post are all included in the first post I made that follows right after it. Basically, in order to say that people are "idiots" to say that God supports Bush for re-election means that you would first have to know that God does not...in other words, you would have to know yourself what you are discrediting others for being able to say that they know. It's called hippocrasy. Voicing your opinion is one thing...but saying that others are wrong is to say you know more than they do. This author made a personal attack on people who support a view different than his. He could only do this if he believed he knew Gods will better than ALL of them...an unlikely scenario, and an arrogant one as well.

People generally post on message boards points of view that they agree with...and I didn't see any point of view of your own writing to suggest otherwise in your original post. Hence, the misunderstanding. But I think that we need to realize that we ARE the author of anything we post...whether our words are used or if we are quoting somebody else. It's the same as if we write a paper for publication. We may borrow somebody elses words if we give them credit, but it is OUR paper designed to make OUR point. WE ARE the authors of it, and of posts that we make on a message board. If somebody posts a porno photo on a message board, who is responsible for doing this? The person posing for the picture? The photographer? Or is it the person doing the posting? When you borrow something, whatever it is, from somebody else and use it, you become responsible for what you do with it...as sure as if the post was in your own words.

HKRockChick · No More Peas! Joined: 25 Nov 2003 Posts: 1513

what do you say to the people who say that God DOES support bush?

Agree? Shut up?

Or just say that God actually ABHORS the idea...

:frankie

HKRockChick · No More Peas! Joined: 25 Nov 2003 Posts: 1513

Are you saying the guy is WRONG for what he wrote? That makes you as bad as him... he is free to claim and believe anything he wants. He has been talking to these people, hasnt he? and if he believes they're all idiots who are we to argue....

:gl

HKRockChick · No More Peas! Joined: 25 Nov 2003 Posts: 1513

its the article and its contents that matter. What does it MATTER whether I agree with it or not.

Oh, I see. If I disagree with everything the article says, then I suddenly become lovable???????? If it appears that I agree then I'm a horrible ogre... a WOMAN with an OPINION - AND NOT EVEN AMERICAN!!!!!!!!!! OH MY GOD!!!!!

:aua

Edited by: HKRockChick at: 8/2/04 14:20

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

HK - "what do you say to the people who say that God DOES support bush?

Agree? Shut up?

Or just say that God actually ABHORS the idea..."

I might ask them what makes them think that, and continue the questioning from there. I would niether agree nor say I abhor the idea. But it does say in the Bible that we are to support our leaders...whoever they are. It also says that God will "scrutinize" (don't remember the exact phrase) leaders much more carefully for their actions than he will the common person.

HK - "Are you saying the guy is WRONG for what he wrote? That makes you as bad as him... he is free to claim and believe anything he wants. He has been talking to these people, hasnt he? and if he believes they're all idiots who are we to argue...."

Read my post more carefully, please. I am not saying he is wrong in his point of view...I am saying that he is walking the fine line between believing in something, and believing he speaks for God about a something. When you begin passing judgement (openly calling them idiots) others for their beliefs, you begin to cross that line. He is saying that his point of view is somehow more valid than somebody elses...a whole lot of somebody elses. To be honest, he sounds like a liberal who is part of the apostasy he mentions. It seems he has forgotten the part in the Bible that says he should support his leaders. I wonder how closely he reads the Bible? You're supposed to accept all of it...not just the parts you like.

HKRockChick · No More Peas! Joined: 25 Nov 2003 Posts: 1513

if there's a part in the bible that says we should support our leaders (no doubt written by someone in power), I'm pretty sure there'll be another bit that says we should question our leaders if they are wrong.

Just a question of what you want to look for. You'll find arguments for everything in everyone's religious texts, not only the bible.

Nowhere does the author speak for God, BTW. He says anyone who dies is blasphemous...

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

HK - "Nowhere does the author speak for God, BTW. He says anyone who dies is blasphemous..."

It is one thing to voice an opinion or belief...but when you denounce that of another you either need some Biblical support in the issue, or you presume yourself to KNOW otherwise...and since only God knows, you would be speaking for him whether you think so or not. So, according to the authors words, he was being blasphemous himself in calling others idiots for their belief.

HK - "Just a question of what you want to look for. You'll find arguments for everything in everyone's religious texts, not only the bible."

I disagree. The Bible is actually quite free from contradictions when things are taken in context. If a person takes things out of context, they can make it sound like anything they want to. Keeping things in context is the key to understanding the intent of the word.

HKRockChick · No More Peas! Joined: 25 Nov 2003 Posts: 1513

I think following blind ideology saves people from thinking. Maybe thats why the author calls them idiots. If someone doesn't want to question anything I'd not blame anyone for calling them idiots. And lazy too.

I think its incumbent upon us to voice our dissent if our leaders are evil, don't you?

I hate doing this cause I am not a bible thumper, but wouldnt you say there were a number of people who resisted their evil leaders' policies in the bible? Too, America would still be under british rule if your forefathers hadnt fought for your freedom... were they evil, did they violate the bible???

Here are some examples of disobedience...

The midwives in Egypt refused to murder the newborn Hebrew boys (Ex. 1:15-21).

Moses asked Pharaoh for permission to let the Israelites leave Egypt. Moses wouldn't take no for an answer because he knew he was doing God's will (Ex. 2--7).

Daniel participated in various government administrations, but he drew the line when asked to violate his religious convictions (Dan. 1,6).

Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego refused to participate when the king ordered all citizens to become idolaters (Dan. 3).

Rahab refused to be part of the resistance to the invasion of God's people (Josh. 2). God was clearly with the conquering Jews.

Amos spoke out during a time of judicial corruption (5:7), immorality (2:7), and oppression of the poor (2:6-8; 4:1; 5:10-12; 8:4-6).

Queen Esther disobeyed official protocol in an effort to save her people from annihilation demanded by unjust laws promoted by evil men (Est. 5).

Paul sought to obey those in authority, even suffering unjustly, though he refused to keep his mouth shut about Jesus Christ (Acts 13--2

.

Peter operated within the systems of authority except when forced to choose between obedience to God or to men (Acts 4:19,20; 5:29).

John the Baptist spoke out against the immoral lives of king Herod and his wife, even though he faced prison (Mt. 14:1-12).

Did God smite them down for their disobedience?

Hey, if one person can claim that God said, so can others.

Quote:
but when you denounce that of another you either need some Biblical support in the issue, or you presume yourself to KNOW otherwise...

Well you denounced/dismissed "my opinion" when you thought I wrote that piece... like I would have no basis to know. How do YOU know that? And you have biblical support for that? Well that guy has biblical support too, only you wont accept it... :wgrin

Now, if the guy had said "God Wants Bush to Win" would you have been so abusive? Or would there suddenly have been biblical support.

So tell me, should Saddam's people have kept quiet and not disobeyed him, should they have not fled the country? God put him there, didnt he? And all the other murdering leaders in this world. Should people not say anything about that?

When Clinton did his intern, did you defend him, saying he was your leader and you couldn't say anything about it?

And Holy Books are all free from contradictions when taken into context. Trouble is, extremists will always abuse the context. And blind ideologists will follow. I'm sure bush is capitalising on this "obey your leaders" trip. <puke>

*************

Anyway, its getting mighty boring again, so good night, gotta study. :muede

LarreeMP3 · Joined: 12 Apr 2002 Posts: 1935

I have a friend (a beautiful actress) from Texas. Her family is friendly with the Bush's. She even worked for G.W. when he owned the Texas Rangers baseball team. G.W. is a regular everyday guy with a huge heart who loves people. I would hang out with G.W. any day of the week over that stuffy snob Kerry.

Click here to listen to three decades of original Larree music!

Rev9Volts · Joined: 10 Jul 2003 Posts: 1327

yea gw would be great to have over especially for something like a bbq... course i don't think i will get to now with him being prez. and all...

Quote:
G.W. is a regular everyday guy with a huge heart who loves people.

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

HK - "Now, if the guy had said "God Wants Bush to Win" would you have been so abusive? Or would there suddenly have been biblical support."

Look, I apologized...so the "abusive" remark is uncalled for. If the guy had said "God wants Bush to win AND anyone who doesn't think so is an idiot", I would have disagreed with him just as much. There is not Biblical support for Bush winning...if you find some, please let me know. I'd be just as surprised as you.

HK - "I think following blind ideology saves people from thinking. Maybe thats why the author calls them idiots. If someone doesn't want to question anything I'd not blame anyone for calling them idiots. And lazy too."

I think it is good to think for yourself...and it is also good to realize that such thinking has its limitations. If you accept that the Bible is the inspired word of God, then you must think (for yourself) that maybe God knows a little more about this world he created than you do. It's about time people started listening.

HK - "I think its incumbent upon us to voice our dissent if our leaders are evil, don't you?"

Not necessarily, no. But, that's what I get for not giving the exact quote out of the Bible. You see, there is a difference spelled out in the Bible between "legitimate leaders", and other "leaders". I don't have a Bible with me right now, so you'll have to find it yourself (well, you found the other ones, didn't you?)

HK - "Well you denounced/dismissed "my opinion" when you thought I wrote that piece... like I would have no basis to know. How do YOU know that?"

I didn't say that you necessarilly have no basis to know for Bush...maybe God has spoken personally to you about it. But you have no basis to "know" for what somebody else thinks. That is what I was talking about. All you can speak to is for yourself...not others. Maybe they know something that you don't?

LarreeMP3 · Joined: 12 Apr 2002 Posts: 1935

Evil leaders get taken care of in the end.

Where is saddam insane today? He's been taken care of. Good always triumphs over evil.

G-d bless America. G-d bless President George W. Bush.

Re-elect Bush in 2004!

Click here to listen to three decades of original Larree music!

Edited by: LarreeMP3 at: 8/2/04 16:26

HKRockChick · No More Peas! Joined: 25 Nov 2003 Posts: 1513

Quote:
Look, I apologized...so the "abusive" remark is uncalled for

OK, my bad. :kizz

DT, let's say Bush is bad (well, I say it anyway). Anyhow, for the sake of argument, let's say YOU say bush is bad. Would you still vote for him (God did give us free choice) on the argument that he is your current leader and its God's will?

Rev, you crack me up. :aua

HKRockChick · No More Peas! Joined: 25 Nov 2003 Posts: 1513

:

Quote:
You see, there is a difference spelled out in the Bible between "legitimate leaders", and other "leaders". I don't have a Bible with me right now, so you'll have to find it yourself (well, you found the other ones, didn't you?)

Is bush a legitimate leader? thats open to question, considering how the whole "election" was a farce...

Hitler was legitimate leader. Are you saying that if you were in hitler's germany you would have been a @#%$ and participated in the holocaust on the basis that you would've obeyed hitler?

Should we hold pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong? Last year we protested against article 23, was that unbiblical?

Oh, I know what the bible says, but in context it means respect the position, and if you disagree then do it in a lawful way (courts, organised protests etc, instead of shooting and killing -eg, anti-abortionist who murder doctors, vandals who destroy property,etc).

Nowhere does the bible say obey your leader even if he has violated the first five commandments and continues to do so while proclaiming his own "goodness" as being from God.

Whats the difference between a "legitimate" leader and "others", and who decides that, the CIA?