Dnarever wrote on Sep 4
th, 2013 at 9:45am:
RightSadFred wrote on Sep 4
th, 2013 at 9:31am:
Dnarubbish
I know most topics are beyond you, like picking an issue which might gain and lose votes, but you need to ask Rudd why he goes down these paths, he is your leader of the party you worship.
The article was just anti Labor or anti gay marrage spin with no substance. Watch the debate and judge for yourself.
The technicalities in the article were all swayed to suite a false conclusion. Rudd had done well to counter the bible quote with another to refute the claim and the quote he used was relevant and correct.
The argument of lining up two quotes from the bible and saying that one was fair dinkum and the other was just a social statement of the day is ludicrous, maybe they were both just a social comment on the day or possibly neither. It is just how the author wants to spin it.
Rudds following statement saying that Human condition and social positions change about sums it up.
I think it obvious that there was nothing of value on this topic in that article. It was someone's view supported by bending biblical meaning to suit his pre conceived opinion.
The only person bending the bible is Rudd, and most Christians know that.
The bible is like any other topic; it has a mainstream view, then it has many smaller alternative views. Does every scientist believe in climate change? Does every scientist believe that vaccinations are safe? Does every scientist believe that fluoride in water is good for you? No matter the topic, there will always be someone who has a different opinion. Usually most people hold to the mainstream view that the majority of experts support. However, many people who will believe the experts on other issues will happily dismiss the mainstream when it comes to biblical studies. Several people may spend 50 years doing bible reaserch, trying to understand the historical context and looking at all possible views, yet people will happily dismiss that reaserch by finding a verse through google and saying that their interpretation is as good as anyone else's. Rudd totally missed what Paul was saying, but since Rudd also missed what the gospel is on about in his next sentence that is hardly surprising.
Rudd showed every Christian on Monday that he has not read the bible. He complelty misquoted it, and gave one of the weakess summaries of the gospel ever made. He is clearly trying to walk a line of saying "I'm a Christian" while grabbing votes from the non Christians as well. And isn't that what the real question was about? It had nothing to do with gay marriage, but instead was about Christians in Australia not sure anymore on what he actually believes. He says one thing, but he also says and does another and people are now confused on where he stands. His answer on Monday only highlighted these two sides of Kevin. Until Monday he seemed like a Christian trying to win the non Christian vote. After Q&A he seems like a non Christian trying to keep the Christian vote by simply saying "I'm a committed Christian, I just don't follow Christ or believe the bible". His response would have lost him as many votes as he picked up.