Is this a "Putrid Attitude"

[JN Anderson]

Originally Posted by pelathais

It is the governor's statement that needs "spin." The fact of the matter is, he is an elected official in a state that is a part of a Federal union which is and always has been expressly SECULAR in nature.

I'm certain that if we allowed them free reign, the Baptists of Alabama would happily marginalize "heretical" believers such as yourself as quickly as you have dissed the ADL and their ilk.

I challenge you - approach this man, Gov. Bentley, and invite him to participate in or to attend one of your debates. Be clear about your position and beliefs. Then, I am fairly certain, you will see the wisdom in a SECULAR form of government.

Pel, now you are assuming that since a baptist would disagree with an OP (is that new or something) means they also cannot get along or agree on other things. If not, why the "challenge"? lol I have attended Trinitarian universities. Others mentioned Dr. Towns and he has given me passing grades on my papers for Sys. Theo 101 a few years ago. So have other Trinitarian professors I have later learned from. You may be behind a little or we can flat disagree but I think OP's are more acceptable than you might think.

[Cindy]

I guess we can't have an honest politician after all. He might show favoritism, and we know that's not allowed, right?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by JN Anderson

Pel, now you are assuming that since a baptist would disagree with an OP (is that new or something) means they also cannot get along or agree on other things. If not, why the "challenge"? lol I have attended Trinitarian universities. Others mentioned Dr. Towns and he has given me passing grades on my papers. So have other Trinitarian professors I learned from. You may be behind a little or we can flat disagree but I think OP's are more acceptable than you might think.

The basis of their "agreement" would have to be found someplace outside of their competing religious views. This is why I feel that the Founding Fathers were so wise in establishing a secular basis for governance.

My own position is that there is fundamentally very little difference between OP and Trinitarians. There has always been sincere and legitimate resistance to the later "Athanasian" creeds of the 6th century (which had little to do with the Athanasius of the 4th century) and when strictly Biblical language is used, most Trinitarian statements are completely acceptable by OPs - see Carpenter's thread from yesterday.

The only problem I have with Bentley's statements are that they appear to have been intentionally jingoistic in tone and will be gobbled up and regurgitated by those on the Left. Republicans must grow up and act with more intelligence and awareness. Bentley probably didn't have to say much of anything to be assured of receiving the support of those in church yesterday. It is the 42 million who were home watching the NFL playoffs that we need to swing around to our way of thinking. By giving the Left and the media in general so much fodder, Bentley plays right into their hands.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I don't know about "putrid" but I think it was a dumb statement from any perspective.

First of all, you have to repent, be baptized in water by immersion in the name of Jesus Christ and then be filled with the Holy Ghost evidenced by speaking in other tongues to be anyone's "brother or sister in Christ." This guy wasn't speaking with "other believers around him." He was talking in front of a bunch of Baptists!

Unfortunately, his hardline approach would also lead him, no doubt, to state that: "If you have spoken in tongues like the heathen occultists and been baptized in any other way than the titles, you are not my brother or sister, and I want to be your brother."

Such bad mannered pendulums swing both ways.

Personally, I am rarely pleased at statements of faith from politicians. They never strike me as sincere in the first place. Or, at least, they are naturally suspect because of what they stand to gain from it.

[JN Anderson]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Unfortunately, his hardline approach would also lead him, no doubt, to state that: "If you have spoken in tongues like the heathen occultists and been baptized in any other way than the titles, you are not my brother or sister, and I want to be your brother."

Such bad mannered pendulums swing both ways.

Personally, I am rarely pleased at statements of faith from politicians. They never strike me as sincere in the first place. Or, at least, they are naturally suspect because of what they stand to gain from it.

MB, isn't it a good thing, at least sometimes, to answer someone who may be asking you a question?

[Socialite]

Like MB, I get nervous whenever candidates start talking faith in a public setting, as they are announced "here comes the Sen/Representative of _____."

In a sense we are all brothers. All brothers of Adam, sharing life together. In the sense of being the family of God, one is born into this family by faith in Jesus. I think it's important to see yourself as a family in both senses though. Jesus, on his mission, did not view his relationship as one far off. He personally identified with us as part of the human family, whom he was on mission to redeem.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by JN Anderson

MB, isn't it a good thing, at least sometimes, to answer someone who may be asking you a question?

What was the question?

Hearing this type of rhetoric over a podium that bears the state of Alabama's seal, an official capacity of office... I can understand why it bothers a lot of people.

[Michlow]

I highly doubt that the people of Alabama elected him to be their "brother", but rather their Governor!

[ILG]

Good way to alienate a bunch of people right off.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by JN Anderson

MB, isn't it a good thing, at least sometimes, to answer someone who may be asking you a question?

Who asked the governor a question and what was it?