Able Track Rd

~ PNW Girl ~

[David Smith @DSStocks13]

@realstewpeters To pretend she didn’t know his true feelings was a huge misstep in her grift. With all of the video evidence available, it was really dumb to try to change Charlie’s narrative on the Iran situation for a few shekels.

[Fr Calvin Robinson ©️®️ @calvinrobinson]

Can an American explain this to me, please?

I can come to the United States and criticise America all day long.

But if I criticise Israel the government will take my visa?

Why Israel? Why not the USA? Why not your other allies?

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@Joshua_the_car Oh it’s more than just her.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@AngelIsFBPW @conservmillen Amen. The Old Covenant finds its fulfillment in Christ. That’s historic Christian theology.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@OreoCat22734 @conservmillen That’s an argument for a shared civilizational heritage, not for a theological category. If you’re describing Western culture, fine. If you’re describing Christian doctrine, “Christian” is the precise term.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@Petty_Pundit @conservmillen No one is confused about the Old Testament. The question has always been about the hyphen. If Christ fulfills the Law and the Prophets, what doctrine is added by saying “Judeo-Christian” instead of simply “Christian”? That’s the question no one seems willing to answer.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@JonAlden1620 @IciMayaDAX @conservmillen Christianity cannot be understood without Israel. It also cannot be reduced to Judaism. Christ fulfilled the Law and established the New Covenant—that’s THE central Christian claim. Amen, it has been said unto you.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@JonAlden1620 @IciMayaDAX @conservmillen No Christian disputes our roots in Israel. The question is whether post-Temple Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity are theologically interchangeable. The New Testament says they are not.

[jayweidner37 @jayweidner37]

I think Turning Point now realizes that Charlie was using Candace as his kill switch.

He told her everything.

That explains the hostility directed towards her.

They must be scrambling.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@DrFrankTurek The irony is hard to miss. Telling Christians not to scratch itching ears while many believe you chose institutional comfort over loyalty to a friend.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@WordBubbles @RMiller13314049 @ReggieRB24 @conservmillen That’s precisely what’s being challenged. Christianity doesn’t teach that it is Judaism plus the New Testament. It teaches the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets in Christ (Matt. 5:17; Heb. 8). “Judeo-Christian” is a political descriptor, not a theological one.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@notyourmamafool @conservmillen Insults don’t establish doctrine. Christianity has produced creeds, catechisms, and confessions for 2,000 years. Surely you can explain one hyphenated term without outsourcing the answer to a podcast.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@dsummer69 @conservmillen If the answer is clear, it should be easy to summarize. “Go watch my podcast” isn’t a theological argument. I’m asking for one sentence: what doctrine does “Judeo-Christian” communicate that “Christian” does not?

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@RealRichardBail @conservmillen Romans doesn’t answer the question I’m asking. It explains the relationship between Jews and Gentiles in salvation history. It does not explain what theological distinction the modern label “Judeo-Christian” adds beyond simply saying “Christian.”

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@parteagirl @conservmillen St. Paul summarized the Gospel in a few paragraphs. The Nicene Creed summarizes the faith in a few lines. I’m simply asking for the theological distinction in the same spirit of clarity. “It’s somewhere in my podcast” is an appeal to faux authority, not an argument.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@JohnJoeMerwin @conservmillen You’re describing the significance of ethnic Israel in salvation Hx. No one disputes that. You still haven’t answered the Q: what doctrine is communicated by “Judeo-Christian” that isn’t already communicated by “Christian”? Romans 11 doesn’t require a new theological category.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@ctmancix @conservmillen "Go consume hours of my content" isn't a rebuttal. It's an advertisement. A sound theological argument should fit in a paragraph. The apostles managed it. The Church Fathers managed it. Why can't she? No one is asking for a new answer.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@Woefkardoef @conservmillen I don’t mind listening. I’m happy to engage with arguments. I’m less interested in appeals to “go consume my content.” A summary shouldn’t be difficult if the point is clear. If the argument is compelling, it should survive a concise explanation.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@RMiller13314049 @ReggieRB24 @conservmillen That’s the very point under debate. Christians don’t merely add the New Testament to Judaism. Christianity is the fulfillment of the Old Covenant in Christ. “Judeo-Christian” can obscure that fundamental theological distinction.

[Able Track Rd @AbleTrackRd]

@JohnJoeMerwin @conservmillen You’ve answered “Who were Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?” No one disputed that. The unanswered question remains: what doctrine is communicated by “Judeo-Christian” that isn’t already communicated by simply saying “Christian”?