Obama Attends Church for 1st Time in5 Months.

So what, why do Christians think everyone should attend a Church Service once a week, every week, rain or shine?

Is it mandatory that Christian believers hear preachin from a Preacher once a week, every week to insure that their "ticket" to the promised land remains valid?

SamCogar wrote:

So what, why do Christians think everyone should attend a Church Service once a week, every week, rain or shine?

Is it mandatory that Christian believers hear preachin from a Preacher once a week, every week to insure that their "ticket" to the promised land remains valid?

Going to church doesn't make you a Christian anymore than going in the garage makes you a car. However, Christians want to go to church to worship, fellowship and find an avenue of stewardship.

But many, many, many WV Christians thinks that going into a beer joint makes you a drunk.

And ps, how do ya know they are worshipping if they are just sitting there quietly listenin ta a Preacher preachin?

Here's the problem I have with the whole thing. I don't care if President Obama goes to church or not. Hell, I don't even care if he's a Christian or not. But when HE is the one out there talking about it, HE is the one that is making an issue of it so if he's going to make it a point of discussing HIS faith and HIS religion in the national media, then HE should live accordingly.

SamCogar wrote:But many, many, many WV Christians thinks that going into a beer joint makes you a drunk.

And ps, how do ya know they are worshipping if they are just sitting there quietly listenin ta a Preacher preachin?

Sam,

I agree with you. There are no doubt people who go to beer joints who are not drunks, and folks who go to church who are not Christians. We can very easilyi make very bad judgement calls by appearances, but it is God who knows the heart.

Having said that, if you are going to look for drunks (for whatever reason), it's a better bet to find them in the bar, and if you are looking for Christians, it's a better bet to find them in church.

But when HE is the one out there talking about it, HE is the one that is making an issue of it so if he's going to make it a point of discussing HIS faith and HIS religion in the national media, then HE should live accordingly.

And who is to say that he doesn't?

ziggy wrote:

But when HE is the one out there talking about it, HE is the one that is making an issue of it so if he's going to make it a point of discussing HIS faith and HIS religion in the national media, then HE should live accordingly.

And who is to say that he doesn't?

His stance on abortion proves otherwise.

ziggy wrote:

But when HE is the one out there talking about it, HE is the one that is making an issue of it so if he's going to make it a point of discussing HIS faith and HIS religion in the national media, then HE should live accordingly.

And who is to say that he doesn't?

Cato wrote:His stance on abortion proves otherwise.

What you don't seem to understand Ziggy is that when the President gets on TV and talks so openly about his faith and what it means to him, while he may be doing so to sooth concerns over whether or not he is a Muslim, his primary audience is fellow Christians and what he is doing is basically testifying and as such, is opening himself to the scrutiny of Christians. So while I agree or disagree with Cato about abortion, anyone that has read a Christian bible can easily question the manner in which the President's light is shining whether you agree or not.

Anyone can question anything- and they usually do it mostly when it's about politics. When George Bush said that his favorite historical character was Jesus Christ, I do not recall Keli questioning anything related to that. With Keli and Cato, it's simply all about whether it's a D or an R politician.

Rs get a free pass; Ds get their critical scrutiny.

Cato wrote:

ziggy wrote:

But when HE is the one out there talking about it, HE is the one that is making an issue of it so if he's going to make it a point of discussing HIS faith and HIS religion in the national media, then HE should live accordingly.

And who is to say that he doesn't?

His stance on abortion proves otherwise.

So to be a Christian, one has to agree with you about abortion?

ziggy wrote:Anyone can question anything- and they usually do it mostly when it's about politics. When George Bush said that his favorite historical character was Jesus Christ, I do not recall Keli questioning anything related to that. With Keli and Cato, it's simply all about whether it's a D or an R politician.

Rs get a free pass; Ds get their critical scrutiny.

So. You and TC are the same with religion. If it's anti-religion, it can do no wrong, if it's religion, it's automatically bad.

It is you and Keli and Cato, and not me nor TC, suggesting that Obama's religion is wrong.

I've never suggested, claimed or stated that Obama's religion is wrong. At best, your statement is disingenuous, at worst, an outright lie.

Why resort to such a statement Ziggy?

SheikBen wrote: Having said that, if you are going to look for drunks (for whatever reason), it's a better bet to find them in the bar, and if you are looking for Christians, it's a better bet to find them in church.

Now Michael, we could argue about that until the cows come home, ...... or until you concede, ......... whichever comes first.

I can't tell you how annoying I find it when someone who met his/her love in a bar later on becomes concerned about his/her drinking.

And would it be equally annoying to you when someone who met his/her love in a McDonalds or Burger King or all-you-can-eat buffet restaurant later on becomes concerned about his/her overeating?

Aaron wrote:I've never suggested, claimed or stated that Obama's religion is wrong.

Sure you did:

Aaron wrote:It goes to character and how one's light is shining as a self proclaimed Christian. It's hard to claim you have been led to the light with a primary precept being that you want to be your brother's keeper when your actual brother is living in poverty on less then you spend on a mid morning snack for your kids. Sorry but it just doesn't work that way.

https://gazzfriends.forumotion.com/national-politics-f6/is-he-george-s-keeper-t4878.htm

That's not his religion, that's his walk. I am not suprised you don't know the difference.

Aaron wrote:That's not his religion, that's his walk. I am not suprised you don't know the difference.

And you dare to complain about someone playing "word games" on a public forum board?

His or anyone else's religion is whatever he or she makes of it- about how he or she "walks" with it.

There's no word games involved. Ask a hundrend Christians what their walk is and I'm sure they can explain it to you. Unless of course you close your ears but then you can't blame your ignorance on others.

The thing is, I don't think you are ignorant of what I'm talking about. I'm pretty confident that you know exactly what I am referring to yet you are trying to distort this to further your agenda.

And you want to talk about playing word games.

Please

I have spoken with several hundreds of self-proclaimed Christians over the decades. And the one striking thing I notice is that almost no two of them view human conduct as relates to Christianity the same. There are as many different expressed combinations of how Christianity should affect human conduct as there are life issues to face and people to face them.

The histories of religions are permeated with factionalism. And one reason- probably the main reason- for religious factions is the authoritarian insistence, such as you display here, that this or that religion means one and only one set of one-size-fits-all doctrinal proclamations to everyone who professes a religion.

I disagree. While religions do have factions, one of the very few constants-and I'm not just referring to factions in Christianity but in other religions as well-is in the universal belief of the importance of one's walk.

It's a philosophy that transcends religion and is a part of everyday life in the form of "do as I say, not as I do" and similar philosophies.

Perhaps if you weren't so clouded by your hatred for the topic here, Christianity, you might understand that.

While religions do have factions, one of the very few constants-and I'm not just referring to factions in Christianity but in other religions as well-is in the universal belief of the importance of one's walk.

But as all Christians don't walk the same, and as all Muslims don't walk the same- and as all whatever else does not walk the same- the "constants" are not constant.

Perhaps if you weren't so clouded by your hatred for the topic here, Christianity, you might understand that.

I do not hate Christianity nor any other major religion. But I do challenge the authoritarianism with which virtually all religions are implemented. There seems to be a strong current among religious advocates- especially of supernatural religions- that without rigid doctrines and authoritarian control, that humans, left to their own spiritual consciences, would gravitate away from religion- especially from religions with doctrines of super-natural focus. That somehow seems to be a threat to the power of religious authoritarians.

Maybe so, but President Obama's "Do as I say, not as I Do" type of walk has absolutely NOTHING to do with any of that despite your many attempts to prove otherwise.

Aaron wrote:Maybe so, but President Obama's "Do as I say, not as I Do" type of walk has absolutely NOTHING to do with any of that despite your many attempts to prove otherwise.

One thing so many self-proclaimed Christians have in common is that they say one thing, but do something else. If Obama were not President- a Democratic Party President- you would not pretend to care about what kind of a Christian he is. So that, your post just above, is a political statement, not a statement about his Christianity.