The Race For 2024

[ZiprHead]

So....today I was speaking to a women who is in her 50s, who does aerobics with my group at the senior center. She was bitching about Trump and said he should be removed from office. I agreed and asked if she had voted for him. "No, I never vote because Jesus is Lord". WTF! I'm not giving up yet. If I see her on Monday, I might try and convince her that being a Christian doesn't mean you shouldn't vote and tell her that my evangelical parents always voted, and in fact, they voted for Democrats. I might tell her if she doesn't vote, she has no right to complain, but of course, I'll do it as gently as possible.

Any ideas on how to convince someone like her to vote, or is she a hopeless case?

Tell her voting Democratic might help her lord Jesus dump Trump.

That's sort of what I've been thinking of since she thinks Trump is an incompetent narcissist etc. It just seems as if she isn't open minded regarding voting. If she is willing to have a friendly conversation about voting, perhaps I can convince her to vote. My little goal is to try to get more apathetic people who never vote or who never vote in the midterms to consider how important it is to vote.

Maybe offer to go with her if she's never done it before. Or demonstrate a sample ballot for her.

 

[southernhybrid]

Maybe offer to go with her if she's never done it before. Or demonstrate a sample ballot for her.

That's not a bad idea, but first I must find a way to convince her of the importance of voting. Maybe I'll gently ask her what her religious beliefs have to do with voting and does she think that Jesus would approve of Trump and if not, wouldn't he want her to vote to in an attempt to reduce his influence on the country and help keep her son from going to war? After all, wasn't he called the Prince of Peace? Anyway....if I have any luck, I'll share it. Somehow I think this might be a hopeless endeavor.

 

[unapologetic]

It's not cluelessness. It's revenge on "woke".

Is it too woke to point out that Rump only won against women.

Any ideas on how to convince someone like her to vote, or is she a hopeless case?

Probably hopeless. But point out that 'president' is beneath jesus. Therefor needs to be a human. jesus only appoints kings. Therefor presidents need to be elected by us humans.
Voting for a president does not deny jesus.

 

[Tigers!]

So....today I was speaking to a women who is in her 50s, who does aerobics with my group at the senior center. She was bitching about Trump and said he should be removed from office. I agreed and asked if she had voted for him. "No, I never vote because Jesus is Lord". WTF! I'm not giving up yet. If I see her on Monday, I might try and convince her that being a Christian doesn't mean you shouldn't vote and tell her that my evangelical parents always voted, and in fact, they voted for Democrats. I might tell her if she doesn't vote, she has no right to complain, but of course, I'll do it as gently as possible.

Any ideas on how to convince someone like her to vote, or is she a hopeless case?

I have never met a Christian who doesn't vote because Jesus is Lord. Must be a USA thing.

Tell if she does not vote she has no reason to complain if she does not like the results.

 

[unapologetic]

Tell if she does not vote she has no reason to complain if she does not like the results.

The results are 'god's will' so she doesn't have the courage to complain. (... to anyone but an infidel like Sothernhybrid.)

 

[TSwizzle]

Tampon Tim is such a clown.

 

[WAB]

So....today I was speaking to a women who is in her 50s, who does aerobics with my group at the senior center. She was bitching about Trump and said he should be removed from office. I agreed and asked if she had voted for him. "No, I never vote because Jesus is Lord". WTF! I'm not giving up yet. If I see her on Monday, I might try and convince her that being a Christian doesn't mean you shouldn't vote and tell her that my evangelical parents always voted, and in fact, they voted for Democrats. I might tell her if she doesn't vote, she has no right to complain, but of course, I'll do it as gently as possible.

Any ideas on how to convince someone like her to vote, or is she a hopeless case?

I have never met a Christian who doesn't vote because Jesus is Lord. Must be a USA thing.

I never heard a Christian say that, either. And I've lived in Arizona, one of the most conservative US states, for 37 years. This place is full of rich (to me) Trumpers and there are more churches than bars. I've yet to hear a Christian person say they didn't vote.

 

[Politesse]

Much more theologically consistent than voting for a president two days after paying monetary tribute to a King. I know quite a few Christians who abstain from voting, because I know a lot of Jehovah's Witnesses and they aren't supposed to vote. I was involved with a Friends (Quaker) community in Berkeley for whom the issue was a running debate as well.

 

[Emily Lake]

Much more theologically consistent than voting for a president two days after paying monetary tribute to a King

What does this mean?

 

[Politesse]

Much more theologically consistent than voting for a president two days after paying monetary tribute to a King

What does this mean?

You've never heard of an offering plate? Those are technically supposed to be offerings to God, never mind that the church actually makes off with them.

 

[Emily Lake]

Much more theologically consistent than voting for a president two days after paying monetary tribute to a King

What does this mean?

You've never heard of an offering plate? Those are technically supposed to be offerings to God, never mind that the church actually makes off with them.

Probably would have helped if you actually said that instead of making a vague and obfuscated reference on the assumption that everyone can read your mind. Clear communication is a good thing, speaking in code is ineffective and pointless.

 

[laughing dog]

Much more theologically consistent than voting for a president two days after paying monetary tribute to a King

What does this mean?

You've never heard of an offering plate? Those are technically supposed to be offerings to God, never mind that the church actually makes off with them.

Probably would have helped if you actually said that instead of making a vague and obfuscated reference on the assumption that everyone can read your mind. Clear communication is a good thing, speaking in code is ineffective and pointless.

I got the reference right away.

 

[Emily Lake]

Much more theologically consistent than voting for a president two days after paying monetary tribute to a King

What does this mean?

You've never heard of an offering plate? Those are technically supposed to be offerings to God, never mind that the church actually makes off with them.

Probably would have helped if you actually said that instead of making a vague and obfuscated reference on the assumption that everyone can read your mind. Clear communication is a good thing, speaking in code is ineffective and pointless.

I got the reference right away.

Not having gone to a church service since I was 5, I didn’t. Especially because it’s clouded by the whole “king” thing.

 

[Politesse]

Much more theologically consistent than voting for a president two days after paying monetary tribute to a King

What does this mean?

You've never heard of an offering plate? Those are technically supposed to be offerings to God, never mind that the church actually makes off with them.

Probably would have helped if you actually said that instead of making a vague and obfuscated reference on the assumption that everyone can read your mind. Clear communication is a good thing, speaking in code is ineffective and pointless.

I got the reference right away.

Not having gone to a church service since I was 5, I didn’t. Especially because it’s clouded by the whole “king” thing.

The "king thing" is what we were discussing in the thread - the inherent contradiction between theocracy and democracy. Most Americans explain away that distinction somehow and vote anyway. But it is not a theologically consistent position to take. Christianity is a monarchic faith, not democratic. The verse says "every knee shall bow", not "every voter shall have a say." An Australian has the excuse, at least, of being obliged by law to vote. But a Christian in the US has no excuse at all for seeking political power, nor supporting those who do. They are trying to "serve two masters", in Christian terms, their Lord and their local representative.

 

[Emily Lake]

]
Not having gone to a church service since I was 5, I didn’t. Especially because it’s clouded by the whole “king” thing.

The "king thing" is what we were discussing in the thread - the inherent contradiction between theocracy and democracy. Most Americans explain away that distinction somehow and vote anyway. But it is not a theologically consistent position to take. Christianity is a monarchic faith, not democratic. The verse says "every knee shall bow", not "every voter shall have a say." An Australian has the excuse, at least, of being obliged by law to vote. But a Christian in the US has no excuse at all for seeking political power, nor supporting those who do. They are trying to "serve two masters", in Christian terms, their Lord and their local representative.

I don’t think that’s true, I don’t think it’s supported by Christian doctrine, definite not by Protestant doctrine. Render unto Caesar and all that. Generally, Christianity assumes the ruler of the state is not the leader of the church.

There hasn’t really been a Christian theocracy since the Byzantine. Technically Vatican City I guess, but since the only residents are literally part of the church, it’s kind of a weird one.

On the other hand… several Muslim theocracies are currently operating right now, and those theocracies strongly believe that the entire planet should be subject to Islamic religious rule.

 

[bilby]

Christianity is a monarchic faith, not democratic. The verse says "every knee shall bow", not "every voter shall have a say." An Australian has the excuse, at least, of being obliged by law to vote.

Australians live in a monarchy, too.

We do, however, keep our king on a small island on the opposite side of the planet, which is quite effective in limiting the harm he can do to our democracy.

 

[bilby]

Generally, Christianity assumes the ruler of the state is not the leader of the church.

That is mostly true today, except in England, Vatican City, and (until 2017) Norway.

However, European Christianity was, until the reformation, more of a federal system, with the Pope as the supreme imperial power, and kings as the local governors in each nation state. The holder of supreme political power in Western Christian countries was, from its founding until the seccession of various Protestant factions, the holder of supreme religious power (at least, that was the official line - disputes over this were ultimately one of the causes of Protestantism, particularly in England).

So your "generally" is true-ish if we only consider the present; But not if we consider the entire history of Christianity.

 

[Politesse]

Christianity is a monarchic faith, not democratic. The verse says "every knee shall bow", not "every voter shall have a say." An Australian has the excuse, at least, of being obliged by law to vote.

Australians live in a monarchy, too.

We do, however, keep our king on a small island on the opposite side of the planet, which is quite effective in limiting the harm he can do to our democracy.

True, that. But at least the divine right of kings doesn't violate the basic order of the universe by allowing citizens to participate in their own governance. The king is the head of the church, and the Godhead rules the king, power and authority flowing ever downward from the heavens. What it is never supposed to do is flow up.

 

[Politesse]

Render unto Caesar and all that.

Does not mean that one should vote for Caesar, and it certainly wasn't an argument to overthrow Caesar and hand power back to the Senate or Sanhedrin. Quite the opposite. That was an argument for paying taxes and keeping their head down, not becoming a democratic political faction.

 

[Politesse]

On the other hand… several Muslim theocracies are currently operating right now, and those theocracies strongly believe that the entire planet should be subject to Islamic religious rule.

Based on... wait for it... mostly, the exact same Scriptures. Plus a famous little corrective coda of course, but the Holy Qur'an does not add in the heavenly endorsement of kingship, if anything it mediates it slightly by introducing the concept of ijna, consensus-building, to its portrait of a just king. No, Muslims are not monarchic because the Prophet (pbuh) invented kings. Islam is monarchic because Abrahamic religions are ALL monarchic, and they all tell the same stories about Abraham and his descendants to justify the rightness of that shared institution. The Hebrew God, who became in time the Christian and Muslim god, has never once offered to share power with mortals. Human authority is permitted only insomuch as the divine will is being communicated through it. Read your Bible, sometime! You'll be surprised how little of what the book says resembles what Christians claim to believe.

Mind you, concerning your portrayal of the present, I am not aware of any living Muslim state that invests all political and religious authority in one monarch. Like the Christendom, the Dar al-Islam has struggled to convince any modern populace that a unchecked autocrat is safe or desirable. Republics may not be Biblical, but they are very, very popular in our century.