House chaplain forced out by Ryan

[Ridgerunner]

So having done your homework, you now you admit that the rise of Calvinism has been a problem in the SBC. Personally, I find it hard to believe that the number of 5-point Calvinist pastors dropped from a third to a sixth of in one year. Seems more likely they went underground.

It really doesn’t seem that Calvinism is much of a problem in the SBC. What was the percentage of Baptist pastors that don’t even know what it is?

Why would they go underground if they were in the ascendancy? They wouldn’t. “Calvinism” isn’t a single thing, but a complex of beliefs, some of which are accepted by certain protestant sects and some of which are not. And the “prosperity gospel” which you are trying vainly to associate with Evangelicals in order, vainly and absolutely wrongly, with Republicans, is not necessarily to be viewed as part of Calvinism. Certainly it’s not part of the TULIP marks of Calvinism you have cited as the core of that belief system.

And you have no more idea why Ryan terminated this chaplain than you know how to reconcile relativity and quantum mechanics.

 

[Luke6_37]

I left the party when it became inescapably clear that one could not simultaneously be faithful to the teachings of the Church and the position of the Dem party regarding abortion.

However, from reading your posts regarding other ProLife issues, such as healthcare, gun control, environmental protection, immigration and the death penalty - it seems that on these issues you align with the culture of death, which also explains your support of the GOP and Trump in particular.

 

[Ridgerunner]

However, from reading your posts regarding other ProLife issues, such as healthcare, gun control, environmental protection, immigration and the death penalty - it seems that on these issues you align with the culture of death, which also explains your support of the GOP and Trump in particular.

You obviously are inventing my views here to fit the Democrat pro-abortion mantra. If you had actually paid any attention to my posts over time, you would know I OPPOSE the death penalty, and have for years. So you just made that part up.

Describe my position on healthcare. Shouldn’t be hard to do unless you just invented that one too, which I think you did. Let’s see you do it

What is my position on environmental protection? Beyond my opposition to WOTUS, what is it?

And you obviously know nothing about my position on immigration. Tell us. Shouldn’t be hard. Remember that part about the 600 million population goal of mine for the U.S.? Tell us about that.

If you don’t know my positions on issues, which you clearly don’t, stop falsifying them.

 

[dvdjs]

You obviously are inventing my views

This from the poster who writes:

The posters on CAF who support abortion? Too many to cite. That’s every single post supporting Democrat candidates or the party

Priceless irony.

If you don’t know their positions on issues, which you clearly don’t, stop falsifying them.

 

[stinkcat_14]

social security is a special tax for a special purpose, it was not supposed to run the government. it was a forced retirement system.

like the medicare tax, why reject it after being forced to pay for it?

these are not entitlements.

Actually, if you look at the court rulings, it is very clear that both social security and medicare are welfare programs and that we have no property rights to a welfare program.

 

[Luke6_37]

Why would they go underground if they were in the ascendancy?

The rise of Calvinism in the SBC set off a lot of alarm bells among Arminians who I have noticed have become far more vocal in their opposition to it lately.

“Calvinism” isn’t a single thing, but a complex of beliefs, some of which are accepted by certain protestant sects and some of which are not.

Calvinism is actually quite simple and highly individualistic, which is what makes it appealing to so many people. Once you reject the notion of Libertarian Free Will and attribute your Salvation entirely to God’s Soveignty, you are pretty much all set and don’t need to do anything else.

And the “prosperity gospel” which you are trying vainly to associate with Evangelicals in order, vainly and absolutely wrongly, with Republicans, is not necessarily to be viewed as part of Calvinism.

The only real difference is that Calvinists don’t believe you can pray for prosperity, but that you are naturally rewarded with it as a consequence of being among the elect. However, from a public policy perspective, it has the same effect of leaving matters of wealth and prosperity up to God (i.e., market forces), rather than vainly seeking to thwart his will by interfering with the system through regulations or redistributing wealth via social programs.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The only real difference is that Calvinists don’t believe you can pray for prosperity, but that you are naturally rewarded with it as a consequence of being among the elect. However, from a public policy perspective, it has the same effect of leaving matters of wealth and prosperity up to God (i.e., market forces), rather than vainly seeking to thwart his will by interfering with the system through regulations or redistributing wealth via social programs.

That’s a pretty big difference, since the Calvinist view of the “elect” does not include “praying” for God’s favor. Without its view of 'election", Calvinism isn’t Calvinism.

And there probably isn’t one conservative out of 100,000 who actually believes “market forces” should determine all without any kind of governmental intervention at all. That’s just a bugbear of the progressives who don’t believe in subsidiarity.

 

[Luke6_37]

Luke6_37:

However, from reading your posts regarding other ProLife issues, such as healthcare, gun control, environmental protection, immigration and the death penalty - it seems that on these issues you align with the culture of death, which also explains your support of the GOP and Trump in particular.

You obviously are inventing my views here to fit the Democrat pro-abortion mantra. If you had actually paid any attention to my posts over time, you would know I OPPOSE the death penalty, and have for years. So you just made that part up.

Describe my position on healthcare. Shouldn’t be hard to do unless you just invented that one too, which I think you did. Let’s see you do it

What is my position on environmental protection? Beyond my opposition to WOTUS, what is it?

And you obviously know nothing about my position on immigration. Tell us. Shouldn’t be hard. Remember that part about the 600 million population goal of mine for the U.S.? Tell us about that.

If you don’t know my positions on issues, which you clearly don’t, stop falsifying them.

Well, the GOP position on all these issues reflects the Culture of Death. Yet, you vote Republican.

You also vehemently attack Democrats whose position on all these issues clearly reflect a Culture of Life.

Maybe if you weren’t so clearly partisan, folks wouldn’t come away with a false impression on where you stand on ProLife issues.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Well, the GOP position on all these issues reflects the Culture of Death. Yet, you vote Republican.

As you know, Pope Benedict said we can only support politicians who support abortion if there are “proportionate reasons” (equally grave) to do so. What Dem position is equally grave to the killing of a million children annually? If, say, the Repubs proposed killing all people of minority extraction here in the U.S., it could be said to be “proportionate”. But it would take something like that.

And the Dems talk the talk, but don’t walk the walk. Obama was president for eight years and had an unbeatable majority in congress for a year and a half. And what improvements did the Dems make to SSI; the program supporting the poorest of the poor? Nothing at all. Other than COLAS that are built into it, it has not increased by so much as a dime since Obama took office. Not a dime. Dem “concern for the poor” is just nonsense. Abortion is the only thing they provide to the poor. And they certainly do provide that.

As I have mentioned before, I was a devoted Democrat for years. I left it because of its devotion to abortion. What would it take to redeem the party? A return to its previous concern for the poor and working people and families and abandonment of its single wedded devotion to abortion.

It would take losing a number of elections, catastrophically, before the party would do that, I think.

 

[dvdjs]

politicians who support abortion

If the support or opposition is mere posture, then the gravity vanishes, and issues that will be actually acted on are weightier.

How many times since Roe v. Wade have the Republicans controlled houses of Congress and White House? What are the fruits?

 

[Luke6_37]

Luke6_37:

The only real difference is that Calvinists don’t believe you can pray for prosperity, but that you are naturally rewarded with it as a consequence of being among the elect. However, from a public policy perspective, it has the same effect of leaving matters of wealth and prosperity up to God (i.e., market forces), rather than vainly seeking to thwart his will by interfering with the system through regulations or redistributing wealth via social programs.

That’s a pretty big difference, since the Calvinist view of the “elect” does not include “praying” for God’s favor. Without its view of 'election", Calvinism isn’t Calvinism.

Like I said, from a public policy perspective it amounts to the same thing.

The Prosperity Gospel attracts folks who aren’t particularly concerned with the consistency of Biblical authority, while Calvinism attracts the same kind of people who want a more substantive doctrinal foundation.

And there probably isn’t one conservative out of 100,000 who actually believes “market forces” should determine all without any kind of governmental intervention at all. That’s just a bugbear of the progressives who don’t believe in subsidiarity.

Subsidiarity does not mean proximal processes are always the most effective, but that the proper level of intervention for a particular cause needs to be ascertained using a bottom-up approach.

With the exception of military spending, that’s not how the GOP operates. They invoke market forces when it comes to issues such as healthcare and education, which clearly should be held to an ideal standard of service, rather than degree of profitability. All the talk about privatizing the VA is a good example of how they would rather throw a problem at the market rather than doing the hard work of figuring out how to fix it.

However, the GOP also games the market by playing to their special interest groups in the mining and extraction industries, who make obscene profits by not being held accountable for the environmental degregation that results from their activities.

 

[Luke6_37]

As you know, Pope Benedict said we can only support politicians who support abortion if there are “proportionate reasons” (equally grave) to do so.

Sure, and as you know, Pope Francis said that you cannot separate one ProLife issue from one another, but that we must be equally attentive to all things that affect lives, especially the lives of the poor.

Healthcare, gun control, environmental protection, immigration and the death penalty are all issues that directly affect life and disproportionately affect the lives of the poor. The poor are the ones dying from Republican inaction or positions on these issues.

https://cruxnow.com/cns/2018/04/18/...sited-pope-insists-all-life-deserves-defense/

In Guadete et Exsultate, or “Rejoice and Be Glad,” his apostolic exhortation on holiness, Pope Francis wrote that living a Christian life involves the defense of both the unborn and the poor, and he criticized what he termed the “harmful ideological error” of thinking one’s own cause is the only important one.

“Our defense of the innocent unborn, for example, needs to be clear, firm and passionate, for at stake is the dignity of a human life, which is always sacred,” Francis wrote. “Equally sacred, however, are the lives of the poor, those already born, the destitute, the abandoned and the underprivileged, the vulnerable infirm and elderly exposed to covert euthanasia, the victims of human trafficking, new forms of slavery, and every form of rejection.”

Francis’s words reminded many people of the “seamless garment” approach to life issues promoted by the late Cardinal Joseph L. Bernardin of Chicago. While applauding its recognition of the sacredness of all human life, some people criticized the approach, saying it could give people a mistaken impression that, for example, the church teaches abortion and capital punishment are equally serious sins. Others worried that some Catholics would claim their defense of life in one area meant that they did not have to pursue the protection of life in other areas.

But “Pope Francis has reaffirmed that abortion is evil without mincing words,” Paglia said. At the same time, he asks that “the pro-life commitment be enlarged.”

 

[Luke6_37]

How many times since Roe v. Wade have the Republicans controlled houses of Congress and White House? What are the fruits?

Bitter, I would say…

Neil Gorsuch just cast the deciding vote that allows states to arbitrarily speed up a prisoners execution for no good reason.

So all those ProLife voters who elected Trump in order to steal a seat on the Supreme Court were just rewarded for their trouble by the deaths of 8 men in Arkansas without saving the life of a single baby.

Given the deal they were making, I am totally not surprised.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...aff0034e2de_story.html?utm_term=.668ebfadecf4

This is from Breyer’s dissenting opinion:

“Why these eight? Why now? The apparent reason has nothing to do with the heinousness of their crimes or with the presence (or absence) of mitigating behavior,” Breyer wrote. Instead, Breyer wrote, “apparently the reason the state decided to proceed with these eight executions is that the ‘use by’ date of the state’s execution drug is about to expire. In my view, that factor, when considered as a determining factor separating those who live from those who die, is close to random.”

 

[Ridgerunner]

How many times since Roe v. Wade have the Republicans controlled houses of Congress and White House? What are the fruits?

As you know, Roe vs. Wade can only be undone by the Supreme Court. Democrats put two pro-abortion justices on the Court by voting for Obama, and are responsible for Roe vs. Wade now and abortion on demand. Trump has appointed one prolife justice but the Democrats are trying to get Trump out of office so he can’t appoint another one.

So it’s your party that’s responsible for the fact that Roe vs. Wade continues to be the law. I think many or perhaps even most Democrats know that and vote for abortion candidates anyway.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Sure, and as you know, Pope Francis said that you cannot separate one ProLife issue from one another, but that we must be equally attentive to all things that affect lives, especially the lives of the poor.

Sure. Which of the issues you named (and about which the Dems did nothing when they had the power to do it) are proportionate to killing a million children per year? Is “gun control” (whatever that is to you) really more important to you than a million dead children?

If so, for shame.

 

[Luke6_37]

Trump has appointed one prolife justice

Oops! You spoke too soon…

House chaplain forced out by Ryan World News

Bitter, I would say… Neil Gorsuch just cast the deciding vote that allows states to arbitrarily speed up a prisoners execution for no good reason. So all those ProLife voters who elected Trump in order to steal a seat on the Supreme Court were just rewarded for their trouble by the deaths of 8 men in Arkansas without saving the life of a single baby. Given the deal they were making, I am totally not surprised. This is from Breyer’s dissenting opinion: “Why these eight? Why now? The appa…

 

[Luke6_37]

Luke6_37:

Sure, and as you know, Pope Francis said that you cannot separate one ProLife issue from one another, but that we must be equally attentive to all things that affect lives, especially the lives of the poor.

Sure. Which of the issues you named (and about which the Dems did nothing when they had the power to do it) are proportionate to killing a million children per year? Is “gun control” (whatever that is to you) really more important to you than a million dead children?

If so, for shame.

Those of us who are uncompromisingly ProLife refuse to engage in such debates. The terms you set up - this weighing of which issues or whose lives are deserving of dignity or protection is frankly abhorrent in the same way eugenics are abhorrent.

If that’s how you see things, for shame.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Neil Gorsuch just cast the deciding vote that allows states to arbitrarily speed up a prisoners execution for no good reason.

So all those ProLife voters who elected Trump in order to steal a seat on the Supreme Court were just rewarded for their trouble by the deaths of 8 men in Arkansas without saving the life of a single baby.

Eight killers in ARkansas versus a million innocent children killed. And to you, that’s “proportionate”. it’s not even close. And the Church does not forbid the death penalty, by the way, though the last three popes have opposed it (as do I, and for that reason).

And Obama’s pro-abortion appointments to the Supreme Court are the reason why the babies continue to be killed. And those who voted for him are just as responsible for those deaths as he is, and as the “doctor” is who wields the curette.

Dems need to take responsibility for their actions. There’s still time to repent, but acceptance of responsibility precedes repentance.

 

[Luke6_37]

And Obama’s pro-abortion appointments to the Supreme Court are the reason why the babies continue to be killed.

How do you figure that? Obama appointed only 2 of the 9 justices on the Supreme Court. One of whom is Catholic.

 

[Luke6_37]

Eight killers in ARkansas versus a million innocent children killed. And to you, that’s “proportionate”. it’s not even close. And the Church does not forbid the death penalty, by the way, though the last three popes have opposed it (as do I, and for that reason).

Like I said in my previous post…

Those of us who are uncompromisingly ProLife refuse to engage in such debates. The terms you set up - this weighing of which issues or whose lives are deserving of dignity or protection is frankly abhorrent in the same way eugenics are abhorrent.

I’m glad you oppose the death penalty, but by your logic, by voting Republican you actually endorse it.

You must be very conflicted.

You can have the last word for now. I’ve got to get to work. Talk to you later.