Re: [TruthTalk] Interesting Article

[Knpraise]

Jonathan,  you have read much to much emotion into my posting on this issue.   You need to go back into the archives with the question "what are the scriptures Smithson used to convict Clinton and sanction the Republican right?"   Seriously.   You are not going to find any such thing from my posts.  I do not use scripture to bulster my political views.    I do believe that Bill Clinton has value in the sight of the Lord and to the same degree as any child of God.  I do not believe that such value-added statements mean that he was a good President or a moral man.   I do not believe that my political view (and contrary to popular belief, I am conservative but not right wing) finds me more in God's pleasure than those who think differently or are identified by "liberal" or even "Canadian."  

As President, there have been much worse,   in terms of what was actually accomplished.  Nixon remains the most immoral of all Presidents in my lifetime in my opinion and Ford the most unaccomplished.   Both Republicans I might add.   I voted  Democrat until Carter's second run for office.   He was and is a pacifist.   He had no business being President.   A wonderful man (to this day) but without a clue.  I voted for him the first and very much believed in him.  

Specifically and in regard to Clinton, I will say again that salvation issues and politics are very different considerations.   I am allowed to be a conservative.   And I am allowed to be wrong.  And I am allowed to have judgments and opinions about my political leaders.    I personally do not like to mix politics and religion and in the future, I will stand down when it comes up.  

If you were one of my boys, I would tell you take a pill and let it go.   I would also apologize for couching my opinions so forcefully as to allow you to feel put upon and I do   -- apologize.   Your contribution to this forum is considerable and, at times, refreshing.   Your emotions are much closer to the surface than many and in the future, I will take that into consideration as I write.   But you must allow for disagreement in a forum such as this.   And you must allow this disagreement to be the product of deep conviction.   To refuse this conflict is to disallow honest exchange. And we need to be honest with each other   emotions and all.   I cannot believe that you disagree with this.   I am asking you to be more forgiving in your thinking (and by that I mean to convey a picture of bending without breaking).   Assume the best on the part of those who disagree.   I  for one, will address my posts to your concerns with a little more sensitivity. 

Let's get back to the message of Christ, putting our hands to plow, forgetting to look to past.   You complimented me in my defense of JudyT.   What you do not know is that I found her writing quite abrasive and unforgiving.   But, in time, I came to see the student in Judy Taylor and the conviction for her Lord.   That conviction trumped all other negative concerns and forced me to allow for  her style of writing in the grace of God. I see that same conviction in DavidM, Linda Shields, Lance, Terry, Perry, Slade, DAveH and all.   You need to allow for style and opinion to be subservient to the sense of shared brotherhood in this forum and claimed by those who write and share their thoughts.  I am asking you to do what I have done.   I did not like JudyT at all in the beginning.   But I now consider her to be  part of the family  -- and I have learned from this experience with JudyT to not question the sincerity and brotherly community of those who claim the name of Christ.    Lance, BillT and your comments have helped me to reconsider much of what I believe.   That does not mean "change what I believe" but to reconsider and, in some area, change in deed.    Anyway  --  stay in the group.   Learn and grow.   God works all things for good  --- allow that to happen in this case.   And I will consider my communications to insure a less abrasive stand.  


a friend and a brother

John Smithson















In a message dated 7/7/2004 8:10:35 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

John, a man who commits adultery (even 60 times which of course in Clintonâs case is hogwash) can still be a Christian.  It is no worse a sin than your own hypocrisy.  You have confused moral behaviour with salvation.  Note that I am not claiming that Clinton was/is a Christian, just that your reasoning is flawed.  I expect a lot from you John.  You could be the leader on this forum.  Many of your posts express the heart of God.  If only this same heart would beat in love with your political views.  The compassion you had for Judy is completely missing when you speak politically.  The same thing happens with Izzy and Terry.  Where does your love go?  Why isnât Christ allowed there?  Why eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil?  It isnât filling, and it wonât satisfy your hunger for long.