John Edwards: I have no moral authority

Comments

[Gary]

Edwards has proven his theological and moral ignorance. And his lack of qualification to hold elected office.

He has also shown that his claim to be a Christian is so much hot air.

[preacherdarren]

He has proven by his fruits that he is a wolf in sheeps clothing.

Christian? not from what I have seen and heard....

Pastor darren

[Streak]

I think Darren and Gary should go on the road and do a little show. "Show up and let these two people play God. They will determine the insides of your heart and tell you if you are saved or not."

Quite a little freak show.

[Gary]

Streak,

Repent or be damned. Judgement is coming to a city near you. And you are not ready.

[Streak]

See, that is a great trick. You don't know me. Have never met me. Yet, through the internets you can see into my soul and tell me that I am not saved.

Can you predict other future events? Who will win the Super Bowl? Who will be President in 2012? Please, enlighten us on your great insight.

[Jarrod]

I think Edwards is probably one of the most moral candidates out there.

But then again, he does not play into the homophobia card nor does he think unjust war is a good idea. His position on these two issues alone are enough to make most on the Christian Right attack him. Another strike in their book is that he wants healthcare for everybody. The Religious Right wants us to care for the unborn baby, but to ignore their needs once they are born.

[Gary]

Jarrod,

Because Edwards is against the war and for homosexuals he is moral? On what basis do you make that judgement?

Why is it my responsibility to furnish you with heath care? Or, reverse the roles and explain why you have the responsibility to furnish mine.

[Streak]

Gary, why is it that when Jarrod suggests that Edwards is moral because of his stance on the war and poverty, you reject that, but when you assert that someone is immoral because of their stance on homosexalty, that is ok?

[Jarrod]

Gary,

From what I understand, Edwards is not for redefining marriage. As Christians we worship the Prince of Peace, not the Prince of War and Violence; that's why I think his position on war is moral.

As for the issue of healthcare, if you take a look at the first Christians in the book of Acts; they shared all they had with one another and no one went without. If you go back and look at the history of Rome, a horrible disease spread throughout the empire. Almost everyone who was well fled and left the rest to die - except disciples of Jesus. They stayed and helped nurse those who were ill back to health - at the expense of their own health - even though these men and women were not "baptized believers in 'Jeezuus.'"

And now to your question:

"Why is it my responsibility to furnish you with heath care? Or, reverse the roles and explain why you have the responsibility to furnish mine."

First off, we have a social military; we have a responsibility as a society to fund our violent, murderous expeditions in foreign countries. Why not use some of those funds to actually save lives instead of destroy them? Also, as a society, those who have more than others have a responsibility to help those that do not have. At least, that's how it works in a society that is concerned about others. A quick look at Matthew 25:31-46 shows us why we as disciples of Jesus should be concerned about the well-being of others.

But then again, "Christians" of your ilk are not concerned with someone after they are born - you're only concerned with whether someone kills them in the womb. Kind of hypocritical if you ask me - or any other rational person, for that matter.

I invite you to unplug from this religion you have bought into and join into an authentic relationship with God. For when you truly do that, you'll actually be desiring to help others, place yourself last, keep people from suffering instead of condemning them to hell, and realize your own iniquities instead of placing yourself in the seat of righteousness.

Just a thought.

[Gary]

Jarrod,

I noticed the Christians in Acts took care of one another, but not society. How do you explain that?

[Jarrod]

Gary,

I explain that by asking you to read what I wrote in my first response about the Christians taking care of the infirmed Romans.

Perhaps you should actually take the time to read a poster's comments instead of thinking of your next response.

[Gary]

Jarrod,

No, that is not an explanation of the question asked.

Concerning Matthew 25: 31-46,
Who is the "my brethren" mentioned in verse 40?

[Jarrod]

Gary,

Did not Jesus consider all of mankind children of God? Then that would make "my brethren" all the people of the world.

[Gary]

Jarrod,

Can you cite Scripture to prove your theory that Jesus considered all of mankind to be the children of God?

[Jarrod]

Here you go: John 3:17.

[Jarrod]

And the more popular verse before it: John 3:16. I'll recite them both here for the sake of other readers:

"God loved the universe so much that God gave Jesus, the son, so that those who believe in him should not perish but have life to the full. For Jesus did not come to condemn the universe and mankind, but that they should all be saved through him."

[Gary]

Jarrod,

Sorry, but those verses say nothing at all about everyone being children of God.

By the way, the version you quoted from is a perversion of what the Bible actually says.

[preacherdarren]

Edwards want win anyway- so why worry about him...

We need to spend our time telling the world about the communist and also the Muslim who are running for that seat.

Pastor Darren

[Tony]

Its unlikely Edwards will get the Democratic nomination but, communists? Huh???

Muslim running for office?? The presidential office? Is this your bigoted interpretation of Obama coming out again?

[Streak]

Hah. John Edwards is a communist? Or does that refer to Hillary?

Tony, I really like how Darren (sorry, I am not going to even put the quotes around pastor any longer) avoids everything. You and I have both called him on his assumption that Obama is muslim, but he simply ignores. We ask him to clarify--does he have information or is he simply assuming because of Obama's name?

Darren ignores because, as we discussed elsewhere, his projection of God is an all-enveloping facade that first and foremost assures Darren that he is right. All questions should be left outside the bubble.

[Jarrod]

Gary,

I think those verses do imply Jesus' view of seeing all as children of God worth being reconciled.

And what biblical version is not "perverted"? Please don't say the King James Version - that is an accurate copy of an inaccurate Greek manuscript.

Darren,

Like we've all said, Obama is not a Muslim; he belongs to the United Church of Christ. And so what if he was? Would he be unable to govern this country effectively because of his religion? That's just ridiculous.

And Edwards is a communist? Why? Is it because he believes in socializing healthcare? After all, we have a socialized military. Why not have a social program that helps heal people instead of killing them?

Man, if only closed minds came with closed mouths.