Will Conservatives Tell Palin to Practice What They Preach?

The better question is should a Christian who leads a congregation lead a nation?

In regards to politics and holding public office, what are Jesus Christ’s teachings?
When Jesus was on earth, thousands of honest hearted people recognized, not just his greatness, but his concern for others. It’s no surprise that they wanted to make him king.
(John 6:10, 14, 15) 10 “Jesus said: “Have the men recline as at meal.” Now there was a lot of grass in the place. Therefore the men reclined, about five thousand in number…. 14 Hence when the men saw the signs he performed, they began to say: “This is for a certainty the prophet that was to come into the world.” 15 Therefore Jesus, knowing they were about to come and seize him to make him king, withdrew again into the mountain all alone.”
Jesus declined to get involved in politics.
Jesus' response was based on at least three factors: his Father's view of expressions of human self-determination, which include human rule; Jesus' awareness that there are powerful, hidden forces working against even the best human efforts at rulership; and God's purpose to establish a heavenly government to rule over the entire earth.
His Father’s view: The lamentable record of human self-rule confirms the truthfulness of Jeremiah 10:23: "I well know, O Jehovah, that to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step." History has proved that humans do not have the capacity to rule successfully without their Creator.
Jesus fully agreed. Independence from God was loathsome to him. "I do nothing of my own initiative," he said. "I always do the things pleasing to [God]." (John 4:34; 8:28, 29) With no divine authorization to receive kingship from humans, Jesus did not even consider accepting it. This does not mean, however, that he was reluctant to help his fellowman. On the contrary, he did all in his power to assist people to find the greatest happiness then and in the future. He even gave his life for mankind. (Matthew 5:3-11; 7:24-27; John 3:16) But Jesus knew that "for everything there is an appointed time," including God's time to assert his sovereignty over mankind. (Ecclesiastes 3:1; Matthew 24:14, 21, 22, 36-39)

Jesus kept out of politics because he was aware of powerful, hidden forces.
Satan, the world's secret ruler, the Bible tells us, offered Jesus "all the kingdoms of the world and their glory" in exchange for one act of worship. (Matthew 4:8-10) Jesus was offered world rulership—but on the Devil's terms. Satan could actually make such an offer because, as Jesus himself called the Devil, he is "the ruler of the world". (John 14:30). The apostle Paul described him as "the god of this system of things." (2 Corinthians 4:4; Ephesians 6:12).
Jesus did not fall prey to this temptation. Jesus knew that the Devil does not have mankind's best interests at heart. He described Satan as "a murderer" and as "the father of lies and of all that is false." (John 8:44). A world "lying in the power" of a wicked spirit can never be truly happy. (1 John 5:19) But the Devil will not have this authority indefinitely. Jesus will shortly depose Satan and completely eliminate his influence.(Hebrews 2:14; Revelation 20:1-3).
A third reason why Jesus stayed out of politics is that he knew that at a future set time, God would establish a heavenly government to rule over the earth. The Bible calls this government God's Kingdom, and it was the main theme of Jesus' teaching. (Luke 4:43; Revelation 11:15) Jesus taught his disciples to pray for that Kingdom to come, for only under its rule will 'God's will be done on earth as it is in heaven.' (Matthew 6:9, 10)
Daniel 2:44 says, "In the days of those kings [ruling at the end of the present system] the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these [man-made] kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite." God's Kingdom will have to "crush" earthly rulerships because these insist on perpetuating the God-defying spirit of self-determination promoted by Satan back in the garden of Eden. In addition to working against mankind's best interests, those who strive to perpetuate that spirit put themselves on a collision course with the Creator. (Psalm 2:6-12; Revelation 16:14, 16)

Jesus always did things God's way. Instead of choosing an independent course and trying to prop up or improve the existing system of things by political means, he worked hard to advance the interests of God's Kingdom, the only solution to the world's ills.

God's Kingdom is the real key to a truly happy world, and the message announcing it is rightly described as good news.

In order to help people make an informed decision about rulership, Jesus commissioned his disciples to preach the "good news of the kingdom . . . in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations" before the end of the present system comes. (Matthew 24:14)

This is the message all true Christians should preach: God’s Kingdom is the only solution to the world’s problems.

JDUDE wrote: God appointed a female judge over the jews but specifically excluded women from the priesthood.

Whether it was God or not, the electrical polarity of males is positive, while females are the negative polarity. When blessing is given (or call it power, or energy or whatever you call that which a priest receives from on high) it comes to the positive polarity of
the male priest, and is then distributed to the faithful, men and women.

It is as simple and as obscure as that. Some day, the balance of positive and negative will be achieved and women will take their places in full equality with males. It would help this process if males would adjust their attitudes toward females.

Since we all reincarnate as males, then females, there is no reason to feel superior or inferior...

I think I already explained that. But I will try again and type slower for you - one is a spiritual office that God specifically allocated to men, the other is a political office that God did not specifically allocate to men.

JDUDE wrote:
"... Women can hold any position, in or out of the church, except the priesthood."

Please tell us why discrimination against women is OK for the preisthood but not for the presidency?

And please don't just quote the bible, explain it in your own words.

This has to be the most anti-christian site I've ever seen and the contributors don't seem to know anything about what the bible teaches. There is no hypocrisy in having a woman hold political office but not the office of priest. God appointed a female judge over the jews but specifically excluded women from the priesthood. One is a political office and one is a spiritual office. The verse from 1 Timothy is referring to the church, not a political office. Women can hold any position, in or out of the church, except the priesthood.

I see that the toddlers are still playing in this pen. They are cute at first, but isn't it time for their naps?

elephant usa free juicy elephant go

german car jhon sea america

dear Hillary supporter for Palin

Hopefully you're not for real and are just a "good Christian" republican troll thinking your little essay might sway some women's votes.

One thing, for sure, you're not a moderate Democrat -- or you don't know what that means, because if you were, you'd never vote for a right-wing republican like Palin whose views are so different from yours.

I had previously posted part of this comment in response to Sally Quinn's question.
The question:
Women can be presidents but not pastors? I don't understand. I would like somebody to explain this to me.
My response:
The answer is related to the concept best presented by St. Augustine a few years ago.
The christian, according to the bible, is "in the world, but not of the world". In other words, their faith is to be integrated into their life to the point that things of God(faith) supercede the "pragmatism" of the world and it's concerns.
St. Augustine descibed this concept as two cities; The City of Man and The City of God.
The Christian resides in both.
The City of Man would include the areas of civic reponsibility. The City of God includes the responsibilties to God.
Therefore a woman may be a candidate for president; a civic office. And a woman may not be a candidate for pastor; a spiritual office.
Some will criticise this as a 'false dichotomy' allowing avoidance of a charge of hypocricy. However the dual nature of humans (spiritual and carnal) requires a choice of which will be the dominant guidance. This choice does not remove the subordinate nature. Christians (or more precisely, disciples of Christ) daily must deliberate between "pragmatism" and God's Sovereignty.

Of course there are those who debate the prohibition of a woman holding a pastor's (ordained) position, but the orthodox christian position is a more literal interpretation of God's word contained in scripture.

Folks,
If Jim Anderson is a retired Episcopal priest and he is concerned with women speaking up in church, he should not be looking at Sarah!! but at his own church. After all, what Timothy wrote concerned the Church not the State.

So, Jim, is it "hypocrisy" for the Episcopal Church to have a woman Presiding Bishop in Katherine Jefferts Schori? If not, then your whole question is just another cheap set up by a liberal trying to make an issue out of Sarah!!'s candidacy when there is no legitimate question. Go Sarah!!

Larry: Paul was in error? Really? As it was, the woman was deceived and the man, Adam, tempted. This, then, is the basis of the argument set forth by the Apostle.

I appreciate your defense of reason, as against what my church calls fideism. I also appreciate your raising a substantive claim that is actually worthy of serious consideration, namely, that 1 Tim 2:12 offers obligatory advice against permitting women to rule (or, for that matter, to teach men).

Looking at the RSV of this text, I discovered, first, that St. Paul expresses this in a personal way. In particular, the subject of the sentence is "I". The RSV has it, "I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent." Obviously, Paul believed that, in this, he was setting a proper example. To back up his claim, however, he seems to have made an error. Verse 14 states, "and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor." Unfortunately for Paul, the account of the Fall in Genesis 3 strongly suggests otherwise, that Adam, too, was deceived. Indeed, the whole context of Paul's remarks suggest he is focusing on the need for prayer and virtue, and he is getting into trouble by injecting his personal views. Clearly, there is no nuance, here, in his views about the role of women.

The tradition of the Catholic Church does not accept this view, as stated. Neither do I.

I do not regard my views on this to be a rationalization. Do you?

Yet another Episcopal priest who has confused a calling to the collar with a calling for a pension.

Many of us who voted for Hillary are moderate/conservative blue-color/middle-class working women whom have climbed the ladder similar to Palin. And yes, an active christian, who not perfect, made sure that I and my children were in church most every Sunday.

As a woman who started as an enlisted Airman (E-1) in the Air Force to get a college degree, I was able to rise to the commissioned rank of Captain in the Air National. In my civilian job, I started as a GS-3 and have worked up to a GS-15 in federal law enforcement. Both careers were non-traditional for women.

I know what it takes to raise a family, get a master's degree at night school, be in the National Guard and be deployed away from my children for extended periods of time, have a full-time job, raise two daughters and put them through college as a divorced single mother.

Yes, I admire Hillary and it took a village to help me raise my kids down this path. But the fact is, Hillary is not in the race. Palin is and I like Palin and am proud to be casting my vote to her. 18 million cracks is not enough. I want the ceiling busted. And, a win for Palin will be a sybmol of that for me.

It is unfortunate that Obama had to act like a jr. high bully and not appreciate the importance of putting Hillary on the democratic ticket. I won't vote for Obama. His lack in judgement on that one issue lost my vote. And political or othewise, McCain was wise enough to take a chance and select Palin. Wow! Talk about breaking the ceiling in the Republican Party!

Although, I consider myself a moderate Democrat, my daughters are registered Republicans. One attends a Southern Baptist Church and one attends an Independent Baptist Church. They are working women and positive role models to both myself and others.

I think that time will show that Sarah has a huge problem with the 9th Commandment, Thy Shall Not Bear False Witness. The possiblity that Trig, the child with Down's Sydrome, is hers, is quite slim!

Check out an objective analysis of the situation here:
http://www.ourchiropractic.com/sarah-bristol-fake-pregnancy-hoax-links.html