Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

DO YOU WANT GOD (CONSERATIVE) OR DO YOU WANT JESUS (LIBERAL) ?

The responses to my other blog (Why is God a warrior and Jesus a pansy) kind of confused me, real Christians are conserative and modern Christians seem to be Liberal. Now my confusion is, why would you accept liberal ideas when the vast majority of these ideas are pure -Evil-. If you accept or listen too any of these liberal ideas you will cross over to the -Evil- side of modern life. Look at Europe and now America and this proves my point that Liberal ideas are the Devils work hiding in sheeps clothing.
 
Evil will always fill the void and there has been a void in general (American) church teaching since the advent of the modernistic nonsense ,specifically Dispensational Futurism and its abhorrence of the Law.
 
Conservative usually means a long held belief or stance on issues of politics or religion. Liberals question and sometimes change long held beliefs and stances. In US politics there are Social and fiscal conservatives, along with social and fiscal liberals. Liberals philosophy is based on changing our actions or beliefs to fit surrounding pressures. Conservative philosophy demands a strong defense of policy and backs it up with president. In Religion ( including Christianity) its about the same. A teaching or belief is questioned and people either hold to it or modify it with surrounding pressures. Its similar to this ( not Christianity), a group of people pray to an idol for food. Some times the crops are bad and sometimes the crops are plentiful. One of the group discovers a fertilizer that is more reliable then simply praying to the idol. The person tells the rest of the group. Some of the group think its simply the idols and the fertilizer has nothing to do with it. Others think the fertilizer dose help. And thus we get liberals and Conservatives. ;)
 
Non sequitor, Jesus is God

you cannot seperate them
And even if one didn't agree that Jesus wasn't God, why would one have to choose Jesus over God since Jesus made it clear that he said and did what the Father wanted him to say and do?

Hence my questioning the title of this thread. I don't understand how one could even suggest that one must choose God or Jesus. Any which way you look at it, it doesn't make sense.
 
You throw around the word "-Evil-" with impunity. This is how I see you.
[video=youtube;a6ucZsJQxbQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6ucZsJQxbQ[/video]
 
-Free- etc. I have said in past posts that I am NOT an expert on the Bible, so my questions come from a different angle. Would I be correct in saying that anybody can interpret the Bible in anyway they want and for whatever purpose they want? Example, the Gay community uses Jesus and the new testament as proof that they should be accepted by Christians. God and the old testament tell us that the Gay lifestyle is sinful and a abomination and they should be driven away from God fearing people because they are -Evil-. Now who is right, have modern Christians wanting to be Liberals accepted this -Evil- and used the Bible so they can justify their lazyness. PS, God is the Father and He created His Son therefore God is number one and Jesus is numer two, now where am I going wrong and please reply in modern english...
 
First you can not separate God from Jesus like you can separate people and give them a category as with God and Jesus it is all that same Spirit that is God manifested in the flesh of Christ.

You can not separate the conservative or liberal side of God because His word is conservative that never changes, even though many try to change it and His word is also liberal, but we are not to use that liberty that is in Christ to change this word to suit our own needs.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
John 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
John 1:5 And the light (Jesus) shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

Galatians 1:10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

Galatians 3:1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?

Galatians 5:1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
Galatians 5:13 For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.
 
The responses to my other blog (Why is God a warrior and Jesus a pansy) kind of confused me, real Christians are conserative and modern Christians seem to be Liberal. Now my confusion is, why would you accept liberal ideas when the vast majority of these ideas are pure -Evil-. If you accept or listen too any of these liberal ideas you will cross over to the -Evil- side of modern life. Look at Europe and now America and this proves my point that Liberal ideas are the Devils work hiding in sheeps clothing.

It's because folks do no longer understand what words mean. They no longer understand the construction & deconstruction of language.

Here is a prime example. In society now we are taught to be "rational". But in reality that is a bad thing. The root word is ratio meaning a part. A limited amount a part of the whole. When one is 'rational' they are viewing things from a limited perspective. When a rational person 'thinks' they rationalize: verb (used with object) - to ascribe (one's acts, opinions, etc.) to causes that superficially seem reasonable and valid but that actually are unrelated to the true.

Whereas it was not that many years ago people wanted to be "reasonable" meaning "able to reason": verb (used without object) to think or argue in a logical manner, noun - 1. the mental powers concerned with forming conclusions, judgments, or inferences. 1. normal or sound powers of mind; sanity.

Subtle, but huge differences.

It's the same with conservative vs liberal.

lib·er·al /ˈlɪbərəl, ˈlɪbrəl/

adjective
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. ( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.

con·serv·a·tive   /kənˈsɜrvətɪv/
adjective
1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.
2. cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate.
3. traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.
4. ( often initial capital letter ) of or pertaining to the Conservative party.

From a political perspective you find the actions described in both parties. Be it the traditional conservative American view of "securing the Blessings of Liberty" which can be seen as conservative in the desire to preserve our traditions. It is also liberal in maximizing freedom. Now take the modern liberal view of wanting to maintain the status quo of preserving the new tradition of the Department of Education based on the definitions that is conservative.

But to understand conservative or liberal one has to understand language and how the meanings in a political context has changed. For example:
http://conservapedia.com/Classical_Liberal
"The term "liberal" changed meaning in the 1930s. Since then Classical Liberals are called "Conservatives" or "Libertarians" in the United States"

Interesting huh?

True Conservatives are actually liberals in the real definition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
"Classical liberalism is the philosophy committed to the ideal of limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets."

Modern 'liberals' have co-opted the word & made it an oxymoron because it is authoritarian.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalism
"Social liberalism is the belief that liberalism should include social justice. It differs from classical liberalism in that it believes the legitimate role of the state includes addressing economic and social issues such as unemployment, health care, and education" They believe in force of government.

George Washington described it best ""Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

Authoritarianism of man can never be conservative because it was never part of our American tradition of recognizing God as the true & rightful authority.

The "malevolent force" has been muddying up words to confuse & deceive folks for millenia.

The best description of traditional conservative American thinking is here:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp

I always advocate folks to become as knowledgeable & informed as possible. Yale's Avalon project has a wealth of documents & writings to study & learn about the formation of our American traditions.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed." - Thomas Jefferson.
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge:" - Hosea 4:6

As far as YHWH/Yeshua being liberal or conservative, He is both if you define conservative as "hold fast to tradition" & liberal as "reform or change"

YHWH/Yeshua brought about great reform & change when He led the ancient Hebrews out of Egypt & into Cannaan, He also brought about great reform & change with the finished work of the Cross & would be considered 'liberal' for these actions .YHWH/Yeshua has been very conservative in the teaching of Faith.

So it's not the label that matters, it Idea that matters. Through time Satan can change the meaning of words & muddy peoples thinking, but he can not change Truth nor the truth of Idea. So we must always be informed & knowledgeable, able to understand understand Idea, able to discern if Idea is truly Godly or not.

p.s.
Yeshua should never be equated with a "pansy", his willing sacrifice took great courage. He had the power to stop it at anytime. Modern media has created the illusion of "hippy' 'pansy' Jesus. Christ as a man exhibited great power, courage, & strength.
 
PS, God is the Father and He created His Son therefore God is number one and Jesus is numer two, now where am I going wrong and please reply in modern english...

Where do you read in scripture that God the Father created His Son? Read the post following yours, and you will see in John 1, the Son did not have a beginning. He is One manifested in three "persons" - no beginning or end. This is part of your disconnect in reconciling what you have a problem with.
 
-Mike- good answer and it explains some of my misinterpretations...
-for_his_glory_ does that mean we should only obey -God- of the old testament...?
-Tonka Tim- your PS, is interesting in that you claim the liberal media is why Jesus is portrayed as a liberal pansy. (That is a closet Homosexual according to Liberals...)
 
-Mike- good answer and it explains some of my misinterpretations...
-for_his_glory_ does that mean we should only obey -God- of the old testament...?
-Tonka Tim- your PS, is interesting in that you claim the liberal media is why Jesus is portrayed as a liberal pansy. (That is a closet Homosexual according to Liberals...)

Through the media, they have been applying a false narrative to Christ since His resurrection, not like this is anything new ;)

The malevolent force (satan) will use any medium possible to spread the lies that lead mankind to destruction. So yeah it is through the Media the lies are spread. The relationship between Him & John is what these false teachers use for that, just like Christ's relationship between Him & Mary Magdalene is used for another lie.

A shame isn't it.
 
-for_his_glory_ does that mean we should only obey -God- of the old testament...?

TonkaTim - Is God not also the same God of the New Testament taking on the form of man in the flesh and bone of Christ as His only begotten son being that of one Spirit bringing us to a new covenant of grace that we should obey His commandments? Answer, yes we are to obey the God of the Old and New Testament and abide by those laws which have not yet been fulfilled.
(not making this into a trinity debate please)
 
Most of the responses have been very informative as to the teachings of the Bible wheather they use the old or new testament. That being said I seem to get the opinion that the old or new testaments are open to the interpertations of the person reading the Bible? Now if that is true, is my interpertation of God and Jesus have some validy even though the vast majority of Bible readers do not like my harsh interpertation of the Bible? PS, I am asking these questions honestly as a non expert of the Bible, but as a non liberal (Liberalism) who believes in the old fashion ideas of the old testament...
 
Most of the responses have been very informative as to the teachings of the Bible wheather they use the old or new testament. That being said I seem to get the opinion that the old or new testaments are open to the interpertations of the person reading the Bible? Now if that is true, is my interpertation of God and Jesus have some validy even though the vast majority of Bible readers do not like my harsh interpertation of the Bible? PS, I am asking these questions honestly as a non expert of the Bible, but as a non liberal (Liberalism) who believes in the old fashion ideas of the old testament...
As Mike stated, Jesus is God, although he is not the Father; Jesus is uncreated and eternal just as the Father is uncreated and eternal.

As I stated previously, even if Jesus wasn't God, he did say that he did and said what the Father gave him to do and say:

Joh 14:9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?
Joh 14:10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works.
Joh 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves. (ESV)

If Jesus is doing the will of the Father and is speaking with authority given him by the Father, then how is there any real difference between the God of the OT and Jesus of the NT?

Look closer at the Jesus of the NT:

Rev 1:12 Then I turned to see the voice that was speaking to me, and on turning I saw seven golden lampstands,
Rev 1:13 and in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden sash around his chest.
Rev 1:14 The hairs of his head were white, like white wool, like snow. His eyes were like a flame of fire,
Rev 1:15 his feet were like burnished bronze, refined in a furnace, and his voice was like the roar of many waters.
Rev 1:16 In his right hand he held seven stars, from his mouth came a sharp two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining in full strength. (ESV)

Rev 19:11 Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war.
Rev 19:12 His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems, and he has a name written that no one knows but himself.
Rev 19:13 He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God.
Rev 19:14 And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses.
Rev 19:15 From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty.
Rev 19:16 On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords. (ESV)

Far from being a pansy, yes?

The fact is, people will always interpret the Bible in a way that appears to justify their sin.
 
Back
Top