I think you and I agree on this point exactly, and I think ColtsFan was trying to say very nearly the same thing.

nailinmyeye on October 22, 2007 at 10:56 PM

It appears that my comments have been misunderstood.

Nailinmyeye, you are correct in understanding exactly where I was coming from. I share much agreement already with the previous commentators. My HA friends already know that I am not a pacifist at all.

My earlier purpose was only to point out the Scriptural principle that our conversation (our respectful tone, our humble, Christ-honoring attitude, and words) must model and reflect Jesus Christ. (James 3 “taming the tongue”, Colossians 3, Ephesians 4, Matthew 12:37, etc)

If a rapist seeks forgiveness from Christ, that’s fine and dandy – but he needs to pay his debts to society in the process and not just walk off. Only then will he truly be forgiven for the hurt he’s caused people.

Ryan Gandy on October 22, 2007 at 7:56 PM

I think you and I agree on this point exactly, and I think ColtsFan was trying to say very nearly the same thing.

Cheers.

nailinmyeye on October 22, 2007 at 2:13 PM

I didn’t say I excused the name calling. Read my post again.

That might have been worded just a little better,

I simply stated – if you’ll follow the conversation by a couple of posts back – that I too am tired of Christians who think the love that Jesus was good at showing nullifies everything else about God. The kinds that storm off in a huff, or … read this … engage in name calling! – when they realize the Bible can’t be re-written as and only as Matthew 7:1.

If a rapist seeks forgiveness from Christ, that’s fine and dandy – but he needs to pay his debts to society in the process and not just walk off. Only then will he truly be forgiven for the hurt he’s caused people.

The Golden Rule

Matt 7:12 Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

We have to read this in context of what Jesus says about who can do (and how it done) truly Good things to others.

Romans 3:22 The righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.

This “Good”, often called righteousness, only comes from the father.

The problem with the Golden Rule is those who mis-interpret tthis to say that Man must do good works through their own power or merit. But this is contrary to Jesus saying that good works can only come from God through Faith in Christ.

It is not us who do good works for our neighbors, but God who does good works for our neighbors through us.

If we find ourselves doing bad works, then God is not influencing us. And if we are doing good works in order to glorify ourselves, then we are not glorifying God who works good through us.

Point is this:

The proper interpretation of the Gold Rule is, therefore, we must do unto others (to God’s glory) what we would have our neighbors do unto us (to God’s glory).

Just doing good in and of itself doesn’t gain brownie points with God. Especially if we are doing them for the sole purpose of making ourselves look good in the eyes of others, and thereby assuming a self-rightous position in the eyes of God.

Remember folks. Biblical salvation and all the good that comes from it is not about us. It is aboput Christ.

Which again, for the record as I have stated before, in so doing, I am treating – in this case the pacifists – as I would like to be treated, therefore fulfilling the Golden Rule.

By that reading of the golden rule, a masochist might feel obliged to inflict pain on others since he himself wants to be treated that way. Many Christian teachers refine the reading of the rule as such: “do unto others, wherever possible, as they want to be done by.” Colts Fan was suggesting that a level of mutual respect is, not only Christian, but also helpful in exchanging points of view.

If “Christian” conservatives turn up their noses at Romney just because he is a Mormon, then they deserve each and every bad thing President Hillary will do to them.

WasatchMan on October 22, 2007 at 4:08 PM

I’m pretty confident that his flip-flops and pandering style is more responsible for people- Christian conservatives included- turning up their noses at Romney than his Mormonism.

Huck is a minister and now they want to bounce him for one bad pardon? Good lord.

Allahpundit on October 22, 2007 at 10:12 AM

Like they gave Dukakis a pass on a weekend pass?

They concluded that Huckabee may not be “Christian enough” because he showed compassion?

High Desert Wanderer on October 22, 2007 at 10:04 AM

Compassion for whom? Not the general public that is for sure. Makes me think of his attitude toward illegals. Dukakis was toast when it came out that he gave a weekend pass to a murderer.

I think that Huckabee just likes to feed his own holy self-righteous ego and never mind at who’s expense.

Then, referring to Mr. Huckabee, he said, “He’s finished, I think. Bad things will be coming out about him,” referring to long-standing accusations surrounding Mr. Huckabee’s clemency for a rapist who later murdered someone in another state…

If a democrat or a liberal had done that, whatever he did there, he/she/it would be pilloried on this board without mercy and probably deservedly so.

Mcguyver on October 22, 2007 at 1:50 PM,
How does that intersect with what you said to ColtsFan? Just curious.
…ColtsFan, who has done nothing but try to bring a balanced Biblical perspective to this conversation?
nailinmyeye on October 22, 2007 at 2:13 PM

ColtsFan, tried to say there is a difference here between government and ones personal life, to wit:

” One should not confuse the Biblical distinction between the roles relegated to the individual and the role relegated to the government.
ColtsFan on October 22, 2007 at 10:51 AM

He’s absolutely wrong in this case, because neither has the authority to forgive sins.
ColtsFan (and he mirrors a lot of so called pacifist Christians) attempts to sound superior with his analysis here and for such I have reserved, appropriately so, special names that I only use for pale-faced pacifists.

Also notice that I didn’t direct my first comment to ColtsFan here, at 11:34 AM, rather, I merely quoted you, nailinmyeye on October 22, 2007 at 11:15 AM and then ColtsFan interjected here, with the standard pacifist Christian rhetoric, to wit:

Remember, it was Jesus himself who emphasized that Christ-like love was the greatest philosophical argument for Christianity.
ColtsFan on October 22, 2007 at 11:56 AM

So at that point I didn’t care what else he said, because he clearly was in the camp of a pacifist.

Unless of course he was trying to say that I’m being “unchristian” by calling pacifists special names.

Which again, for the record as I have stated before, in so doing, I am treating – in this case the pacifists – as I would like to be treated, therefore fulfilling the Golden Rule.
Because, if I was being as stupid as the pacifists, I would want someone to do whatever it takes to try and knock some sense into me.

So, if ColtsFan is truly not a pacifist, then my name calling clearly was not meant for him.

How does that intersect with what you said to ColtsFan? Just curious.

and

Ryan Gandy on October 22, 2007 at 1:26 PM

You don’t blame Mcguyver for calling ColtsFan names? ColtsFan, who has done nothing but try to bring a balanced Biblical perspective to this conversation?

Seriously?

In order for the RRs to maintain their mythical control they’ve got to get out in front of the GOP loss and take responsibility. Otherwise, people will look at the demographics and see many who normally vote Republican soured on the Party due to incompetent handling of the war and social conservative overreach.

nailinmyeye on October 22, 2007 at 1:03 PM

One cannot, be a Christian and pretend to play God by forgiving/providing clemency for sins (or, support those who play God).

Forgiving sins is entirely in God’s domain through Christ.

nailinmyeye on October 22, 2007 at 1:03 PM

That might have been worded just a little better, but I honestly don’t blame him. There are too many self-professed “Christians” today that are more concerned with political correctness and what the world will think of them than what God will think of them.

And if you get on their bad side, whoo boy.

In which case why should it stop a Christian group from supporting him?

Allahpundit on October 22, 2007 at 11:17 AM

Because it led to rape and murder? Religion can be used for many purposes, and can be interpreted a million different ways to be used for a billion different ends. Don’t we criticize moderate Muslims for not critizing militant Muslims? But I guess they shouldn’t criticize militant Muslims, right? Because they are acting on Muslim principles?

I agree with your overall argument, by the way AP, but they should not necessarily support his pardon decision either, just because they are Christians. Just my perspective.

I just checked out your new web site. I have not been there in a long while. Nice updated, look.

You have restored credibility to Blogger web design.

:-)

It’s obvious that you are a Christian-in-name-only, better-than-thou, pandering pacifist.

Mcguyver on October 22, 2007 at 12:36 PM

If you are a Christian, and not a troll trying to make trouble, I would think you might want to apologize for that.

Yes, we are.

Our nation, which is based on Judeo-christian principles, elects leaders to protect us from enemies foreign and domestic. For such a leader to provide clemency to a murderer is to disobey his sworn duty, and those who support such a leader are deranged followers.

Ahem.

Mcguyver on October 22, 2007 at 12:36 PM

Wow. Just…wow.