Jude 2

I don't have alot of time this morning so I am just going to comment on a couple of key statements Obama made during his speech and submit some scripture for your concideration. (The text of the speech can be found in several places online so I am not going to link directly to it.)

The gay activist and the evangelical pastor may both deplore the ravages of HIV/AIDS, but find themselves unable to bridge the cultural divide that might unite their efforts.

Is it possible for us to join hands in common effort?

How does each of us remain firm in our principles, and fight for what we consider right, without demonizing those with just as strongly held convictions on the other side?


What bothered the doctor was an entry that my campaign staff had posted on my website - an entry that said I would fight "right-wing ideologues who want to take away a woman's right to choose."

I wrote back to him and thanked him. I didn't change my position,...

Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction. But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.

....differences of culture and religion and conviction can co-exist with friendship....

No Mr. President, it cannot.

Light cannot "co-exist" with darkness. Good should not dwell with evil. The murder of innocent life is not equivalant to choosing whether or not to have white or wheat. It is not such a tivial thing to get in bed with a murderer, or someone who supports and even enables the ablities of the one who takes away life. The two are hopelessly irreconciable! As they SHOULD BE!!


2 Cor. 6:14...................For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?

Ephesians 5:11 Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

1 John 1:6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and o do not practice the truth.

There are many people who would like to come in and decieve the church with the lies of being mutually respectful when there is simply no way that light can fellowship with darkness. Abortion is not the least of the dividing issues among the people of Light and the people of the world. To try and co-exist in a false sense of fellowship is to deny what we have been called to......."righteously holy living".

I have a little more on how Obama basically says that doubt is (or should be) a part of our faith. And that no one can know the will of God. I suppose its all relative to him. *shrug*

But remember too that the ultimate irony of faith is that it necessarily admits doubt. It is the belief in things not seen. It is beyond our capacity as human beings to know with certainty what God has planned for us or what He asks of us, and those of us who believe must trust that His wisdom is greater than our own.

This doubt should not push us away from our faith. But it should humble us. It should temper our passions, and cause us to be wary of self-righteousness.

Doubt has no place in the life of the believer. Jesus didn't tell Thomas to use his doubt to temper his passions. He told him to STOP doubting and believe!

It is not "beyond our capacity.....to know what God has planned for us". Mr. Obama, it's called walking in the spirit of the Lord and KNOWING HIM and obeying Him in spirit and truth. It is called a RELATIONSHIP with the Devine and Him living IN the believer and guiding our paths. We can in fact 'touch and KNOW" that He is God and follow the will that God has shut up in our bones as if it were a fire!

Go back to the Book in which you claim to place your faith Mr. Obama, and accually read what it says!

He obviously has no faith, has experienced faith (a gift from God), and therefore must not be born-again. Faith is by no means doubt but the very opposite. It is assurance though we cannot see. We walk by faith, not by sight.

Y'all will probably clobber me on this, but I kind of agree with what Brian typed, quoting Obama. Let me carefully say here that I do not agree with Obama. Don't take me out of context, and hear me out. Thanks!

Okay, Brian quoted Obama as saying that faith necessarily admits doubt. What is doubt? Well, biblically it has many different words that, in translation, are rendered "doubt". Brian takes it, I think -- and tell me if I'm wrong -- to mean a lack of faith, to believe that God's promises are not real or cannot be trusted.

And, that's one definition (see, Strong's Greek 1252, meaning "to be at variance with one's self, hestitate, doubt). Matthew 21:21 is probably the best example.

But, that isn't the only definition of doubt. Doubt can also mean simple uncertainty. See Strong's Greek 639, example at Galatians 4:20 where Paul wrote to that church that he stood "in doubt" of them, that is, he was perplexed and undecided.

And, I'd submit to you that perplexity is part of faith. Paul wrote, and we often quote, 2 Corinthians 4:8, "We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed. We are perplexed, but not in despair." He went on to elaborate on the sufferings of following Christ in this way, that, "We, having the same spirit of faith ... also believe and therefore speak, knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise us up also by Jesus" (2 Cor. 4:13, 14). All of the perplexity, the uncertainties of life are, for us, bundled up in faith. They don't disappear. Rather, they give us reason to consciously direct our trust toward Christ, do they not?

So, I wouldn't just pounce on the use of the word "doubt" here. Now, Obama could have meant something very different than what you and I may think when we frame "doubt" in these terms. I can't say for sure. (I guess that means I have doubt, eh?) But, this I do know, that there is an element of "doubt", that is not knowing the certainty of the direction and unfolding of things (and, we don't know how things will develop), and that uncertainty is a reason we need and do exercise faith in God. If nothing else, it is an ever present indicator that we are not Him.


Edit: Let me add this. Doubt, as applied to knowing what God asks of us, as far as what Obama said on that, is not (IMO) a simple shrug of the shoulders and release from accountability for not doing what God asks. "Well, I didn't know, you see, Lord, and .....".. Uh-uh. That's not doubt. That's a get-out-of-it card, a no-accountability card.

There is plenty instruction in the written Word about what we should do. And, honestly, I'm a bit perplexed (here we go, now) as to how he would say (as he has before) on the one hand that we should know with certainty that the poor/downtrodden/sick/elderly/etc. are to be helped and so government is meeting a biblical calling in running big social programs, but on the other hand in the context of abortion we should somehow step back and quiz ourselves on what God really wants us to do. That, to me, is duplicitous. As long as the benefit of doubt runs in favor of bigger government, Obama is comfortable with it. For him, government is the default, the gap-filler. He can escape with that because he's the love child of the left wing and their media, and anyone who brings that up is an evangelical or Christian fanatic just trying to get their points in.

I have never listened or watched an Obama speach. I never will. I hear enough of his quotes to let me know he is a waste of precious time I could spend listening to my grand children...

Brian, et al, I say to you a hearty AMEN. He is trying to bully us into finding" common ground" and using the Word of God to do it. He needs to think about his own words when he addresses congress.

Finding common ground to him means I would agree with him.....NEVER!

He said we need to look to science.....he doesn't. Two people come together sexually( usually) and both bring 15 genes....that combination creates a dna that is totally unique in the universe......it happens at the moment of conception.....what grows from that is...... A BABY!!!! Wow, Idiot, science has already proven our point.....

What a total waste of good human tissue this man is.....and I am NOT opionated....

dolfan wrote:Let me add this. Doubt, as applied to knowing what God asks of us, as far as what Obama said on that, is not (IMO) a simple shrug of the shoulders and release from accountability for not doing what God asks. "Well, I didn't know, you see, Lord, and .....".. Uh-uh. That's not doubt. That's a get-out-of-it card, a no-accountability card.

Hey dolfan, this is in part what I think Obama is laying the foundation of. That, and the idea that doubting what each of us teach as being absolute insofar as biblically based doctorine.
He said "It is beyond our capacity as human beings to know with certainty what God has planned for us or what He asks of us, and those of us who believe must trust that His wisdom is greater than our own."
I think he is trying to convey, given the fact that he is mainly addressing the abortion issue here, that there is no way for a mere human to know if God wants us to support or oppose abortion, and therefore both are valid equal moral decisions where there is no right or wrong. I think he grossly misrespresents what the scripture say about what God has asked, or I should say DEMANDS from His followers. That being servitude! To serve God and be SUBMISIVE to HIS will, NOT the will that governs our human concious, but the will of the Devine that transends time and culture and in most ways conflicts with what we may call human nature.

When Obama says that doubt "should humble us. It should temper our passions, and cause us to be wary of self-righteousness." I fear that he is speaking of the type of self-righteousness that led many of the Notre Dame graduates (and others) to protest his apperance there.

Obama and the majority of the liberal left only believe in " Fair-minded words" when those words coincide with there own. A quick look at how the left treated Miss America hopeful Carrie Prejean should be enough insight to show just how many "fair-minded" words they are willing to use toward those of differing world views...........NONE!

Dr. Ron wrote:I have never listened or watched an Obama speach. I never will. I hear enough of his quotes to let me know he is a waste of precious time I could spend listening to my grand children...

Brian, et al, I say to you a hearty AMEN. He is trying to bully us into finding" common ground" and using the Word of God to do it. He needs to think about his own words when he addresses congress.

Finding common ground to him means I would agree with him.....NEVER!

He said we need to look to science.....he doesn't. Two people come together sexually( usually) and both bring 15 genes....that combination creates a dna that is totally unique in the universe......it happens at the moment of conception.....what grows from that is...... A BABY!!!! Wow, Idiot, science has already proven our point.....

What a total waste of good human tissue this man is.....and I am NOT opionated....

Thanks Dr. Ron. My post above touches on what you said about Obama wanting to find common ground......yea but only with those that agree with him! Not me, not now not ever.

All I will say is that went he speak's and try to use scripture to prove his point. He misuses the scriptures and his trueness comes out for all to see. As this Notre Dame speech.

Brian, I think you saw right through his deceitfulness.

Brian, I agree with that. He and his speechwriters are accomplished dancers of words. "Self-righteousness" comes across from him as a warning against believing you're right and someone else is wrong. Humility does not require that I check at the door my assuredness about what God has already stated clearly enough. But, on the other hand, his actual words --- taken alone --- are true that humility requires us to be wary of real self-righteousness. And, humility comes not only from realizing my own limitations (or, what he called our incapacity to know), but from also actually knowing, in this case, that God has, indeed, spoken and clearly so. That's not just humility, but what you called servitude.

He called upon the graduates "to find a way to live together as one human family", while acknowledging the "diversity" of cultures, beliefs, etc. In admitting that the abortion debate cannot be reconciled, the notion of "human family", by definition, means some will be left out of the best of whatever he envisions that to be. Guess who that'll be. Well, he doesn't leave us guessing, does he? He said of the challenges of our world, "Moreover, no one person, or religion, or nation can meet these challenges alone". Well, he just poured the kingdom of God in the trash chute, didn't he?

I would submit to you that government cannot meet even the most basic moral obligations in any satisfactory way. He says here that government, and not religion --- not any of them, can do so. All of the things which Jesus said He came to put to rights are things which Obama said cannot be put to rights by any person or religion. He said,

We too often seek advantage over others. We cling to outworn prejudice and fear those who are unfamiliar. Too many of us view life only through the lens of immediate self-interest and crass materialism; in which the world is necessarily a zero-sum game. The strong too often dominate the weak, and too many of those with wealth and with power find all manner of justification for their own privilege in the face of poverty and injustice.

and while I agree that those are effects of sin (although I question many of his premises, but won't take that rabbit trail here), he has dismissed Christ as the King who resolves the great injustices. "No one person .... no one religion."

Now, he moves to the question of HOW we "work through these conflicts". And, here, I'll have to say I relish the thought of being able to have debate without demonization. Part of that requires thicker skin on everyone's part. But, while his example about civility and good faith help the HOW question, it doesn't do much for the question of where we wind up when all is said and done. That's the contention. No one of good faith in the pro-life camp, for example, is going to civilly and in good faith become an advocate for some tempered version of baby-killing, which is what abortion is. No one of good faith to the orthodoxy of liberalism is going to civilly advocate some tempered version of choice, which is what limiting abortion is. To say that these positions are irreconcilable, which he admits, and then to shoot for "common ground" is tripe. And, in my view, it is cynical tripe because he knows better, and if he doesn't, he is made of lesser stuff than even I give him credit for.

Reduction is not a middle ground in abortion. Abortion really is what Obama earlier pooh-poohed in his speech --- a zero sum game. One woman's choice to abort adds choice to her freedoms, but removes life from her baby. It is the ultimate injustice, the ultimate unilateral economy. And, having respect for the difficulties of that choice is no solution. If it were, then he'd have to admit that all the wealthy must do is respect the difficulties of the poor on some common ground. But, just as he'll use the power of government to redistribute wealth and mitigate privacy of property, he'll use the power of government to reinforce abortion as an option and mitigate the right to life. There's no two ways about it.

Obama adjures them to be cooperative, and that way "all things are possible." Again, it smacks of Babel to me. I respect that he was "brought to Christ", by his own testimony, by the working together of many believers. That's fantastic. But, he turns and wrests this precious hope that "with God all things are possible" and "I can do all things through Christ..." away and substitutes the presence and working of God with the ingenuity of people. But for the fact that we are limited, and that we lack capacity and knowledge in the truest and most absolute ways, he'd be right. Yet, we're not beyond those limitations. We're fallen and not yet restored. All of our best intentions are never going to imitate those things that eye has not yet seen nor heart conceived by merely finding common ground and respecting differences. The very gospel which promises the delivery of all of God's promises to His people also says that we cannot walk together unless we are agreed. We have differences in the family of God, but they aren't the kind of differences that assert different paths to the same God. There's only One. And, the common ground we discover happens through the transforming of us by Him, so that the ground is hallowed not because it is common, but because it is uniquely His path for His name's sake. Commonality is not the virtue; unity is. And, Jesus Christ is the Master of that unity. It isn't brokered.

dolfan wrote:Brian, I agree with that. He and his speechwriters are accomplished dancers of words. "Self-righteousness" comes across from him as a warning against believing you're right and someone else is wrong. Humility does not require that I check at the door my assuredness about what God has already stated clearly enough. But, on the other hand, his actual words --- taken alone --- are true that humility requires us to be wary of real self-righteousness. And, humility comes not only from realizing my own limitations (or, what he called our incapacity to know), but from also actually knowing, in this case, that God has, indeed, spoken and clearly so. That's not just humility, but what you called servitude. ...

so why doesn't his words get spun into hate speech? ah well, glad I am a PAN-theist - whatever happens, it will all pan-out. heheheheee

dolfan wrote:Commonality is not the virtue; unity is. And, Jesus Christ is the Master of that unity.

Amen to that!

What he was trying to do was tell a group of Catholics that they need to let sleeping dogs lie and forget about the abortion issue since they are a bunch of hypocrites (his words not mine).