Similar posts

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

A Christian's life is in constant opposition to the non-Christian outlook and agenda, and as long as a person is a non-Christian, he lives every moment of his life as a rebel against God's kingdom and his people. Therefore, on this spiritual level where things really count,the Christian and the non-Christian maintain a constant hostility against each other. Although this should not translate into physical violence, this does not reduce the enmity between the two. Unthinking people regard physical violence as more dangerous or more worthy of attention, but the conflict on the spiritual/intellectual level runs much deeper, and carries greater long-term influence and significance. This does not mean that you have to be constantly abusive toward unbelievers. However, there must always be a clear awareness of what they are, so that when you interact with them, you will not operate on false assumptions about what kind of people they are and where they stand. Many Christians are often tempted to allow a sense of solidarity with men to override their obligation and allegiance to God. But God is pleased with those who will put him front and center in all that they think and do (Exodus 32:25-29; Numbers 25:3-13; Deuteronomy 13:5-16; Deuteronomy 33:8-11).

A number of hurdles in theology and apologetics exist for many believers because of this – on those issues they stand with men rather than God. Otherwise, there is no reason that a Christian should have any hesitation or difficulty in answering a challenge such as, say, the so-called problem of evil. It has never been a rational problem for Christianity, but when the objection is raised, believers sometimes sympathize with men's bitterness against God, and allow a problem to take root where there should be none. You are generally permitted to associate with unbelievers, but there are biblical restrictions and exceptions, which I cannot enumerate here. In any case, you must no longer behave toward them the way you did before, and you must abandon the idea of maintaining intimate and meaningful relationships with any of them. Since your deepest commitments are now vehemently hostile to theirs, it is no longer possible to have the deepest kind of communication and comradeship with them. Even the closest relationships between Christians and non-Christians must remain superficial. Anyone who disagrees with this either compromises their Christian commitment, or fails to understand what it is to have a truly deep friendship.

This reality finds its most acute expression in the marriage relationship. Now, of course a Christian must not marry a non-Christian, so we are considering a marriage in which one of the two unbelievers converts, or in which a Christian marries a non-Christian in defiance against God's command. Since the marriage relationship is supposed to be the closest possible relationship between two human beings, this is also the closest possible relationship between a believer and an unbeliever, but because such a relationship is doomed to come far short of what marriage is intended to be, it is also the most tragic. In fact, in a relationship where two people are supposed to become one in spirit and in body, these two individuals are divided at the deepest level, torn apart by the vast gulf that separates heaven and hell. This separation is already present and manifest in their daily life, and unless the other person also converts, one day it will become complete and permanent.

In contrast, the marriage vow between two believers is taken from God's own word (Genesis 2, Ephesians 5, etc.) and taken before God as their witness. Their ability to fulfill this vow comes from their constant contact with God's power in sanctification, and their confidence in each other is also derived from this. Just as a Christian relies on the Holy Spirit to sustain his spiritual life, and to grow in knowledge and holiness, he depends on this same power and grace to make progress in his marriage. On the other hand, there is no power and no promise for the non-Christian who takes the marriage vow. He relies on his own moral integrity and ability, and since he has neither of these or at best only an appearance of these, his marriage and all his relationships – like all his thoughts and activities – are without meaning and substance. The question of how much we are to interact with unbelievers is frequently mishandled. People err toward both extremes. There are those who think that we must deliberately disassociate with unbelievers as much as possible, but this extreme is not common in our circle. Rather, there is sometimes a need to correct a misapplication of the teaching that believers are to be "in but not of the world." Some Reformed and Evangelical believers carry this very far, riding on their version of the "cultural mandate," their denial of any "sacred vs. secular" distinction, and the false doctrine of "common grace." This line of thinking is sometimes used to excuse their licentiousness, and their lust for worldly culture, amusements, and associations. But to be "in" the world, or even to be very involved in it, does not mean that we are to embrace and befriend it.

(..)

Our interest here is whether Christians should shun all immoral non-Christians. Paul gives a negative answer, but this comes within the above context and cannot be universally applied without discrimination or qualification. Also, what reason does he offer? And what does his explanation imply? Again, Paul states that it would be impossible to shun all immoral non-Christians, because all non-Christians are immoral people, and they are everywhere. The only way to avoid them is to leave this world. At least in this passage, he does not say that to shun non-Christians is morally wrong in itself – he states only that it is practically impossible to do so. And at least in this passage, he does not say that to associate with non-Christians is in itself a desirable thing, but only that it is a practical necessity. Therefore, based on this passage, one cannot assert that the opposite of not shunning non-Christians is to befriend them and to have intimate and meaningful relationships with them.

Of course there are other reasons to associate with unbelievers. Besides the practical impossibility of avoiding them in social and business transactions, God has commanded us to bear witness to the gospel of Jesus Christ before all people by our words and deeds, through which God will summon to faith those whom he has created and chosen for salvation, and harden those whom he has created and chosen for damnation. But nothing in the entire range of our activities before the world requires us to become intimate friends with unbelievers. And in fact, it would be a spiritual, intellectual, ethical, and practical impossibility to do so – again, unless either the Christian or the non-Christian compromises his deepest commitments, in which case either the Christian is no longer a Christian, or the non-Christian is no longer a non-Christian. Therefore, although it is indeed possible for a Christian to be on friendly terms with a non-Christian on a superficial level, an intimate and profound communion is out of the question.

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

[Regarding 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18: "Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage each other with these words."]

The passage is often read at funerals, with the intent to encourage. However, Paul forbids universal application, since he contrasts the way that Christians should grieve against the way that all others grieve, since the rest of humankind have "no hope." He is writing to Christians about Christians. If the audience includes non-Christians, or if non-Christians are among the dead, then the doctrine is not nearly as comforting. The doctrine should not comfort the non-Christians who mourn, since they will not share in the glory of the return of Christ, or in the resurrection of Christians. And the doctrine should not encourage anyone about the deceased non-Christians, since death spells the commencement of a kind of suffering for them that strains our ability to fathom, although we applaud the justice of it.

Even as Paul addresses those who might be in mourning, and even as he writes to the Christian living about the Christian dead, he makes an attack on the unbelievers. Unless a minister has warrant to assume that he is speaking to Christians about Christians, he is a liar if he applies the doctrine of the glorious resurrection of the saints as if it applies to all in the audience, and at a funeral, as if it applies to the one in the coffin. If the minister is aware that his audience includes non-Christians, and if he is aware that the deceased was an unbeliever, then what excuse does he have to say anything other than, "Look! God is punishing this man – your father, your husband, your son, your friend, this relative of yours – even now...God is punishing him, torturing him, burning him up even now! Your wife, your mother, your sister, your daughter...she is now screaming out in pain and agony! She is crying for help, but there is only endless suffering before her, forever. And if you do not repent, you will likewise perish! Repent, for soon it will be your time to face the Lord!"

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

In other words, since his chosen people are saved from God’s wrath and will therefore never experience this aspect of divine glory, God made the reprobates so that he can show off all that he is by damning them, punishing them, and torturing them in hell. This proceeds from his redemptive love. He does this precisely because he loves those he has chosen to receive his mercy. If I want to show my son how skillful I am with a rifle, I am not going to shoot him in the face with it. No, I will shoot a deer or a bear, whose life is dispensable. And I will do this because I love my son and want him to know more about me.

This is God’s love, and this love always wins, because God always wins. And this means that, because God is love, the reprobates – those who are non-Christians and will remain non-Christians because of God’s foreordination – can never escape hellfire. No matter how hard non-Christians strive to save themselves, God will catch them and send them to hell, where he will actively torture them with endless pain and anguish. God’s love (for himself, for his Son, and for his chosen people) guarantees the eternal damnation and suffering of all non-Christians. He will see to it that it happens.

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

All non-Christians are morons. Many Christians refuse to say this because they have an evil respect for non-Christian scholars, and a false concept of Christian gentleness. In refusing to declare that all non-Christians are stupid, they have denied an important aspect of the Christian faith. The biblical message is that man is both sinful and stupid without Christ. Thus those who deny that non-Christians are stupid also deny that Christ saves us from both our wickedness and our foolishness. This implies that we were intellectually sufficient without salvation from Christ, and that we needed his salvation only from our sinfulness. This is a denial of the saving work of Christ, and amounts to blasphemy.

N/A #fundie vftonline.org

We have already seen that the Christian Theocrats who wrote America's Constitution had no feelings of animosity towards non-Christians. In a Christian nation such as America, people are free to believe whatever they want.

Their actions, however, must conform to Biblical Law. Non-Christian religions have no freedom in a Christian nation to act in ways which violate God's commands. This position was clearly enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court. "Religious freedom" has always been limited to the space between one's ears. And it was Thomas Jefferson who made the distinction between beliefs and actions, and it was Jefferson the Supreme Court quoted in declaring that non-Christian religions do not have absolute religious freedom in America because America is a Christian nation.

Most people never think about these facts. Give it just a little thought. One morning you walk out front to get your newspaper and you see that your pagan next-door neighbor has built an altar on his front lawn and is preparing to rip the beating heart out of his young daughter's chest as a gift to his gods. Will you rescue the child -- and thereby "impose" your religious values on your "devout" neighbor -- or are you a "pluralist?" You're in the voting booth. Candidate A is a Christian and promises to pass laws against murder, theft, and polygamy. Candidate B says he will keep his religion private, and will pass no laws if anyone feels they need to sacrifice their children to Moloch, steal money from Christians to give to the goddess Kali, or accumulate multiple wives for celestial marriage. Who would you vote for? Who would the men who signed the Constitution urge you to vote for?

The "separation of church and state" does not mean the separation of our laws and government from God and true religion. The Supreme Court has declared that America is a Christian nation, and there is only limited freedom for non-Christian religions.

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

The truth of the Christian faith is plain and obvious. There is never a good objection against it, but it should be reverently accepted. And because the truth is plain and obvious, every objection against the Christian faith is always stupid and evil. Because every objection against the Christian faith is stupid and evil, we must attack every objection, and lest it is alleged that we avoid the issue, we should answer it as well. But more than this, it is characteristic of the Bible to attack the person who makes the objection. This is because whenever a person questions the Christian faith, it necessarily means that there is something wrong with the person.

Paul does not say, “O you wonderful and intelligent man, why do you make such an outrageous objection against God?” No, the apostle attacks the man himself – “But who are you, O man, to talk back to God?” This is a rhetorical question – he means that the man is a nobody and should shut his mouth. Paul is not stupid like our preachers and theologians. They tell us that non-Christians can be sincere and intelligent and yet make objections against God. Where did this nonsense come from? Perhaps they learned it from the non-Christians, who are always desperate to assert their sincerity and intelligence. Or perhaps the preachers and theologians wish to compliment their own defiance against God. But Jesus said that the mouth speaks out of the abundance of the heart. The non-Christian makes objections because he is a sinner, a rebel – he does not just act like one, but he is one. Any Christian who makes a meaningful contribution in preaching and debate must criticize and belittle the person – the non-Christian himself – and not just his arguments and his actions.

Who are you, O non-Christian, to challenge the truth of God, when the Bible declares that you already know about him? Like a coward, like a traumatized little child, you repress this knowledge so that you do not need to deal with reality. Who are you to reject a guilty verdict when the Bible shows that all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God? You retort, “Who are you to judge me?” Well, who are you to tell me that I may not declare God’s judgment upon you? Who are you to decline the gospel? You are nobody. You are nothing.

...

Away with all of you! God exercises complete and immediate control over all things, including the decisions and destinies of all men. Just as he molds his chosen ones into his masterpieces, he molds the reprobates into receptacles of rubbish and feces. Unlike our preachers and theologians, Paul’s opponent at least understands the doctrine, that it is God who creates and hardens the sinner, but the sinner is still blamed and punished. God hardens whom he wants to harden (v. 18), so that they cannot believe and be saved. He does this by his active and direct power, as a potter molds the clay (v. 21). Such men are prepared for destruction (v. 22). They cannot resist his will, but he still blames and punishes them (v. 19). He can do this because he is God, and no one can utter a word against him (v. 20).

N/A #fundie vftonline.org

Vine & Fig Tree's
Anti-Separation
of Church and State Page

Freedom for Non-Christian Religions
in a Christian Nation

We have seen that

Religion is the foundation of government. The Founding Fathers believed there can be no secular government. Deism, infidelity, and atheism are threats to good government.
There is a true religion, others are "false religions."
America is a Christian Nation.

But some have attacked the "Christian America" thesis by arguing that the Founding Fathers clearly spoke of the need to give "religious freedom" to all, regardless of their beliefs. There is truth to this statement, even thought the majority of times the phrase "religious freedom" was used it referred to freedom for all denominations of Christians. But no one who signed the Constitution believed that pure religious freedom was a possibility. We will see more of this in another paper. On this page we wish to re-assure those of non-Christian religions that living in a Christian Theocracy is better than living in an Islamic theocracy, a Jewish theocracy, or a Secular Humanist theocracy. Living in a Christian nation means enjoying greater freedom and economic prosperity than any other nation on earth. But if your religion requires you to engage in the sacrifice of your virgin daughter to the sun-god, or if your religion requires you to marry as many wives as you can before you die, you will not be allowed to practice these aspects of your religion

Even though they believed in a nation "under God," that is, the Christian God, the Founding Fathers were not vicious Christian bigots who persecuted non-Christian religionists. They gave all religions rights within Christian social norms. But it was clear that one religion was preferred.

Rajkumar Richard #fundie christianapologeticsalliance.com


Consequences of Christian Universalism

By virtue of his universalistic persuasion, a Christian Universalist implies that:

Bible is corrupt – errant and fallible.
God is a cruel dictator without holiness, justice and true love. God’s commands need not be obeyed (e.g. evangelism is a non-factor).
The roles of Christ and the Holy Spirit is a non-factor
A believer need not be holy, need not love and worship God, and can be immoral.
A believer need not repent or believe in Christ and need not produce the fruit of the Spirit.
Since Christian Universalism opposes the Bible, we can reasonably assert that Universalism is a heretical teaching and Christian Universalists are a cult (false religion). Christians espousing universalism are not Christians even though they may term themselves as a Christian.

Although I don’t stand in judgment, the Christian Universalist, according to my understanding of salvation, lives dangerously close to an eternal separation from God.

Why does a Christian succumb to Universalism?

Unbelieving family and friends: If we believe in Christ, and our family and friends do not, then we suffer intensely knowing that those whom we love so dearly are hell bound. This constant pain motivates Universalistic persuasion.
Since universalism is an untenable proposition, a better mode of reconciliation would be to pray earnestly for God’s light to shine in the hearts of our loved ones. Meanwhile, we should gently and respectfully provide reasons for our hope in Christ, hoping that they would turn to Christ.

Observing the apparently flawless lives of the non-Christians: There are many non-Christians, who through their apparently impeccable life put Christians to shame. So one could wonder how such a life would be deemed to hell.
This situation could be reconciled through the fact that all are sinners and imperfect in thoughts, words, and deeds. None can be as perfect as God. So an impeccable life is only impeccable within the confines of the act(s) that invoke impeccability (e.g. charity). Therefore, since the flawless lives of non-christians are merely confined to certain acts, a reasonable conclusion is that all men are imperfect sinners worthy of infinite punishment.

Conclusion:

The Bible affirms that those who lead others to sin (disbelieve in God) are in a great and mighty danger – a potential loss of eternal life (cf. Matthew 18:6; Mark 9:42; Luke 17:1-2).

Universalism states that all will go to heaven. If Universalists are right and the debunking of Universalism is incorrect, then all will go to heaven (I and the Universalists). This is a win-win situation for me. But if Universalism is nonsensical, the Universalists are treading dangerously towards hell. For the Universalists, this is a win-lose situation (they lose, Christians win).

May we earnestly seek to follow and obey God in the light of HIS truth. Amen.

Grantley Morris #fundie net-burst.net

To have sex with a non-Christian is to defile Christ. Scripture is emphatic that sex makes two people one. A born-again Christian is spiritually united to Christ and a non-Christian is spiritually united to the devil. To marry a non-Christian is therefore to try to make Christ one with the devil.

A spiritually mixed marriage is a hideous perversion. It is the profanity of trying to unite that which must never be united – trying to unite that which belongs to the Holy One to that which belongs to the Evil One; trying to make holiness (that’s what we are through our union with Jesus) one with evil (that’s the basic nature of the nicest non-Christian).

Cerdiwen #fundie christianforums.com

It is contrary to Christian teaching to say that "Non-Christians don't have fear of divine vengeance." The first Chapter of Romans clearly states that Non-Christians know of God and his retribution of evil for evil, but repress this knowledge. The unfaithful may try to push the anxieties out of their heads, but they will never go away. Non-Christians like you fear God but try not to. They try to pretend that his retribution does not exist. Look around you at this forum -- the unfaithful here are all trying to assuage their troubled minds!

(Some Non-Christians, for example, Platonic Theists, try to persuade themselves that what they are fearing is a corrective punishment by God. They claim that divine retribution is proper to fear but also proper to experience. But this too is a repression of reality.)

But there will not be peace except for the peace of God on his terms. Let the fear remain until your throw yourself under the aegis of the cross!

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

As evident in Acts 17, there are often constraints imposed upon us by time and other factors. But as circumstances allow, we must offer a systematic and comprehensive presentation of the biblical worldview, and a systematic and comprehensive refutation of the non-biblical worldviews represented by the hearers. Our aim must be nothing short of a complete vindication of Christian claims, and a thorough annihilation of non-Christian beliefs. This may be done over the course of days or even months. And in some situations, it is done over the course of many years, as should be the case in parenting our children. Sometimes we may have only half an hour, but whatever the case may be, we should seek to cover the major points, or to preach "the whole counsel of God" (Acts 20:27, NKJ). As we do this, we must make clear that we are loyal only to the biblical foundation and heritage, and not a pagan foundation or heritage.

[...]

Most Christians are not aggressive enough, even if they know something about biblical apologetics and evangelism. We can all take a lesson from the exchange between Elisha and Jehoash: (quotes 2 Kings 13:14-19)

God has given us divine weapons with which to destroy all non-Christian religions and philosophies (2 Corinthians 10:3-5). These are spiritual or intellectual weapons, expressed in our preaching and arguments. But what are we doing with them? As Elisha was angry with Jehoash for not being aggressive and thorough enough, so this man of God would be very angry with most of us today. He would have no patience for our tolerance and propriety.

Nevertheless, God is faithful to himself and to his people, and he has preserved some of us who have not bowed the knee to relativism, pluralism, and other non-biblical perspectives. We who know our God will do great things in his name. We will ceaselessly attack non-Christian religions and philosophies with biblical argumentation and persistent prayer. We will strike them again and again. When they run, we will pursue them; when they hide, we will expose them; and when they fall, we will trample them. We will not make Jehoash's mistake, who struck three times and stopped – we will never stop. When we finally learn to fight by the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, we will find that non-Christian thought has no defense against our assaults. We will be an invincible army, and the very gates of hell will not stand against us.

abidinginvine #fundie rr-bb.com

Someplace were comments can be left for an article (not this one - might have been YouTube) there was an argument between Christians and non-Christians going on. Amazing how the non-Christians were saying, "Well, God is love, and because He's love He CAN'T send anyone to hell!"

They're worshipping one of God's attributes, and ignoring others, such as holiness and justice.

They're in for a really rude awakening! (nodding smilie)

stevangelist #fundie rr-bb.com

I know many Non-Christians who are constantly on the move in an attempt to escape reality . They usually have the T.V. or radio on when they are home because they say it is too quiet otherwise.

Many of the Non-Christians I know aren’t very good at handling even a small crisis that threatens a small part of the way of life they take for granted. Can you imagine Non-Christians if the way the of life they take for granted in the U.S. suddenly stalls or ends? How would Non-Christians behave if we won’t be able to buy gas or groceries for a period of time? THESE ARE SOME SCARY THOUGHTS!

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

A disciple never looks back. As the work of the plowman demands undivided attention, so
one who "looks back" is disqualified from "service in the kingdom of God" (v. 62). Jesus
does not say that one cannot excel as a disciple if he looks back, but that such a person
cannot be his disciple at all. He means what he says. There is no room for hesitation,
distraction, or regret. "How searching is this test to those who profess to be
Christians!…Religion is everything, or nothing. He that is not willing to sacrifice
everything for the cause of God, is really willing to sacrifice nothing."


Religion must be all or nothing. It must dominate every part of thought and conduct; otherwise, our faith is
not genuine.
There are those who think that religious differences should never damage our relationships.
However, religious commitments are ultimate commitments, so that a relationship that is
not affected by them must be a most superficial relationship. If one can have a deep
relationship with another of a different religious commitment, it can only mean that they
are not devoted to their faiths. Every part of a Christian's life is dominated by his faith, or
he is not a Christian at all. Thus to have anything more than a superficial relationship with
a non-Christian must necessarily mean that he has compromised his faith. This is because
once the two venture beyond a superficial level of interaction, their two worldviews would
bound to clash. And to have the deepest kind of relationship with such a person, such as
marriage, is outright forbidden by the Bible.


As Jesus says, "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come
to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter
against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law – a man's enemies will be
the members of his own household" (Matthew 10:34-36). There will be conflicts between
Christians and non-Christians. Religious commitments are not something that can be put
aside. The non-Christians who claim to be friendly and open-minded, and who desire
fellowship with everyone, nevertheless refuse to convert to the Christian faith when we
make it a requirement for fellowship. Thus even they acknowledge that religious
commitments matter, and that what we believe about the ultimate issues is more important
than peace and relationships. The difference is that they are self-righteous and hypocritical
about this – they say that they value peace and relationships, but they ask us to put aside
our Christian principles while they hold on to their own beliefs about religious and ultimate
matters.


Only God has ever demanded total dedication from men and women in the way Jesus does.
We must keep in mind that when we are dealing with Jesus Christ, we are dealing with
God himself. Our readiness to follow him reflects our attitude toward God, because Jesus
is Go

Al Bedrosian #fundie rawstory.com

A group that lost its U.S. Supreme Court case over prayer at public meetings said recent comments by a Virginia elected official illustrate the risk of allowing such sectarian invocations.

“The freedom of religion doesn’t mean that every religion has to be heard,” said Al Bedrosian, who sits on the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. “If we allow everything, where do you draw the line?”

The Republican said Monday, after the high court ruled 5-4 that legislative prayer did not violate the constitutional prohibition on government establishment of religion, that he would not vote to allow non-Christians to deliver invocations.

“I think America, pretty much from Founding Fathers on, I think we have to say more or less that we’re a Christian nation with Christian ideology,” Bedrosian said. “If we’re a Christian nation, then I would say that we need to move toward our Christian heritage.”

Those remarks echoed statements he made several years ago in an editorial published in the Roanoke Times, where he described freedom of religion as a “hoax” and claimed “the global warming crowd worships the environment as god, the abortionist has the death of unborn babies as their god, and the homosexuals have sexual freedom as their god.”

“The real battle is keeping the name of Jesus as Lord,” Bedrosian wrote in 2007. “The name Jesus is what makes us a Christian people and a Christian nation. This is why we must continue our heritage as a Christian nation and remove all other gods.”

That’s what Bedrosian intends to do in his position as county supervisor, saying he would reject any request by any non-Christian adherent to deliver a religious or secular invocation.

“I would say no,” Bedrosian said. “That does not infringe on their freedom of religion. The truth is you’re trying to infringe on my right, because I don’t believe that.”

Issac #fundie yecheadquarters.org

[About FSTDT with the (old?) Admin's answers in bold.]

What is the goal of this site? Entertainment.
I guess it is entertaining to have a site that is 90% geared towards the hate of Christians. Even up to implying that they should be killed just for what they believe.

I don't get a lot of non-Christian submissions. Non-Christian quotes just don't get submitted to the site very often at all.
Which shows that your members are basically Atheists, and Satanists like yourself.

I allow people to say anything, I operate my site using a principle of minimal moderation.
Regardless of how many excuses you make for your sites content. What you allow on your site shapes what your site has become. If killing Christians is entertainment, then allowing it to be said is what you condone. Having the ability to delete comments like this on your site, but not choosing to because "you allow people to say anything" attitude. Is allowing, and approving what you actually think. Because when someone actually carries out what you allow on your site (killing people for what they believe), I'd like to see if you can get off the hook by using one of the lame excuses you use here. There is nothing you can say that will ever justify murder.

No one would care what fundies say if it weren't for the fact that they are trying to roll back civil rights in this country, rewrite the whole of history to fit their little pet theories about the universe, make a mockery of science by trying to justify ice-canopy theories, hydroplate theories, flood geology, and geocentricism.
So your goal of all this is a type of mind control? Where your way of thinking is the only way everyone should think? Because to do what you say above, it would take an established dictatorship that puts out information that only supports it's views (your views). And stifles all other views even up to killing those who would disagree. Even Hitler tried to do this. If what you believe were truly about free thought. You would not care what I think, or anyone else. The term free thinker is just a cover up for the mind control you want to havem over everyone. Because free thinking is a part of freedom. I see no freedom in thinking that anyone who does not go along with your ideas, should be ridiculed, or even killed. Maybe that's the real reason you allow people to say: We should kill Christians. Deep inside, it's what you want. So you let other people say it for you.

So is the mockery of science your justification for murder? Because every excuse I see by people like yourself, always boils down to science and evolution. And killing for evolution always connects to Hitler. And will be the reason I will always make that connection as long as sites like yours, and other condone killing.

Quick #fundie christianforums.com

The Bible teaches a soteriology -- a means of uniting with God. God tells us that we can unite with him by being pardoned of divine destructive punishment ("justified"), as we believe ("faith") that Christ was punished in our place on the cross ("atonement"). This is the Biblical Christian soteriology: "justification by faith." Other religions have different soteriologies:
Platonism. For example, in Platonism, it is taught that God punishes humans only to correct them and not to destroy them -- kind of like a gardener pruning a tree, or a surgeon cauterizing a patient, or a sculptor chiseling a stone. Thus, Plato taught that we unite with God by yielding ourselves to the operation of his ongoing wrath and cooperating synergistically to be transfigured by it. This soteriology is made clear in Socrates's dialogue with Polus in Plato's book, "Gorgias."
Islam. In Islam, it is taught that a person can escape Allah's non-corrective punishments ("justification") by believing in Allah and Muhammed's Quranic prophecy ("faith") and by not failing to live according to the Five Pillars.
Many Non-Christians resist converting to Christianity because they believe that God taught them the soteriology they believe. For example, both Plato and Muhammed believed that God was teaching them their soteriologies. But even if it is true that God taught one of the non-Christian soteriologies, this is still not a good excuse for resisting converting to Christianity. Why not? Because Yahweh tells us that he would lie to humans in order to deceive them into believing a non-Christian soteriology. Having believed the false soteriology he taught them, he would condemn them for their violation of his law:
2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 (New International Version)
They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.


Thus the fact that you believe God taught you your religion is not grounds for following it rather than converting to Christianity. For, even if you are correct that God taught your religion to you, it is nevertheless false. Only by the Christian soteriology can you unite with God.

Natalie Faith #fundie christianguitar.org

I watched a video today on abortion and the woman that was speaking mentioned that she was glad Christians don't have as many abortions as non-Christians and that we reproduce more than non-Christians, because we will have more people to share the Gospel with the world... yet we prevent birth or the possibility of it by stopping conception...

Straight-talk #fundie bbc.co.uk

have found very extreme reactions from people who discover that I am a Christian.
- Even more than when I tell them I follow Man U.
Some people are attracted; others show a very negative reaction. But very few are indifferent.
I hope this does not sound arrogant; but I believe I know the reason for this. In fact we are warned in the bible about how this decision can split families; the feelings are that strong. The fact remains that a Christian reflects a belief that through Christ they are saved and can enter heaven when they die. And as Jesus said there is no other way, should this be true, this leaves the non-Christian in a very vulnerable place.
The non-Christian may think they have very good reasons not to believe; but if they are wrong they are doomed.
Some people cannot face up to this possibility. They are not prepared to check things out properly; perhaps thinking that they will have to change their behaviour/life in some way. They would rather not do this; so instead show contempt to those that have had discovered who Jesus was

Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson #fundie answersingenesis.org

I believe surveys say around 97% of professional scientists hold evolution. Understandably many people want to know why, if the evidence for biblical creation is so compelling, so many scientists still reject it. Well, the same surveys show that probably at least 70% of professional scientists are non-Christians. We know from Romans 1 that non-Christians have a spiritual bias and deliberately suppress the truth. So the Scripture tells us that, yes, the vast majority of them have a compelling spiritual reason to ignore what we’re saying. And so, practically, the way it works itself out, is they never bother to consider it.

Also, most people go through the public school system, and they hear from an early age just evolution. They never hear, and they are not taught even to consider, an alternative hypothesis. So they are taught from an early age to suppress the truth, and so this is just the fruit of an educational system that ignores the opposition.

Also, by and large, they just don’t read our literature. They’re ignorant. Now, sadly, the professing Christians who hold evolution (for example, the BioLogos community) also seem to practice the same thing. In the few interactions I’ve had with their scholars, whether it’s theologians or scientists, they are clueless about anything scholarly that we’ve written. I’ll ask them, “Name the last young earth creationist scholarly book you’ve read.” The response: “I don’t know.” Have you read Coming to Grips with Genesis? No. Have you read Earth’s Catastrophic Past? No. So why don’t more people accept this? Because they’re totally ignorant of what we’ve printed. And they don't want to consider it.

And so to me that’s the answer to the question, “Why don’t more people believe it?” They never consider it; a lot of them probably don’t want to consider it because this obviously strikes at the very heart of their worldview, and Romans 1 says that it’s not just that there’s some indirect “Oh, I might have to think about Christianity.” No, the things of God are clearly seen from what has been made, so the creation issue strikes at the heart of their cherished beliefs, and they have to suppress it.

Old Man Montgomery #fundie oldmanmontgomery.wordpress.com

[=Authors Note: For the sake of trimming, some of the Bible verses in the original page have been removed=]

From the website of ‘johnshore.com’

These were published and dated December 16, 2010. I have only recently become aware of this ‘movement’ via Facebook. (One never knows what one will find there.) These are referred to as the “Sixteen Tenets of ‘unfundamentalist Christians’ , known also or previously known as ‘ThruWay Christians’. Being the old-fashioned, hard-nosed Bible thumper that I am, I disagree with some facets of this and the conclusions of the entirety.

Of course I have reasons and those reasons are published below. Just for convenience, I numbered the statements, replacing what appeared in my copy as a paragraph ‘dot’.

Just for the record, as the article was dated December 16, 2010, it is entirely possible Mr. Shore has completely changed his mind and recanted this whole document. On the other hand, I just checked Mr. Shore’s last blog entry and he’s still pitching the “UnFund” theme.

Caution: If the reader is not a Christian believer, much of this discussion will seem pointless. Feel free to read on, but if you’re confused, don’t worry, it happens to lots of folks.

Here beings the tenets:

1. Jesus Christ was God incarnate. He performed miracles; as a means of providing for the irrevocable reconciliation of humankind to God he sacrificed himself on the cross; he rose from the dead; he left behind for the benefit of all people the totality of himself in the form of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

So far, I’m in agreement. Jesus is God incarnate; the ‘Son’ who is God Himself. Jesus was executed and killed (no alternatives) on a Roman cross under Roman law. Jesus’ death was the final sacrifice needed to atone for the sin of all people who appeal to Him for forgiveness. Jesus rose from the dead on the third day showing Himself to be God and giving a promise to all of an Eternal life in Heaven with Him. He sent the Third Person of the Godhead, the ‘Holy Spirit’ to believers after His ascension.

2. Christ and Christianity are meant to be understood, appreciated, and experienced as galvanizing inspirations for living a life of love, compassion, fairness, peace, and humility. Period.

Now we’re disagreeing. The primary purpose and function of Christianity is to repair the breach between God and mankind due to mankind’s rebellion and disobedience. Being forgiven by Jesus and redeemed by His sacrifice, mankind can have a direct and proper relationship with God. The qualities of love, compassion, fairness, peace and humility are by-products of that proper relationship, not the primary aim.

Am I splitting hairs here? Not as much as one might think; the matter becomes clearer as we proceed.

3. The Bible is a collection of a great many separate documents written by different people in different languages over thousands of years. Properly understanding both the letter and spirit of the Bible necessarily entails taking into account the historical and cultural contexts that so greatly inform so much of its text. The size, density, history and complexity of the Bible render unfeasible the idea that not one of its words reflects more man’s will than God’s. The spirit of God is inerrant; people—even those impassioned by the conviction that God is speaking directly to or through them—are not.

The one starts out well and descends into heresy. The Bible was written over a period of approximately 1500 years. The Books of Moses, the Torah – sometimes Pentateuch, was written in the period between the Exodus from Egypt, around 1400 B. C. to the time of the Babylonian Captivity, around 600 to 530 B. C. (give or take a decade or so.) The book of Revelation, written by John the Apostle was written around 90 A. D. The rest was written somewhere in between, with the possible exception of Job. Job was one of the earliest sections written and may predate Moses. The Bible was assuredly written by at least forty different authors. (For instance, the books of Judges, Kings and Chronicles were written over periods of time and one author could not have written them all; they require accounts from events several hundred years apart. The Torah was more than likely written by a number of scribes with Moses or a later, Babylonian scholar as ‘editor’ and having final input. Genesis is obviously based on oral traditions of the Israelite nation.) The books reflect social conventions and cultural coloring of the times involved.

However, it is the message of Almighty God to humanity. No matter how much a human can foul up, the integrity of the message is based on God’s ability to ensure His message is properly passed on. No human can foul up or outright lie good enough to defeat God’s purpose. So as much as mankind wrote the words on paper (papyrus or whatever), the ‘Word’ (Greek ‘logos’, meaning idea, identity or concept) is that of God. As such, it is inerrant in message.

The idea of the Bible being ‘written by man and therefore possibly distorted’ is an old heresy. It was argued about in the earliest councils trying to settle on the ‘Bible’ and is the basis for several cults who claim to be Christian, but rely on teachings of extra Biblical origin. The heresy also finds much favor among those who wish to discredit any one particular facet of Christian doctrine. Under any version, the idea the Bible isn’t correct means either God really doesn’t care about the message or God is incapable of protecting His own plan. Christians cannot in good faith (no pun intended) accept either alternative.

4. Anyone seeking to mix church and state has failed to understand the nature and proper role of either. Belief that all people are created equal and are deserving of equal protection under the law is foundational to all modern democratic nations. To incorporate the inherently exclusionary imperatives of a particular religion into the determinedly inclusive system of democracy would be to undermine the very spirit of democracy by pushing it toward a theocracy.

This is a pretty silly statement and is highly ignorant of history. The ‘foundational’ belief of people being created equal and deserving equal protection under law is uniquely derived from the Judeo-Christian tradition. It is not found in Islam, Confucianism, Buddhism, Hinduism or any of the other ‘religions’ of the world. It is Christianity that fostered Democracy, not Democracy that fostered Christianity.

Additionally, it was Christian believers and supporters who founded the United States as a nation with no state religion. The United States was not founded as a ‘Christian nation’, but was indeed begun as a ‘nation of Christians’. To pretend otherwise is to ignore history and to invite serious question as to the point of the discussion. One must also note that all movements to ‘remove’ the influence of Christianity from the United States and civil laws result in the promotion of either Secular Humanism or Islam.

There are no moral vacuums.

5. It’s not possible to read Paul’s New Testament writings and remain unmoved by his open heart, intellectual prowess, and staggering bravery. And yet Paul (who, after all, spent years zealously persecuting and having executed untold numbers of Christians) must remain to us a mortal man. More than reasonable, it is incumbent upon those who claim to seek the deepest knowledge of Christ to subject the words of Paul to the same kinds of objective analysis we would the words of any man daring to describe the qualities, purposes, and desires of God.

This is a gentle, lofty and seemingly reasonable attempt to undermine the message presented by God through Paul the Apostle. What this statement does is deny the Divine inspiration and authorship of the Bible as a whole. It returns to the fore in a moment with more of the ‘villify Paul’ agenda.

6. With regards to the written identity of God, the pronoun “he” is a necessity of the English language, not an actual anatomical designation. God is neither male nor female; God contains all of both.

Again, agreement. In Hebrew, just as in English, the male pronoun unless specifically intended refers to both male and female. Jesus says (John 4:23 and 24)“But a time is coming – and now is here – when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such people to be his worshipers. God is spirit, and the people who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” Also one notes in Genesis (chapter one, verses 26 and 27)
“Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, after our likeness, so they may rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move on the earth.”
God created humankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them,
male and female he created them.

So, both male and female were (still are, more or less, being distorted from the original model by mankind’s disobedience) created in God’s image; which manifestly means not a physical image, but a mental and spiritual image.

7. The Biblical scholarship supporting the idea that Paul never wrote a word proscribing natural homosexuality is at least as credible and persuasive as the scholarship (if not typical Bible translations) claiming that he did. Any person who uses the words of Paul in the New Testament to “prove” that homosexuality is a sin against God has either never themselves researched the matter, or has simply chosen to believe one set of equal proofs over another. Though laziness is easily enough understood, we remain mystified as to why anyone who purports to follow Jesus would choose to condemn an entire population over choosing to obey Jesus’ self-proclaimed Greatest Commandment to love one’s neighbor as one loves oneself.

Here’s the follow up to point 5. Once Paul is ‘questionable’, the condemnation of homosexuality can be dismissed as a personal quirk, or possibly an outright error on the part of Christianity (on the whole).

Here’s the premise of the tenet: Paul either really didn’t mean what he wrote about the practice of homosexuality despite what is clearly written in the original Greek manuscripts and all subsequent translations of the Bible, or Paul was mistaken and therefore not inspired by God. What an amazing statement.

Either God inspired and authored the Bible or not. If one chooses to deny God’s inspiration in part, then the whole becomes suspect. If God was lax in allowing Paul to write and publish errors, then what of the rest of the Bible is trustworthy? Conversely, if God did in fact inspire and author the Bible, then Paul’s writing is equally trustworthy.

Leviticus 18
This entire section (several chapters) deals with sexual sins and prohibitions. In part (I have inserted whole paragraphs to present an in context view):
19 You must not approach a woman in her menstrual impurity to have sexual intercourse with her. 20 You must not have sexual intercourse with the wife of your fellow citizen to become unclean with her. 21 You must not give any of your children as an offering to Molech, so that you do not profane the name of your God. I am the Lord! 22 You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman; it is a detestable act. 23 You must not have sexual intercourse with any animal to become defiled with it, and a woman must not stand before an animal to have sexual intercourse with it; it is a perversion.
Leviticus 20
9 “‘If anyone curses his father and mother he must be put to death. He has cursed his
father and mother; his blood guilt is on himself. 10 If a man commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death. 11 If a man has sexual intercourse with his father’s wife, he has exposed his father’s nakedness. Both of them must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves. 12 If a man has sexual intercourse with his daughter-in-law, both of them must be put to death. They have committed perversion; their blood guilt is on themselves. 13 If a man has sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman, the two of them have committed an abomination. They must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves. 14 If a man has sexual intercourse with both a woman and her mother, it is lewdness. Both he and they must be burned to death, so there is no lewdness in your midst. 15 If a man has sexual intercourse with any animal, he must be put to death, and you must kill the animal. 16 If a woman approaches any animal to have sexual intercourse with it, you must kill the woman, and the animal must be put to death; their blood guilt is on themselves.

These two passages are from the Torah, the first five books of the Old Testament. One can argue these are part of the Jewish or Mosaic Law and are therefore obsolete; in that case, general adultery, incest and bestiality are also permitted along with homosexual conduct. Or is that the point?

First Timothy 1 (written by that suspect Paul fellow)

8 But we know that the law is good if someone uses it legitimately, 9 realizing that law is not intended for a righteous person, but for lawless and rebellious people, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 sexually immoral people, practicing homosexuals, kidnappers, liars, perjurers – in fact, for any who live contrary to sound teaching. 11 This accords with the glorious gospel of the blessed God that was entrusted to me.

There is a note on the phrase ‘practicing homosexuals’ in verse 10 from the NET Bible: “…this term… ??se?????t?? states, “a male who engages in sexual activity w. a pers. of his own sex, pederast 1 Cor 6:9…of one who assumes the dominant role in same-sex activity, opp. µa?a???…1 Ti 1:10; Pol 5:3. Cp. Ro 1:27.” L&N 88.280 states, “a male partner in homosexual intercourse – ‘homosexual.’…It is possible that ??se?????t?? in certain contexts refers to the active male partner in homosexual intercourse in contrast with µa?a???, the passive male partner” (cf. 1 Cor 6:9). Since there is a distinction in contemporary usage between sexual orientation and actual behavior, the qualification “practicing” was supplied in the translation…”

First Corinthians 6 (also written by that questionable Paul)
9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. 11 Some of you once lived this way. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

This last passage strikes me an illuminating. Homosexuals are included in a list of sin categories which include heterosexual sexual sinners, idolaters, adulterers (distinct from ‘sexually immoral heterosexuals), thieves, greedy, drunkards, verbally abusive and swindlers. The phrase ‘verbally abusive’ is rather interesting. The NIV translates it as ‘slanderers’; I think ‘gossips’ might easily fit into the meaning. At any rate, people who say nasty things about others are lumped in with murderers, thieves and the sexually immoral (of any type).

The last verse in the paragraph implies a change of life in those reading the letter. “Some of you … lived… But you were washed… sanctified… justified…” So they were not just forgiven and allowed to continue; they changed their values and life-styles. The same implication applies to the sexually impure; they don’t do that sort of thing anymore; they avoid that sort of thing; they are ashamed of and denounce their own past behavior.

Therefore, the Old Testament writings prohibited homosexual conduct as does the writings of Paul, therefore the New Testament. The words used really do mean homosexual conduct and not just the generic ‘sexual misconduct’.

I’m really curious about the ‘equal scholarship’ which demonstrates what the Bible says isn’t what it means. I’d like to examine the line of thought and arguments.

The statement “…Jesus’ self-proclaimed Greatest Commandment to love one’s neighbor as one loves oneself” is incorrect and sloppy scholarship.

Matthew 22:
35 And one of them, an expert in religious law, asked him a question to test him: 36 “Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?” 37 Jesus 44 said to him, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment.

This tenet goes past ‘unfundamentalism’ and is squarely non-Christian.

8. It is much more reasonable—and certainly more compassionate—to hold that throughout history God chose to introduce himself in different ways into different cultural streams than it is to believe that there is only one correct way to understand and worship God, and that the punishment for anyone who chooses any but that way is to spend all of eternity having the living flesh seared off of his or her bones.

More reasonable? By who’s standard? As a Christian, the only viewpoint that counts is God’s viewpoint. That ‘viewpoint’ is expressed in the Bible, which is – as noted prior – God’s message to humanity.

More compassionate? To whom? Not to mention under what definition of ‘compassion’? I find no compassion in patting someone in error on the head and say comforting words while allowing them to remain in error at the risk of Eternal Death.

So let’s go along with the idea of God introducing Himself into different cultural streams in different ways. Why would introduce Himself in a totally different manner if He’s the same, Eternal God? For instance, in the sub-continent which is now India, why would God decide not to be the Eternal God of Creation of the Jewish people, but instead be represented by a pantheon of conflicting gods which change over time? Why would Almighty God manifest Himself as the volcano god, demanding virgin sacrifices? Would God happily change Himself into the Great Green Arkleseizure of Viltvodle VI?

Is He still God? Is He bored and just experimenting? Can He not remember who He is, from epoch to epoch?

The idea appeals to the ‘open-minded’ who have no ideas about who God is, or what He should be or do. The concept flies in the face of the ultimate creator of the Universe and all things that exist, who is Eternal and changeless, who is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. In other words, God.

Again, not just ‘unfundamentalist’, but not very good thinking and doctrinally non Christian.

9. “No one comes to the Father except through me” does not mean that in the afterlife only Christians can get into heaven. It means that Jesus/God decides who does and doesn’t make it in.

From this one is forced to believe Jesus will not judge between those who accept Him and those who don’t, but instead will judge by ad hoc rules of ‘good behavior’. I say ‘ad hoc’ because no such rules are outlined in the Bible.

All that stuff about believing in the Son and relying on Him in tenet 1 are out the window, then? It is good deeds that really make the difference?

This heresy is remarkably old as well. It predates Christianity, in fact.

Jesus mentioned this concept in Matthew Seven, starting with verse 15:
15 “Watch out for false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are voracious wolves. 16 You will recognize them by their fruit. Grapes are not gathered from thorns or figs from thistles, are they? 17 In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree is not able to bear bad fruit, nor a bad tree to bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, you will recognize them by their fruit.
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of heaven – only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. 22 On that day, many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in your name, and in your name cast out demons and do many powerful deeds?’ 23 Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you. Go away from me, you lawbreakers!’
24 “Everyone who hears these words of mine and does them is like a wise man who built his house on rock. 25 The rain fell, the flood came, and the winds beat against that house, but it did not collapse because it had been founded on rock. 26 Everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain fell, the flood came, and the winds beat against that house, and it collapsed; it was utterly destroyed!”
So then, what about “… the one who does the will of my Father in heaven…”? John 15, starting with verse nine makes it clear:
9 “Just as the Father has loved me, I have also loved you; remain in my love. 10 If you obey my commandments, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commandments and remain in his love. 11 I have told you these things so that my joy may be in you, and your joy may be complete.”

Nowhere in the Bible, nowhere in the quotations of Jesus, nowhere in the letters of the various apostles and elders in Jerusalem is any such doctrine mentioned or taught. In one setting (John 10:14-18), Jesus says,
14 “I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me – 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father – and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep that do not come from this sheepfold. I must bring them too, and they will listen to my voice, so that there will be one flock and one shepherd. 17 This is why the Father loves me – because I lay down my life, so that I may take it back again. 18 No one takes it away from me, but I lay it down of my own free will. I have the authority to lay it down, and I have the authority to take it back again. This commandment I received from my Father.”

Verse 16 is often used to ‘prove’ the heresy of various versions of God and or Jesus running about in human history, showing up in various forms and guises. One fellow seriously suggested it could indicate the existence of extra-terrestrial life. Actually, the statement simply indicates non-Jewish people were included. That’s all.

I personally don’t have any problem with extra-terrestrial life, or any of them being in Heaven. But it will be on the basis of an individual relationship with Jesus Christ.

I am also firmly convinced all the inhabitants of planet Earth will have adequate notice of the person and Deity of Jesus Christ. God is not the sort of being who looks for tiny excuses and ‘foot-faults’ to disqualify anyone from Heaven.

10. The question of whether or not hell is real is properly subsumed by the truth that a moment spent worrying if you’ll be with God in the afterlife is an opportunity missed to be with God in this life.

I agree. There is no point of wondering, let alone worrying, if Hell is real. Jesus talks about it too much to be in doubt. It isn’t pleasant, but it’s there. One is obliged to take note and do something to avoid residence.

11. God’s will and intention is to forgive and teach us, not to judge and punish us.

That is true, but only to a qualified extent. Jesus came to Earth as a mortal man to tell us what to do to avoid Eternal punishment and die in our place to pay the price for our sin. Obviously, God the Father was in on this plan as was the Holy Spirit.

God really does not want anyone to spend Eternity in Hell. However, since all mankind is in the default position of being in rebellion against God, mankind is by default condemned to Eternal Hell.

The words of Jesus in John, chapter three:
16 For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him. 18 The one who believes in him is not condemned. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God. 19 Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone who does evil deeds hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed. 21 But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done in God.
God is loving and concerned. God is simultaneously honest and just. God is God and that means – in a long list of other things – He will always conduct Himself as God and be true to His own nature.

There are also a number of references warning that when Jesus returns – ‘The Second Coming’ – He will in fact judge all people according to their alliances.

12. The only person who should be actively endeavoring to convert non-Christians into Christians is God. Jesus does not need our help drawing people towards him. He does need, or could certainly use, our help in making sure that people know that they are, just as they are, loved.

This statement directly contradicts the command of Jesus.

Matthew 28:16-20
16 So the eleven disciples went to Galilee to the mountain Jesus had designated. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him, but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came up and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age

Acts 1
6 So when they had gathered together, they began to ask him, “Lord, is this the time when you are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” 7 He told them, “You are not permitted to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the farthest parts of the earth.” 9 After he had said this, while they were watching, he was lifted up and a cloud hid him from their sight.

First Peter 3
15 But set Christ apart as Lord in your hearts and always be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks about the hope you possess. (“Hope” here meaning the expectation of Eternal life with God.)

So in this statement again, the concept is not ‘un-fundamentalist’ but ‘un-Christian’.

13. Getting a divorce is painful, and if at all possible should certainly be avoided. But ultimately the act in and of itself is not immoral.

This statement flatly contradicts Jesus’ teaching on the subject.

Matthew 5
31 “It was said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife must give her a legal document.’ 32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Matthew 19
3 Then some Pharisees came to him in order to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful to divorce a wife for any cause?” 4 He answered, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and will be united with his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” 7 They said to him, “Why then did Moses command us to give a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her?” 8 Jesus said to them, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because of your hard hearts, but from the beginning it was not this way. 9 Now I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another commits adultery.” 10 The disciples said to him, “If this is the case of a husband with a wife, it is better not to marry!”11 He said to them, “Not everyone can accept this statement, except those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are some eunuchs who were that way from birth, and some who were made eunuchs by others, and some who became eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who is able to accept this should accept it.”

So yes, Jesus said divorce is an immoral act, save for the cause of adultery. Even then, the divorced man or woman is limited in options.

14. God does not want any woman “submitting” to anyone.

Another direct contradiction of Biblical teaching.

Ephesians 5
22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord, 23 because the husband is the head of the wife as also Christ is the head of the church – he himself being the savior of the body. 24 But as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her 26 to sanctify her by cleansing her with the washing of the water by the word, 27 so that he may present the church to himself as glorious – not having a stain or wrinkle, or any such blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In the same way husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.

Colossians 3
18 Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. 19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be embittered against them.

Oh, wait! That’s that questionable Paul again! Since Paul is so very questionable, we can ignore much of his writings – especially the parts about moral conduct, sexual misconduct and general carryings-on.

First Peter 3
1 In the same way, wives, be subject to your own husbands. Then, even if some are disobedient to the word, they will be won over without a word by the way you live, 2 when they see your pure and reverent conduct… like Sarah who obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. You become her children when you do what is good and have no fear in doing so. 7 Husbands, in the same way, treat your wives with consideration as the weaker partners and show them honor as fellow heirs of the grace of life. In this way nothing will hinder your prayers.

That’s the summation of Peter the Apostle. He agrees with Paul the suspect.

15. There were no dinosaurs on Noah’s ark; Jesus didn’t have a pet stegosaurus. An all-powerful God and the theory of evolution are not incompatible.

Whooop! Whooop! Whooop! Strawman Alert!
So, just where do we find claims of dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark? Which gospel contains the story of Jesus and His pet stegosaurus? What kind of hairball ploy is this?

Okay, “An all-powerful God and the theory of evolution are not incompatible.” That part is reasonable enough. However, this isn’t a matter of doctrinal distinction; it’s a matter of textual examination.

Dinosaurs on the Ark? Sheesh.

16. The single most telling indicator of a person’s moral character has nothing to do with how they define or worship God, and everything to do with how they treat others.

So, a relationship with God isn’t important; what is important is ‘good deeds’.

Actually, this is a deceptive argument; somewhat strawman in nature. I’ll agree one’s ‘moral character’ is not always dependent on how one defines or worships God. However, one’s moral character has nothing to do with one’s Eternal estate, being in a proper relationship with God and spending Eternity with God in Heaven.

One can be a rotten skunk and be bound for Heaven, or a very decent, clean, honest and honorable person going to Hell.

I know for a fact that my moral character was – for that matter ‘is’ – not always as good and shining as it ought to be. After becoming a Christian, I have sinned grievously, often and cheerfully. But my eternal destination is already secure and in Jesus’ care. As far as God is concerned in Judgment, I am as pure as Jesus.

Which is not to say I’m content in my life that way, or at peace with God. I found I was a jittery, angry, depressed, unsettled maniac; at least some combination of two or three of those. I can hide it well, but it’s there and I am very aware of it.

What happens is this: God works on me to make me into who – the type of person – He wants me to be, fit for Heaven in Eternity.

To conclude:

“Un-fundamentalists” accept the Deity, Sacrifice, Resurrection and Redemptive nature and power of Jesus Christ. However, they also believe God has appeared in other forms and guises, seemingly revealing other versions of Himself. So Jesus really isn’t uniquely God at all.

“Un-fundamentalists” deny the Divinely Inspired nature of the Bible, strip Paul’s writing of authority and accept homosexual misconduct – and by inference, heterosexual misconduct – as both normal and moral.

“Un-fundamentalists” claim the goal of Christianity is to live a good life; ‘good’ being defined by not offending anyone, getting along with all and ignoring Biblical principles if adherence would cause a row.

“Un-fundamentalists” believe Christians should not vote in accordance with Biblical principles. Nor should laws follow the long held traditions of either Judaism or Christianity.

“Un-fundamentalists” do not assume responsibility for evangelism; in fact, evangelism is discouraged.

“Un-fundamentalists” believe God never criticizes or judges human conduct. They believe there is no Hell. After all, God isn’t going to punish anyone for anything anyway.

All things considered, “Un-fundamentalist Christian” is not a properly descriptive phrase. Citing the serious theological and doctrinal differences between this cult and mainstream Christianity, I would suggest perhaps “Nearly Christian” would be a better description. Since the first tenet does recognize Jesus as God, perhaps “Barely Christian” would do.

Now, I know some bright soul is going to jump on me with the Biblical injunction of “Judge not, lest ye be judged”. The statement comes in Matthew 7, starting with the beginning of the chapter. The whole paragraph reads as follows:

1 “Do not judge so that you will not be judged. 2 For by the standard you judge you will be judged, and the measure you use will be the measure you receive. 3 Why do you see the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to see the beam of wood in your own? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye,’ while there is a beam in your own? 5 You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. 6 Do not give what is holy to dogs or throw your pearls before pigs; otherwise they will trample them under their feet and turn around and tear you to pieces.

This whole speech is addressed at being judgmental of other people in regard to their fitness or standing before God. I am not ‘judging’ any person, but a set of beliefs and how they measure up to Christianity, I am not violating any injunction. Indeed, I am following a warning given by John the Revelator in First John 4:

1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses Jesus as the Christ who has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God, and this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming, and now is already in the world.

So I am testing this ‘spirit’, this claim of revelation of God. I find interesting that tenet 1 claims to recognize Jesus as the Son of God in the Flesh, and then denies Jesus’ Deity in most of the subsequent tenets.

Soldiers of Jesus #fundie #psycho friendlyatheist.patheos.com

Jesus said “turn the other cheek,” but an evangelical Christian group called “Soldiers of Jesus” is taking over large swaths of Brazil, threatening religious minorities with death if they don’t convert. The Washington Post‘s Terrence McCoy has the disturbing story:

Priests have been killed. Children have been stoned. An elderly woman was seriously injured. Death threats and taunts are common. Gangs are unfurling the flag of Israel, a nation seen by some evangelicals as necessary to bringing about the return of Christ.

All of this is bolstered by a right-wing government that came into power on the backs of evangelical Christians who weren’t bothered enough by the blatant cruelty of President Jair Bolsonaro and a rise in Christian programming in the media that routinely paints non-Christians as villains. (It all sounds very familiar.)
These gangs in particular have broken into people’s homes, forcing them at gunpoint to destroy religious items that aren’t Christian. Religious leaders who practice a non-Christian faith have been forced to shut down their houses of worship or face death. So far, over 200 of these temples have been forced to close. There is no sign of this persecution stopping any time soon.

Until conservative Christians have the courage to call it out, no matter the country, it will never change. They’re too addicted to power to do the right thing.

cold fusion #fundie forum.prisonplanet.com

Quote
"and explain to then why King James is so super cool,wouldn't it be better to go for one of the other English translated,less tyrannical influence,than trying to convince King James was great"

I said,
Quote
"First of all, King James was one of the best kings, if not THE best king, that England ever had. He had nothing to do with the actual translation work, other than granting his permission for the work to be done, and seeing to it that the translation committee had what they needed to get the job done."

It doesn't MATTER whether James was a Christian, a non-Christian, a good Christian, a bad Christian or an indifferent Christian. If you do the homework, I think you will find some interesting reading and a good testament to the moral values and manner of living of King James in his letter to his son in the book "Basilicon Doron".

Trying to character assassinate James is a red herring, a straw man argument, and totally irrelevant to the real issue. The point is that THE KING JAMES BIBLE IS A TRUE AND FAITHFUL TRANSLATION OF THE RIGHT MANUSCRIPTS AND IS THE BEST BIBLE THAT HAS EVER BEEN PRINTED (OR, IMHO, WILL EVER BE PRINTED). The tactics of the "Yea Hath God Said? Society" never change.

Austin Area Interreligious Ministries #fundie statesman.com

Austin Area Interreligious Ministries, the city's largest interfaith organization, announced Thursday that its annual Thanksgiving celebration Sunday had to be moved because Hyde Park Baptist Church objected to non-Christians worshipping on its property.

The group learned Wednesday that the rental space at the church-owned Quarries property in North Austin was no longer available because Hyde Park leaders had discovered that non-Christians, Muslims in particular, would be practicing their faith there. The event, now in its 23rd year, invites Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Bahais and others to worship together.

Curtis #fundie bibleforums.org

I’m a little surprised that none of you have mentioned “Intelligent Design”. Science has proven that a single cell is irreversible complex, being that it is impossible to have evolved. Both Christian and Non-Christian scientists now agree on this fact. AS a matter of fact one atheist scientist has give a person better odds of rolling dice and coming up with six’s every time fifty thousands times in a roll.

Intelligent Design has changed my faith life forever and I thank God!

Tenebras Lux #fundie therepublicanstandard.com


There is so little that distinguishes today’s liberal Christians from the ancient Pagans to whom the gospel was originally preached, they would be more honest in dropping the name “Christian,” and adopting once again the title of Pagan.

Before I continue, the term liberal Christian is used in a theological and moral context, and not necessarily a political one. It comes from the 19th century in which Christians sought to liberate themselves from traditional orthodoxy in favor of a more progressive interpretation of doctrine in a modern world. It is possible for a political liberal to hold orthodox views on Christian theology, but the correlation against shows it is very rare. Furthermore, one can hold conservative political ideology and be very much a “Liberal Christian.”

One of the reasons Christians were so despised in Ancient Pagan Rome was because of their claim to exclusivity in the quest for eternal life. They were actually called atheists because they denied the validity of other (the Romans’) religion’s claims. They were intolerant of the pantheistic ideas Rome held, and were persecuted because of their arrogant claims that Jesus was the only way to eternal life.

Today, religious pluralism is once more in vogue, and to deny the validity of non-Christian claims to salvation – or to affirm the exclusivity of Christian claims to salvation – makes one almost immediately an arrogant bigot, and worthy of scorn. Pushed by popular culture icons such as Oprah, liberal pastors began to adopt the idea, and congregations soon followed. A Pew research poll found that 52% of professing Christians believed that even non-Christian faiths can lead to eternal life. Of course that doesn’t make their opinion correct (it only makes it unorthodox), but it does indicate how far the reach of religious pluralism – Paganism – has spread today.

Pagan Rome and Greece were notorious for their licentious sexual activities and wanton lasciviousness in the pursuit of pleasure. Homosexuality was not considered a sin; in fact, it was rather expected in their cultural milieu. While they never went so far as to call a homosexual union a civil marriage, no state or custom apparently tried to prevent the practice, but instead encouraged it in certain instances. This was one of the sins that Paul preached against to the Corinthians, who were notorious in the Hellenic world – even to Cicero – for their lust and sexual liberty.

Liberal Christians now have come full circle, refuting overtly what Paul had preached and insisting that such activity is not only tolerable, but may be righteous in the sight of God. They no longer preach against perversion as outlined in the Bible, but celebrate it as much, if not more so, than the Pagans of Corinth or Rome.

Perhaps the latest iteration of Paganism to manifest itself in the professing Christian Church is the toleration toward polyamory. One could predict it wouldn’t be long, given the logic of sexual acceptance based solely on the litmus test of “consent.” (Not the objective consent of the Creator, mind you, but the subjective consent of the Creation.) Today, ordained ministers in the Christian Church are not just tolerating the idea of polyamorous relationships, but are encouraging it as a scriptural sacrament.

Jeff Hood, a minister in the Southern Baptist Convention justified his views on holy polyamory by invoking the Holy trinity:

~~~~

“I heard the voices of the polyamorous repeatedly whispering, ‘Why are you persecuting us?’ Unable to contain myself, I shouted out, ‘Forgive me!’ At that moment, I collapsed. Before I perished, I felt the pull.

“Divine polyamory found me a sinner and lifted me up by grace. The Holy Trinity ushered me to love. Looking around, I saw a great cloud of polyamorous witnesses shouting, ‘Holy! Holy! Holy, is the polyamorous love of God!’”

~~~~

Utter blasphemy. “Without the polyamorous we cannot know God,” Hood also says.

What this reminds me of is the same orgiastic culture so prevalent in Pagan Rome and Greece – the same culture to whom the Apostles and the Church Fathers fought so hard to preach the Gospel, in order to free them from their sins.

In the second century, Marcus Minucius Felix wrote an apologetic dialogue responding to Pagan criticisms of the Christian Church, and in this dialogue Felix exposes the same behaviors outlined above, and goes further to chastise the Pagan culture for their abhorrent practice of abortion and infanticide:

“And I see that you at one time expose your begotten children to wild beasts and to birds; at another, that you crush them when strangled with a miserable kind of death. There are some women who, by drinking medical preparations, extinguish the source of the future man in their very bowels, and thus commit a parricide before they bring forth. And these things assuredly come down from the teaching of your gods.”

Of course, for Liberal Christians today, they would never dare preach against abortion, but instead have come full circle into celebrating the sacrifice of children upon the Saturnine altar of the god “self-worth”.

So this raises the question: If Liberal “Christians” have re-adopted so many of the Pagan practices that the early Church evangelists preached against; and if they deny the validity of those fundamental characteristics that distinguish Christianity from Paganism (like the exclusivity of Christ), why do they insist on calling themselves Christians? If they would stop pretending, I might respect them more intellectually; but the fact remains they blaspheme the name of Christ and His work when they continue to celebrate as righteous that which God has explicitly forbidden.

jeepman1983 #fundie sitelife.wwmt.com

[Our president is not muslim. He never was and it's not our businesss if he converts in the future. This is America. . .built on religious freedom!]

America was built on Christian Freedom.

[Jeepman...can you point me towards the sections of the Constitution that state that? Or, any other laws for that matter.]

Goalie... I made my last statement based on historical deduction. Back in 1787when the Constitution became official, the Christians of the day far out numbered the non-christians (Jews, Muslim, Hindu, Atheists, ect). From this fact, I deduced that our Founding Fathers were not concerned with non-christian religions but more so the freedom of christian denomination. My original statement is that America was BUILT on Christian Freedom clearly refers to the beliefs of our Great Founding Fathers.

narfre #fundie imdb.com

Why do Atheist celebrate Christmas AND miss work for it?
***(No...I do not care if it was a pagan holiday originally, I'm talking about CHRISTMAS, not Yule, keep this in mind, I could careless about the history, I'm talking about what it represents NOW.)***

I do not understand why atheist...or any other non-christian people celebrate christmas. It makes no sense what so ever, its STRICTLY for the birth of Christ...no other reason, just cause you like getting presents is not an excuse, and its not "just for our kids to enjoy" why risk your kid believing in a God thats not there?

You don't bash religions and say how much you do not believe in something...then pick and choose what you want to celebrate and pretend the true meaning of the event is not really what it is, thats just plain retarded.

Why don't you also request to work those holidays since you do not believe in it, you are just being lazy and taking a free ride on a day you don't even believe in. If you are true to your non-belief you should stay at work like a good little atheist and quit free loading, and there is no room for a dumb answer like "Why would I miss out on paid days off from work."

If thats your answer...then for all you atheist that SAY you have morals...are lacking some big ones right there for slapping the true believers of christmas in the face with you free loading on a day for believers.

Its a disrespect towards the Christian religions.

A non-satanic person does not worship satan, so a non-christian should not celebrate christmas, cause that would make them a hypocrite of their "non-belief"

Vox Day #fundie voxday.blogspot.com

I don't suppose there are any other religious groups that pose a similar threat to the Russian people, their security, and public order, are there?

Religious freedom is a bogus and ill-considered pseudoright. In practice, it has been turned into a weapon that is almost solely used against Christianity across the West, and therefore it has to be abandoned. It has always been a charade anyhow; any religious belief or practice that challenges the state is always going to be banned no matter how sincerely held it may be. No one is about to let Aztecs start mass sacrificing to the sun or permit Druids to burn people in wicker baskets, no matter how historically legitimate their religious traditions are.

In like manner, any religion that harms the commonwealth merits similar outlaw status. Let people live among others of like religion if they wish to practice their religious traditions. How serious and sincere can their beliefs be anyway, and how much do those beliefs merit respect, if non-Christians would rather live in Christendom among Christians than where Islam, Hinduism, Shinto, or Judaism are the state religion?

Don't be fooled by the appeal to imaginary fears for Protestants. The concept of religious freedom in the USA died the moment prayer was banned in the public schools, and the coffin was nailed shut when Muslim immigration was encouraged. There is no legitimate moral, legal, or philosophical reason that every nation in Christendom should not proceed to ban all non-Christian religions as readily as atheist regimes banned Christianity in the 20th century.

The Enlightenment, such as it was, ended a long time ago. It failed. It is long past time to reject its failed liberal precepts.

Todd Friel #fundie blogs.christianpost.com

There are two groups of people who should not be shocked to discover that a member of the Duggar family is a sinner: Christians and non-Christians. Surprisingly, both camps seemed to be surprised by this revelation.

That is what makes the Josh Duggar story a disaster.

Christian surprise

The subject line from an email sent by a popular Christian website stated: “Christian world rocked.” Really?

Based on his own admission, Josh sinned, repented and got saved. Why in the world would Christians be appalled to discover an unregenerate 14-year-old boy acted wickedly?

According to Josh himself, “I sought forgiveness from those I had wronged and asked Christ to forgive me and come into my life.” Sounds like a pretty typical conversion story to me.

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God (I Cor.6:9-11).

Have we forgotten that the Apostle Paul was a murderer before God saved him?

It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost of all. Yet for this reason I found mercy, so that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might demonstrate His perfect patience as an example for those who would believe in Him for eternal life (I Tim.1:15-16).

Josh is no worse than the Apostle Paul. Josh should not be shunned by Christians; he should be comforted by Christians who are just as wicked and just as forgiven as he is. Josh is nothing more, and nothing less, than a story of God’s amazing grace.

Non-Christian Surprise

Here is the headline from the magazine that decided to go rooting though Josh’s closet: “Bombshell Duggar Police Report.”

This might be the bigger tragedy of the Josh Duggar story: unbelievers consider it a bombshell when it is discovered that a Christian has a shameful past. This ought not to be.

If we Christians were doing our job proclaiming that the Gospel is for sinners, of whom we are the foremost, the world would yawn when it discovered that Josh was a hound dog.

If Christians were as loud about the Gospel as we are about being the moral majority, I suspect there would be five results:

1. Unbelievers would not see Josh Duggar as a hypocrite; they would see him as a typical born-again believer who is forgiven by an amazingly gracious God.

2. Unbelievers would not see Christians as a mere special interest group that seeks to impose values on other people.

3. The Gospel would be shining brightly.

4. Somebody might get saved.

5. Josh Duggar and his family would be going about their business today as a typical Christian family saved by grace alone.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem that any of those things are happening. I don’t blame the world; I blame us.

Is it possible we have become so obsessed with imposing our values on unbelievers that the world sees us as self-righteous Pharisees and not as blood-washed sinners?

Have we been so consumed by the culture wars that we have failed to engage in the spiritual battle for souls?

A Gospel Opportunity

Josh tendered his resignation to the Family Research Council and they accepted it. While none of us know all of the details, if Josh were in my employ, I would not have accepted his resignation.

I would have shouted from the rooftops, “If you think Josh is wicked, you should meet the rest of us! That is why we are Christians! We need forgiveness for being wretched, vile, wicked rebels. If you are a rebel too, Jesus died for you! Run to Jesus! Join the wretched club.”

Let’s not squander this opportunity to share the great good news that Jesus died for perverts, liars, thieves, drunkards, abortionists, Wall Street fat cats, skid row bums, suburban housewives, blue collar workers and every sinner who will come to Him in repentance and faith.

Josh Duggar’s story is more than a Gospel tragedy; it is a Gospel opportunity. Don’t waste it.

ServantofJesus #fundie deviantart.com

Lies, Greed, Idolatry and the Deification of Santa
by ServantofJesus, Dec 18, 2017, 5:37:05 PM
Journals / Personal
For most people - especially those who know [or should know] better - "Santa Claus" ("Sanctus Nicolaus"; to which the modern figure of Santa Claus is derived from the Dutch figure of Sinterklaas, whose name is a dialectal pronunciation of Saint Nicholas; also - interestingly - "Santa" [or santo] in Spanish meaning "holy") is just a fictional character that was popularised particularly by Coca Cola who is extremely loosely based on the historical person of Saint Nicholas, and many see him as just an excuse to try to make sure the kids behave during this time of year. And for all intents and purposes, in the strictest sense that is very true.

Also, before I continue, the name "Father Christmas" is also interesting [and not just in its origins] when one thinks of it from a 'clergyman' point of view, other than it being meant as a personification of Christmas. Interestingly enough, after Emperor Constantine legalized Christianity, Nicholas was elected Bishop of Myra. I'm probably stretching the connotations of this, but having him being called "Father Christmas" could also infer to as what Roman Catholic, Orthodoxy and Anglican traditions would use when they call high religious leaders as "Father" (of which Jesus warned us not to call anyone on Earth "Father" [in this context, not the biological one] in Matthew 23:8-9).
Anyway, when you actually look in to what "Santa" is all about, when you actually pay attention to the words of the songs such as "Santa Claus is Coming Tonight", and "Here Comes Santa Claus", you get a person that goes far beyond what Saint Nicholas was ever originally represented about the idea of gift-giving around this time of year.

I suppose you could call this "Santology" - the study of Santa Claus. This is by no means an in-depth study or anything like that, as it goes in to FAR more detail on this site here (though I must note that this site takes this whole thing to the utmost extreme, though I do agree with many of the points on there myself): Santa Claus: The Great Imposter

First of all, I will go into the practical and realist side of things, with what really matters when it comes down to it: lying to children.

Very much like what GospelCenteredMom.com has to say about it, there's a big difference between children having [for example] an imaginary person that they talk to; pretending they're a super hero; or just imagining they're on the moon - and actually believing that the Santa to which all the songs they've been singing about (which I'll come to later), is real.

I will assume - particularly the non-Christians that will come on here and read this - for those who are less discerning of such matters, that you think the idea of Santa is nothing but harmless fun, but a study was done last year that a Belief in Santa could affect parent-child relationships, warns study, to which part of it says this:

The darker reality, the authors suggest, is that lying to children, even about something fun and frivolous, could undermine their trust in their parents and leave them open to “abject disappointment” when they eventually discover that magic is not real.
Kathy McKay, a clinical psychologist at the University of New England, Australia and co-author, said: “The Santa myth is such an involved lie, such a long-lasting one, between parents and children, that if a relationship is vulnerable, this may be the final straw. If parents can lie so convincingly and over such a long time, what else can they lie about?”

For the next part, I shall be borrowing from TheTwoCities.com which has this to say about it, that to think that parents are willingly and actively lying to their children throughout the Christmas season should cause us to be concerned about their integrity and trustworthiness when it comes to more serious subjects such as teaching kids truths about God - obviously applying to Christians of course; non-Christians don't have a true backbone for their reasons to not lie to their children if it suits their needs. That is, without 'borrowing' from the Christian worldview.

And not only that, but it also teaches the children that lying is OK (as long as it's fun, of course).

Another question aught to be brought up on this issue: Why should Santa get all the glory for all the time, money and effort that friends and family have spent in getting everything for their children? To me, this completely shows an utter lack of respect that should be given to those that have made it special – and actually made it possible.

3 other points I'll borrow from that site
He promotes a false, works righteousness, theology

One thing everyone knows about Santa is that he’s always watching. In order to get what you want, Santa has to see you being good. This is anti-gospel! Even if we make a point of clearly explaining the good news to our children, the yearly exercise of behaving in order to receive gifts strengthens our natural bent toward works righteousness. It contradicts the grace-alone through faith-alone message we are striving to instill in our children.
He encourages self-centeredness [my point on the title of Greed]

The other thing everyone knows about Santa is that he’s always asking, “What do you want for Christmas?” We go along with this by helping our kids sift through catalogues, encouraging them to make lists, and taking them on special outings so they can tell Santa what they want. During the holidays we unashamedly encourage our kids to dwell on things rather than Christ. This cultivates an egocentric understanding of Christmas and twists the holiday so it is now all about them and what they want, rather than Christ and what he did.

He tells our kids that they are good

And, of course, our kids ALWAYS get what they want for Christmas, thus instilling in them the understanding that they are (or at least were in December) good. Should we stuff their stocking with coal? No, of course not. But it seems a shame that on the very holiday we celebrate God’s plan to redeem us from sin, we tell our kids they’re not really sinful.

So what this basically boils down to is Idolatry. Santa has been put on a pedistal, and has diverted our attention away from Jesus - the greatest Gift in the history of Creation. Of course you can try to have the two together, but which of these 2 is the most attractive? Which one would the child really want to focus on? A baby in a manger [in the context of this time of year], or a jolly man who you can see in a "Grotto" and ask him for whatever you want.

The next logical point would be on the Deification of Santa:

Have a read at some of these lyrics:

Here comes Santa Claus!. . .
Bells are ringin', children singin',
All is merry and bright.
So hang your stockings and say your prayers,
'Cause Santa Claus comes tonight
Jump in bed, cover up your head,
'Cause Santa Claus comes tonight
So let's give thanks to the Lord above
'Cause Santa Claus comes tonight
He's making a list and checking it twice
Gonna find out who's naughty and nice
Santa Claus is comin' to town
He sees you when you're sleepin'
He knows when you're a wake
He knows if you've been bad or good
So be good for goodness sake
Does that not sound like god-like qualities to you? That Santa should be one whom you should pray to, because the child thinks he'll be coming and giving you presents? And not only that, but he actually SEES you when you're awake or asleep, or when you've been good or bad! Only God can truly know this.

Sure these may just be lyrics in a song, but do not children learn these lyrics as soon as they're even able to understand what it all means? Is not this the whole part of what Santa makes him Santa? The “theology” of Santa? But let's not forget it's not only in songs, but is indoctrinated into you with films about him, all to get you to believe that he can do the things everyone is telling you he can do.

On a side note, doesn't anyone else think that the idea of a fat man watching your kids all year around is just a little... creepy?

I may as well copy 2 more of her reasons for rejecting Santa, because she can say it better than I can
He reveals that we don’t think Christ is enough

When we add Santa to Christmas, it reveals that we don’t think God, the creator of all things, humbling himself, becoming flesh, living a perfect life among us, dying for our sins, defeating death, and reconciling us with himself, is enough. We add Santa to make Christmas more fun, and more whimsical. In reality, the incarnation is not lacking, it does not need more.

He promotes the idea of mindless faith

All Santa stories include an element of faith. Scripturally speaking, saving faith, involves two aspects. As R W Glenn put it, we have to believe that, and believe in. The former refers to the affirmation of facts. For example, biblical faith requires one to believe that facts like, Jesus was born of a virgin, in Bethlehem, around 2,000 years ago, are true. In the case of Santa, his “facts” are so absurd that one must attach mental blinders in order to believe them. Although the fear of producing Santa-believing grown-ups is not a credible concern, turning out adults with wrong ideas about faith, is. Encouraging our kids to believe falsehoods plants the idea that faith involves checking your brain at the door and feeds the notion that faith can’t be supported by facts and good reasoning. Yes, the Bible states that our faith is in things not seen, but that does not mean it is in things that are not real.
My last point is just how much of a Westernised, first-world person this character is. There are countless millions of people who don't even have access to safe water to drink, or enough food to survive on. Where is Santa in those countries? Thankfully he's no-where to be seen.

Churchworker #fundie p089.ezboard.com

[One the other boards I frequently post on, the SAB, has a frequent fundy poster named Troy Brooks who has been banned from many forums. Here is something from one of his latest sockpuppet posts on the SAB, "How Will the Antichrist Win You Over Forever?".]

Non-Christians don't like the peace they have created for themselves because it is uprooted by the peace Christians can display. So the non-Christians get jealous, agitated, losing that feeling self-exaltation in their self-generated peace, which is bound to crumble sooner or later. So they react by attacking Christians.

Miracle Hill Ministries #fundie wltx.com

(Submitter's note: This is a follow-up to this story.)

Woman claims discrimination by SC foster agency over her religion

Author: By MEG KINNARD Associated Press

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — A Catholic mother says a federally funded South Carolina foster agency abruptly stopped working with her and won't allow her to foster children because she's "not the right kind of Christian."

In a federal lawsuit filed Friday, Aimee Maddonna and her lawyers say Miracle Hill Ministries is unconstitutionally discriminating against non-Protestants. The lawsuit challenges a waiver granted this year to the Greenville agency, which previously has come under fire for denying services to same-sex couples and non-Christian families.

Last year, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster requested a waiver exempting the state from an Obama-era regulation preventing publicly licensed and funded foster care agencies from servicing specific religions. That request was granted last month.

But years before Miracle Hill's actions toward non-Christians became an issue, Maddonna says the agency first encouraged her to become a foster parent but then cut off ties when they realized the Simpsonville mother is Catholic and not a "born-again" Protestant, as the agency's rules require.

Maddonna first reached out to Miracle Hill in 2014, when the mother of three decided that it was time to welcome more children into her home. Maddonna, who grew up in a household full of foster children, many with special needs, told The Associated Press in an exclusive interview she wanted her children to be able to develop the same foster sibling bonds she had.

"I wanted to open up my family and my home to kids in need," Maddonna said. "I have the view that every child has the ability to enrich the lives of adults around them, too."

For weeks, Maddonna says conversations continued with Miracle Hill officials, who set up a final interview before she was to be approved as a foster parent. In a conversation ahead of that meeting, Maddonna says she was asked to give the name of her church.

"By the name, you can tell it's a Catholic parish," Maddonna said. She says the Miracle Hill representative "immediately responded back with, 'I'm sorry, we only employ volunteers and mentors who are Protestant Christian.'"

"I've never considered myself a religious minority until that moment," Maddonna said. "I had to tell my kids that, because we're Catholic, we can't take these kids out for ice cream and cheer them on at their games. I was devastated."

In the last fiscal year, Miracle Hill received nearly $600,000 in state and federal funding, the organization's president has said.

Rachel Laser - president and CEO for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, whose lawyers are handling Maddonna's case - says that despite the waiver's specific language concerning Christianity, Miracle Hill is unconstitutionally discriminating against non-Protestants.

"This is a problem that the government has caused. If Miracle Hill were a private entity not accepting state and federal money, then they could decide with their private money whom they served," Laser said. "Aimee isn't the right kind of Christian, so they don't serve her."

Named in the lawsuit are Gov. McMaster, the South Carolina Department of Social Services and the federal Department of Health and Human Services. Spokespeople for McMaster and the federal Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately return messages Friday seeking comment on the lawsuit.

On an online form used to request more information about the foster care program, Miracle Hill describes itself as "a non-denominational, Christian organization based upon a protestant statement of faith." An informational sheet provided to AP describes a viable foster parent as "a born-again believer in the Lord Jesus Christ as expressed by a personal testimony and Christian conduct," going on to note further that the applicant must be an active participant of a protestant congregation.

An online frequently-asked-questions section notes that, while Jews or Catholics "wouldn't be a good fit for Christian leadership roles at Miracle Hill, such as in our foster-care and mentoring programs," the organization can help connect them with other groups where they can serve.

Maddonna recently reached out to Miracle Hill again, to see whether their policy had changed, but she said she received no response.

"When most people think of people being turned away, they think of equally despicable circumstances where a gay couple or a Jewish couple is turned away," Maddonna said. "If you don't protect the rights of everybody, it sets a precedent that will eventually touch on you."

Westboro Baptist Church #fundie rawstory.com

Proving that there is no limit to fundamentalist Christian extremism, the ultra-conservative Westboro Baptist church has launched a crusade against Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis despite all parties being against same-sex marriage.

While Davis is sitting in jail on contempt charges for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, members of the extremist Westboro Baptist church in Topeka are threatening to go to Kentucky to protest against Davis for being an adulteress –due to having been married four times — and for causing “F*g marriage” because of her sinfulness.

Davis, who converted to Christianity four years ago maintains that she cannot issue licenses to gay couples on religious grounds, calling it a “Heaven or Hell decision.” Despite that, members of the Topeka church have launched a Twitter jihad on Davis saying she is a “phony divorced/remarried traitor to God,” and “#NotChristian.”

Addressing Davis, who has been married four times –twice to the same man — and reportedly had twins out of wedlock, Westboro tweeted: “‘Surely as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband, so have ye dealt treacherously with me.’ -The LORD”

A sampling of Westboro’s less than Christian charity towards Davis below.

Now that #KimDavis is in jail, time to criminalize homosexuality, adultery, fag marriage & fornication, and book 'em Danno! #FollowGodsLaw

What if a clerk denied #KimDavis a license for her 2nd/3rd/4th marriage because Christ calls it adultery?

image
#KimDavis & her "Christian" ilk have contributed as much to fag marriage as @HRC @TheAdvocateMag & other militants.

image
It's time to pack this sign and visit Kentucky -- land of the phony divorced/remarried traitors to God. #NotChristian

KY clerk Kim Davis would NOT feel at home at Westboro Baptist. She a fake (hence her 3 husbands!), @MattMurph24 >>

image
If Kim Davis has any real fear of God she'll resign and move out of the house from the man she lives w/ in adultery!

Kim can't keep living/sleeping with a man not her husband & say she's repented. Any more than "gay Christians" can. https://twitter.com/attitudemag/status/640149018186809344 …

Christ: “Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: ...
Luke 16:18 https://twitter.com/wbcsaysrepent/status/639617003221749760 …

Skyfloating #conspiracy abovetopsecret.com

Is Westboro Baptist Chruch a Mind Control Psy-Op?

After watching the 8-part series The most hated family in America I am wondering whether "Westboro Baptist Church" under the Phelps family is a covert psy-op or a secret mind-control / MKUltra cult. We know that there have been mind control experiments with other religious cults, most notoriously Jim Jones mass-suicide cult or, more recently, Heavens Gate. In the video series itself there are various hints that something is amiss. Here are a few:

* In one of the videos Fred Phelps claims that his church is "the ONLY church that teaches Gods word". Similar is claimed in a later video buy one of the members. This blanket insult at millions of other Christian churches should give you a hint that these people are either mentally ill or under some remote influence. I mean, we know that many ultra-fundamentalist Christians think that Christianity is the only true Religion, but to think that ones church is the only true church is more than just a little extreme.

* All phelps family members seem to have a lot of money, including those who are no longer members of the Church.This is odd since ultras and extremists normally dont have that much money. On the fringe of society nobody wants to give you money. It looked as if every family member sports their own SUV.

* The media are lashing on to these far-out-fringe loons as if they were representative of anything. In the movie its Louis Thereoux, but also other notables such as Michael Moore take "Westboro Baptist Church" as representative of what Religion is all about. Clearly walking around with Pickets saying "God Hates Fags" and "Fags eat Poop" is not what Religion is about. So what is the medias agenda with zooming in on these utter loons as if they were what the majority of religious people are like? If this is a Psy-Op then the goal here would be to increase the divide between the two already extremely conflicted ideological groups (left-wing/right-wing) in America.

* While it is true that there are parts of the Bible that forbid a Christian from having homosexual relationships, emphasizing and exaggerating this particular aspect of the Bible is a sign of either - again - mental illness, or some kind of unsound agenda. Most Christians I know would hold pickets saying "Jesus Loves You", not "God Hates Fags". In fact, quite a number of Christians are tolerant of Homosexuality. But their voices dont get heard in the media. In fact, the Westboro Baptist Church looks more like it was dreamed up as a caricature of an atheists biggest nightmare than anything resembling the normal decency and respect we know from Christians.

Of course I have no evidence that WBC is a secret psy-operation by some agency or rogue agency. Im only seeing the ripples of a stone cast long ago. Im only wondering who cast the stone. Im wondering if we, working together, can research and find evidence for strange ongoings in Westboro. Because there are a number of things seriously wrong with this case. How does a church get this insane? And why do all kinds of well-known journalists zoom in on it as if it represents anything? Its because of the medias cameras that these loons became known in the first place. Without the media they would be nothing. This is indeed how the mass-media manufactures controversy. Its so easy. You just point your camera at the most deranged idiot around and make it into something big.

I will be looking around for any further evidence that might point to what the thread title says and post it here as I find it.

Vox Day #fundie voxday.blogspot.com

This is a brilliant application of what Big Social is doing, only instead of allowing the hand-picked SJWs of the Twitter Trust and Safety Council or the Facebook-endorsed SPLC to do the restricting, the Chinese government will do it. And why not? The basic principle has been established and broadly accepted, from Twitter to the Her Majesty's Government. As Q said, "why are trips allowed?"

Imagine if the God-Emperor and his Grand Inquisitor were to launch a similar program in the United States. After all, who has proven themselves more untrustworthy than Facebook? How could the SJWs legitimately complain if Mark Zuckerberg and his executives found themselves placed under permanent restriction? This principle of "once untrustworthy, always restricted" is merely an adaptation of Facebook's own approach to banning thoughtcrime and legally controlling the public discourse, and it represents a welcome return to pre-Enlightenment philosophy on the part of a people who were always rightly dubious about it being genuine. There can be no "freedom of speech" in any non-Western, non-Christian, non-American society, because the concept doesn't even make sense in any other context.

If you wanted to keep what passed for free speech in America, then you shouldn't have permitted entry to Catholics and Jews, followed by wave after wave of various peoples whose beliefs and cultural traditions are entirely antithetical to the concept. And given those waves of immigration, you can't be surprised that it's no longer even possible to publicly state that a man is not a woman without negative legal and social and employment and financial consequences.

[Wait, Catholics aren't western and Christian now?]

The devil, of course, is in the definitions. But the devil is out. Let's not shed too many tears for the SJWs once they discover the difference between "influence" and "power", for as another Chinese leader once said, "power comes from the barrel of a gun". It does not come from control of a momentarily popular software application.

patriotjb #fundie rr-bb.com

What Christians are doing the exact same thing as what Islam teaches? Could you name one and if you do are they:

--advising people they must convert to Christianity or be put to death?

--advocating special labels for non-Christians like infidels, Crusaders or comparing people to pigs?

--advocating populating inside a country and then declaring their goal to take over the country as a Christian theocracy?

Matt Slick #fundie google.com.au

• On the Pokemon rules website it states, "Carry your Pokmon with you, and you're ready for anything! You've got the power in your hands, so use it!"
• One observer of children playing the game said the children would afterwards mimic the game by summoning the Pokemon to attack others. This is occultic.
• Pokemon are summoned to do battle and to protect. This is equivalent to sorcery.
• Earth, Wind, Fire, and Water are frequent elemental themes found in Pagan religions, witchcraft, and Wicca, and are used heavily in Pokemon.

The spiritual side of the world is real. There are spiritual elements and demonic forces at work, whose purpose is to lead astray and destroy:

"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places," (Eph. 6:12).

The enemy is powerful and cunning. The only light we have is the Bible, and we need to follow it and not give ourselves or our children into the hands of those who would introduce occultic principles in a role-playing game. Again, the Bible says...

"But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons," (1 Tim. 4:1).

There is nothing wrong with children having fun and using their imaginations, but when that fun involves the occult it is dangerous. As Christians, we should be very concerned about what our children are involved in since they can be so easily influenced. They don't need the influence of the occult or evolutionary theory to help them towards Christ. They need the truth.

You are over-reacting

Addendum - two months later:

This article has generated some interesting responses. I've been called delusional, bigoted, paranoid, and one who contributes to the decline of society because of my intolerant comments about an innocent and fun child's game. One mother, who claimed to be a Christian, emailed me with heavy complaints and accusations and sought to justify her actions in encouraging her children to watch Pokemon. Well, that is her prerogative.

Have I changed my opinion? Not at all. Am I delusional, bigoted, paranoid, and a contributor to social decay? I certainly hope not. And from what I see in God's word and from what I have seen in Pokemon, I still stand on what I have said.

I expect people to not like it when their comfort zone is rattled, when I don't tote the secular line and salute to "harmless children's games," even when they teach occultism. By the way, I told the Christian mother that the Lord will hold her accountable for how her children are raised. I asked her if she wants to continue to encourage her children to play with cards that teach casting spells, evolution, and controlling forces to do your bidding. She emailed me back and called me some names.

Others have simply assumed a non-Christian perspective and made judgments about me and this article from their non-Christian point of view. That isn't a problem. They are entitled to their opinions, as am I.

Is Pokemon good? I don't think so. Does it contribute to impressionable children accepting occult ideas? Yes, it does.

Tim Dukeman #fundie afellowtruthseeker.blogspot.com

[All emphases are in the original except for the underlining, which is used to clarify a quote]

If you haven't heard yet, World Vision has changed its hiring policy to allow individuals in legally-recognized same-sex marriages.

...

...World Vision has declared that a person can live openly, proudly, and unrepentantly in a lifestyle that the Bible calls "unnatural," "detestable," and "an abomination" and still be a Christian. Which is the exact opposite of what the Bible says:

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6)

Don't miss the beautiful picture of the Gospel in these verses. Before Christ, we were caught in all kinds of sins that would keep us out of the Kingdom of God. But we have been washed, sanctified, and justified! We are not the same! We have been forever changed by the precious blood of the Lamb of God. In contrast, World Vision teaches that we can enter the Kingdom of God without being washed, sanctified, and justified, settling on a gospel that literally sends people to Hell.

Consequently, World Vision is no longer a Christian organization. It seems clear that Christian people should support Christian organizations over non-Christian organizations that do the same work. For contrast, let's examine this statement by Samaritan's Purse President Franklin Graham:

I was shocked today to hear of World Vision’s decision to hire employees in same-sex marriages. The Bible is clear that marriage is between a man and a woman. My dear friend, Bob Pierce, the founder of World Vision and Samaritan’s Purse, would be heartbroken. He was an evangelist who believed in the inspired Word of God. World Vision maintains that their decision is based on unifying the church – which I find offensive – as if supporting sin and sinful behavior can unite the church. From the Old Testament to the New Testament, the Scriptures consistently teach that marriage is between a man and woman and any other marriage relationship is sin.

The call to help the poor is an important one, and we must take seriously the biblical commands to do so. However, there is no reason to partner with the workers of darkness. The Bible is very clear on this point. In II Chronicles 20, The LORD sent a prophet to rebuke Jehoshaphat (king of Judah) for joining with Ahaziah (wicked king of Israel) to build ships. That's it. And if God cares about our associations when we partner with someone to build ships, how much more does God care about our associations when we do His work in His Name? This is what the Holy Spirit says:

Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God. (II Corinthians 6)

For Conscientious Christians, the Boycott of World Vision starts today. We must not allow World Vision to proclaim a false gospel with our money. We must not support World Vision over Christian charities. We must not fellowship with darkness. We must not allow Christian Love to be mutilated, and Christian Compassion to be shipwrecked.

If World Vision wants to send people to Hell in the name of humanitarianism, they can do it on someone else's dime.

Arunma #fundie christianforums.com

Anyone who fails to believe in God, or who attempts to commune with him through false religion, is intrinsically opposed to God. Thus it would be accurate to say that all non-Christians are anti-God. People often wonder why God would send all non-Christians to hell. This is part of the answer.

khazul #fundie bbs.payableondeath.com

There is no such thing as Christian Homophobia. Yes homosexual lifestyles can tear a family apart, especially if some members disagree with it and don't voice there opinions in Godly love. It is more likely in Christian house holds as we as Christians are not to support sin. Yes some people on this forum have shown hate for homosexuals; it doesn't mean it's a uniform Christian belief. I've seen more non-Christian "Homophobics" than Christian.

Sandy Shaw #fundie ezinearticles.com

(A review of James Cameron's latest)

Maybe we should expect spiritual outrageousness from Hollywood by now. After all, they hardly seem to be able to make a spiritual statement in their movies without alienating every Christian in the audience. They have been warned about this before. Michael Medved has stated that Hollywood loses billions of dollars simply by offending Christians and church-goers, who number in the hundreds of millions in America. They often don't seem to care.

But Avatar takes this to a new extreme. Many critics have commented that it has a deeply pro-environmentalist message, and indeed, it seems almost loaded with every touchy-feely New Age environmentalist theme that you can imagine....

It always strikes me as sad when these great breakthroughs in the arts fail to glorify the One who gave us creativity in the first place. Sadly, this is one of those times, and I understand that is why, even after the awe and wonder of seeing one of the greatest visual spectacles of our age, my friend left the theatre feeling pretty flat. I wonder how many others felt the same - even non-Christians. I wonder how many left sensing there was something very wrong at the core of this story. I would guess there might be quite a few.

There have been a lot of complaints about the storyline. Even many non-Christians may not like seeing the "Earth mother goddess" getting all the glory, which is why I gather that this movie will never take top spot as the most-watched film in history, despite all the money spent on it.

Will Hollywood learn its lesson? I strongly doubt it. Hollywood has a very unique agenda and thousands are taken in and deceived.

Will I go and see it for myself? Probably not!

Daymond Duck #fundie raptureforums.com

The growing persecution and spiritual decline of America is bad enough already, but it is going to get much worse in the future. It is difficult to say how many Muslims are coming into the U.S. when people are saying the number is much higher than our government is letting on. And Pres. Obama has already said he will increase it even more. It is sad to know that Syrian Muslims are being brought in, but Syrian Christians are being refused entry. Bringing non-Christians in and keeping Christians out changes things.

Increasing the population of Muslims is going to mean more mosques; more demands to stop monitoring mosques, more demands to stop profiling Muslims; more demands to bring in extended families of Muslims; more demands for Muslim prayers before Congress, at city council meetings and the like.

It will mean more demands for Sharia Law: more attempts to get rid of the Bible, portray Christians as hate-mongers and extremists, send Christians to sensitivity training, get rid of chaplains in the military and the like; more demands to change school textbooks, lunch menus, etc. and perhaps more terrorist attacks, especially on churches.

Muslims are coming (and being brought) to the U.S. for many reasons, but the primary reason they are coming is to fundamentally transform the U.S. into a Muslim nation.

I have been to Mexico and seen many faithful Hispanic Christians. The vast majority is nominal at best. About 75-80%, say they are Catholic. They say they are Catholic because their parents were Catholic or they believe they were born Catholic. But their Catholic beliefs are far from traditional mainline Christianity. In many cases, their beliefs have been blended with ritualism, magic, voodoo, varied Indian cultural practices and the like.

Several years ago, a missionary took my wife and me to a Roman Catholic Church in Mexico and a voodoo ceremony was being performed in the church. I am not against legalized immigration (and I don’t blame anyone for seeking a better life), but I am saying that letting 25-30 million people with many kinds of strange beliefs come into the U.S. in the next 4 to 5 years (and not letting Christians in) will decrease the percentage of true Christians in the U.S.

Understand that the Bible is not wrong. Every jot and tittle will be fulfilled including what it says about persecution. Understand too, that what Islamic terrorists do in other countries (behead Christians, burn churches, burn people alive, cut babies in two, sell people into slavery) they will also do in the U.S. Their threats to raise the Islamic State flag over the White House and to blow up the White House should be taken seriously.

The spirit of Antichrist is already here and a flood of epic proportions is on the way. It will further weaken the U.S. spiritually and we should be concerned for our Lord, our children, our grandchildren, others and ourselves.

David Barton #fundie rightwingwatch.org

Now discrimination today is always a bad word a hundred percent of the time, but it simply means making a choice between or making a difference between. And discrimination means I am going to discriminate and say I can tell a difference between a Christian and a non-Christian and therefore I only want Christians working on my church staff. I can tell the difference between someone who says they're homosexual and someone who says they're straight. A secular organization has a tough time discriminating, but a church needs to have the right to discriminate.

This is a biblical issue because Jesus has an entire parable in Matthew 20: 1-15 where he talks about a landowner who had a vineyard who went out to hire folks to work in his vineyard. And as he hired them he make a contract with them that said you'll work for this much or whatever and throughout the day he hired people and he made individual contracts with them and at the end of the day when he is paying them all off, the guy who got hired first said "wait a minute, that's not fair" and [the landowner] said "time out, we had a contract, didn't we? You agreed to work for a certain wage ... you should have gone down the street and found somebody else to work for that would have paid you different, but you agreed to work for that wage." And Jesus makes a great statement in Matthew 20: 15 where he says "don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money?"

Now that's a great statement and that's a statement Jesus teaches to show the inviolability of contracts between employers and employees. That's why the government is not supposed to get involved in this stuff anyway. Government shouldn't be involved in employment contracts period.

Staropramen #racist #fundie #psycho forum.christogenea.org

[Regarding the 2012 Wisconsin Sikh temple massacre]

Real Christians know that it's Jesus's way or the highway. The rest of the non-Christian white population can only see what we believe is Truth as an arrogant isolationist philosophy. That will never change as long as they are unregenerated, save the pouring out of God's Spirit on all white flesh [Joel/Acts] when most [maybe all?] of the remaining white non-Christians will be supernaturally shaken out of their foolishness whether they like it or not and the extermination of God's enemies commences.

At worst this shooter should be considered a brother that made a strategically foolish mistake. But morally what he did is no different then going to Pathmark and buying some Raid. My bible tells me that we will be smashing jewish babies skulls against rocks when Christ returns. And yet look at the things this guy is being called by his brothers and sisters for shooting some invaders. Of course we cannot commit acts that are deemed illegal NOW. But with the type of sympathy that I see demonstrated towards these Sikhs in that thread, even the suggestion of a freekin' donation drive, it is obvious to me that there will be huge piles of mutilated and raped white people before this is over.

Stinker #fundie christianforums.com

If true Christians had the power in the U.S. there would be so fewer secular laws.

Since they are not, we have so many laws for so many things that shouldn't have to be, that it is almost insane!

Non-Christians can never understand the Lord's teaching of true freedom through obedience to His New Testament commandments. Non-Christians see obedience to His teaching as kind of miserable slavery. They do not see the true slavery of endless secular laws from the result of a society in rebellion against the Lord.

Bryan Fischer #fundie rightwingwatch.org

My argument all along has been that the purpose of the First Amendment is to protect the free exercise of the Christian religion.

One evidence that [the Founding Fathers] were not dealing ... they weren't even intending to deal with non-Christian religions is what they did with Mormonism in the latter part of the nineteenth century. Mormonism - they call themselves by the name of Christ, but it is not an orthodox Christian network of churches, it just is not. Mormonism is not an orthodox Christian faith. It just is not. They have a different Gospel, they have a completely different definition of who Christ is and so forth, I mean, the list could be multiplied endlessly.

And it was very clear that the Founding Fathers did not intend to preserve automatically religious liberty for non-Christian faiths, so when Mormonism came along, they practiced polygamy, they believed in polygamy, just like Muslims do today.

Bryan Fischer #fundie rightwingwatch.org

My argument all along has been that the purpose of the First Amendment is to protect the free exercise of the Christian religion.

One evidence that [the Founding Fathers] were not dealing ... they weren't even intending to deal with non-Christian religions is what they did with Mormonism in the latter part of the nineteenth century. Mormonism - they call themselves by the name of Christ, but it is not an orthodox Christian network of churches, it just is not. Mormonism is not an orthodox Christian faith. It just is not. They have a different Gospel, they have a completely different definition of who Christ is and so forth, I mean, the list could be multiplied endlessly.

And it was very clear that the Founding Fathers did not intend to preserve automatically religious liberty for non-Christian faiths, so when Mormonism came along, they practiced polygamy, they believed in polygamy, just like Muslims do today. It was a part of their revealed religion. God had commanded Joseph Smith to have multiple wives and commanded Joseph Smith to go tell your wife Emma, look you gotta room, I want my son Joseph to be able to have as many wives as he wants so you're just going to have to accept it. So God is telling Emma through Joseph Smith, look you're just going to have to live with this deal. So multiple wives in the Mormon Church until 1890 when the Mormon Church told their folks to obey the law.

The Mormon Church, by the way, has never denounced the practice of polygamy. It has not. What it did in 1890, if you go back to the Doctrines and Covenants, what the Mormon Church did is they advised - it wasn't even an order - they advised the members of the LDS Church to obey the law which said one man, one woman, period. So my guess is that if those that are trying to legalize polygamy, and they are working on it right now ... [Fischer cites court case pushing for recognition of polygamy and says it the same as using courts to push for gay marriage] ... If there is some activist court that says you have to recognize polygamous marriages in your state, you're going to start seeing the LDS church, I believe go back to the exercise of polygamy. If it's legal, because all they told their folks is obey the law, if the law says you can have multiple wives, I believe the LDS Church will be out in the front of the pack.

I mean, not everybody in the LDS Church is going to do it any more than all the members of the LDS Church ever did it. It was a minority even in Joseph Smith's day - I mean, Brigham Young set some kind of world record for number of wives, I mean he was up there in Muhammad territory frankly. But most Mormons didn't do it, it was just a small percentage that had the resources to be able to do it. But I think it will come back, it will come back pretty vigorously in the Mormon Church, again, because all the church fathers said in 1890, just obey the law. Well, if the law says you can have multiple wives, they'll be back.

George #fundie fstdt.com

I must say that you wrote an excellent book when you wrote about the Gap Theory. I agree with this theory of biblical creationism. We live on an Old Earth; however, we were not made by evolution and are no relation to the ancient life forms found in the fossils. You are truly a scholar and Marshall University, founded by the Virginia Legislature before the Civil War, should be proud of you.

I wish to say one other thing. Those who are non-Christians should not be rude to our host. Be polite and express a respectable opinion. I am an educated Methodist Christian and proud of it. One day I will be absent from the body and present with the Lord (II Corinthians 5:6-8). I would advise non-Christians to reconsider their opinions. One day it will be too late!

Marilyn Hickey #fundie worldnetdaily.com

A Denver-based Christian ministry claims it witnessed a modern-day loaves-and-and-fishes miracle in Egypt where the 3,500 Kentucky Fried Chicken meals it ordered for conference attendees served more than 5,000 and produced leftovers.

The incident was reported by Charisma Magazine and described on a YouTube video about the trip.

According to Marilyn Hickey, 77, whose ministry organized the meetings in conjunction with the Egyptian Evangelical Association, 3,500 boxed-lunches from KFC were ordered and accounted for, said the Charisma report.

"There were tickets distributed for the lunches," Hickey said. "The boxes were given out, leaving none in the room."

But after the food was gone, the crowd swelled to about 5,000, and volunteers returned to the room and were "astonished" to discover 1,200 more lunches.

Hickey reported that after the lunches were handed out, another 1,200 appeared in the room, "leaving a surplus of food and dumbfounded witnesses," Charisma reported.

Hickey's staff called the incident during the recent Egypt trip a "loaves and fishes" miracle, the report said, after Jesus' miracle in the New Testament in which a small boy's lunch of loaves and fishes fed thousands.

Hickey told the publication she feels confident in proclaiming the event as a miracle because independent Egyptian and non-Christian sources verified the unexplained appearance of the lunches.

"It happened in such a way that [my ministry] was not at all associated with it, which left local volunteers and non-Christians marveling at what had happened," she told Charisma.

Ken Ham #fundie answersingenesis.org

There is Hope for Atheists!

When I read some of the atheist blogs, Facebook posts, and news articles that display a sheer hatred against Christians (really, it’s a hatred against God), it can seem, humanly speaking, hopeless to try to reach these secularists with the truth of God’s Word and the salvation message it presents.

And yet, we can be encouraged to read of the incredible conversion of Saul (who severely persecuted Christians) in Acts 9 and realize that God’s Word can penetrate even the most hardened heart. Indeed: “For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).

As I read many of the comments by atheists (blasphemous and vitriolic as some of them are), I also understand that they have been indoctrinated in evolutionary ideas. Most of them have probably never really heard a clear, logical defense of the Christian faith that would answer many of their skeptical questions. It’s important to remember that God’s Word commands us to “sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear” (1 Peter 3:15).

At the same time, it’s vital that we never divorce any arguments/defense we could present to atheists from the powerful Word of God: “So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17).

When I read some of the atheist blogs, Facebook posts, and news articles that display a sheer hatred against Christians (really, it’s a hatred against God), it can seem, humanly speaking, hopeless to try to reach these secularists with the truth of God’s Word and the salvation message it presents.

And yet, we can be encouraged to read of the incredible conversion of Saul (who severely persecuted Christians) in Acts 9 and realize that God’s Word can penetrate even the most hardened heart. Indeed: “For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).

As I read many of the comments by atheists (blasphemous and vitriolic as some of them are), I also understand that they have been indoctrinated in evolutionary ideas. Most of them have probably never really heard a clear, logical defense of the Christian faith that would answer many of their skeptical questions. It’s important to remember that God’s Word commands us to “sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear” (1 Peter 3:15).

At the same time, it’s vital that we never divorce any arguments/defense we could present to atheists from the powerful Word of God: “So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17).

WE DO OUR BEST TO DEFEND THE CHRISTIAN FAITH USING APOLOGETICS AGAINST THE SECULAR ATTACKS OF OUR DAY.
At Answers in Genesis, through our resources, conferences, and other outreaches, we do our best to defend the Christian faith using apologetics against the secular attacks of our day. But in doing so, we need to also point people to the truth of God’s Word and challenge them concerning the saving gospel. We use apologetics to answer questions and direct people to God’s Word and its message of salvation.

There’s no greater thrill in this ministry than to hear how God has used what has been taught by AiG to touch someone’s life—for eternity. Last week, I was introduced to one of our new volunteers, Donna, who is helping sew some of the costumes for the figures that will be placed inside our full-size Ark. She had responded to my Facebook post asking for seamstresses.

I discovered that she became a Christian in 1993 after attending one of my seminars (called “Back to Genesis” with the Institute for Creation Research ministry) at Cedarville University in Ohio. The Bible-upholding seminar was such an eye-opener to her about the reliability of the Bible that she became a Christian.

We asked if she would share her testimony.

"Ken:

The Lord opened up this atheistic evolutionist’s eyes decades ago, through exposure to Ken’s ministry.

I was a die-hard evolutionist, completely convinced that the fossil finds in Olduvai Gorge supported the “evidence” that we evolved from less-complicated, early hominid creatures, like the so-called “Lucy".

To keep a long story short: I attended a Creation Seminar at Cedarville College [now Cedarville University], sat in rapt attention as Ken Ham told me “the rest of the story,” and I realized that all of the fossil finds I believed supported evolution were, in all cases, misinterpreted. I was blown away! So, learning the truth about evolution preceded my realizing that God was real (after all!) and that the Bible was His Word. I became a creationist before I became a believer in Christ.

I was raised and educated Roman Catholic. My parents took all seven of us to church every Sunday. And for all that religiosity, we never spoke of Jesus at home.

After twelve years of Catholic schools, and being taught that Noah's Ark, for example, was just an allegorical way to relay the story that “if you come on board with belief in God, he'll keep you through the storm,” that there probably was no actual Noah's Ark, and probably no actual Adam and Eve, it was easy to throw out the Bible as any believable “Word of God.”

I became a non-Christian. I used to say, “How can I believe a book that's been copied over and over and over, translated in so many different versions, when it probably doesn't even look like the original, like a Xerox copy of a Xerox copy of a Xerox copy?” It was easy to walk away from what little faith I'd been taught.

But then being exposed to creation science ministries, I had to look honestly at what I'd come to believe about God. I can't name a specific date that I came to saving knowledge of what Christ had done for me—it was more of a season. I was that thick headed. It took a while for it all to unfold.

Today, I am feasting on apologetics, Christian music, and the inerrant Word of God. I never thought the Bible could make so much sense. Christ has loved and protected me through my years of doubt, even though I never deserved it. I know where I came from, and I know exactly where I’m going. I am free of the fears and superstitions of religion, because I have a deep, personal relationship with the most awesome Creator of the Universe!

By the way, my twin daughters are both graduates of Cedarville, and one is a pastor's wife!

I am so honored to be doing any little thing to make the presentation at the Ark Encounter come alive, and look forward to many more days helping with the sewing effort."


Thank you, Donna. What a wonderful account!
We were able to find some information on the 1993 seminar that she attended at Cedarville University; Cedarville is a university that has a close affiliation with AiG today. See a photo of me (with dark hair) on page 4 of Torch, summer 1993.

In explaining how we conduct apologetics evangelism at AiG, I like to use the account of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11). When Jesus came to the tomb of Lazarus, He told people to roll the stone away. Now, Jesus could have moved the stone with one command—but what people could do for themselves, He asked them to do. Then what people couldn’t do, He did with a command—His Word. He raised Lazarus from the dead.

At AiG, we know that non-Christians are really walking dead people “who were dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1). Only God’s Word can raise the dead. So when we are witnessing to “dead” people, we do the best we can to give answers (1 Peter 3:15) to defend the faith, and in so doing, point them to the Word of God that saves! God is the One who opens people’s hearts (including atheists) and “who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:6).

Yes, God’s Word reaches even the most hardened heart. There is hope for every atheist, for the Lord “is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). And “blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” (1 Peter 1:3).

If the Lord has used AiG, including our Creation Museum, in your life to bring you to salvation, would you please let me know? Thank you.

Dennis Prager #fundie barbwire.com

I’m a non-Christian. I’m a Jew. Christmas is not a religious holy day for me. But I’m an American, and Christmas is a national holiday in my country. It is, therefore, my holiday — though not my holy day — as much as it is for my fellow Americans who are Christian. That’s why it’s not surprising that it was an American Jew, Irving Berlin, who wrote “White Christmas,” one of America’s most popular Christmas songs. In fact, according to a Jewish musician writing in the New York Times, “Almost all the most popular Christmas songs were written by Jews.” Apparently all these American Jews felt quite included by Christmas!

By not wishing me a Merry Christmas, you are not being inclusive. You are excluding me from one of my nation’s national holidays.

. . .

The vast majority of Americans who celebrate Christmas, and who treat non-Christians so well, deserve better.

So, please say ‘Merry Christmas’ and ‘Christmas party’ and ‘Christmas vacation.’ If you don’t, you’re not ‘inclusive.’ You’re hurtful.

Adrian Sol #fundie #sexist dailystormer.name

[From "University PURGES All Non-Christian Staff – Perverts Not Amused!"]

Does America need to be purged?

Yes.

Obviously.

The real question is, will a purge even be enough? Can we straighten up merely by burning all the perverts and heretics, and keeping the skanks in line?

It’s difficult to say. However, it’s definitely worth trying.

And encouragingly enough, some small-scale purging seems to be occurring already.

[Screenshot of article "A Nashville Art School Will Purge All Non-Christian Faculty Now That It Has Been Taken Over by a Religious University" by Artnet]

Yet even with such soft measures, everyone is losing their minds.

Artnet

Earlier this week, students, and faculty at the Watkins College of Art in Nashville, Tennessee, were shocked to learn that their school would be absorbed by Belmont University, a local Christian institution that has made national headlines over the last decade for allegedly retaliating against faculty who went against its strict code of faith.

“There is rage and there is fear,” Quinn Dukes, an alumna of Watkins College who organized an online petition against the merger, tells Artnet News. “Students and faculty are losing both a history and a school.”

In other words, their entire school, and their entire history, is anti-Christian. That’s the only explanation for why the entire institution would be destroyed.

Considering that it’s an “art” school, that wouldn’t surprise me.

Sounds like the inquisition is going to have a field day with these people.

[...]

“We do not hire people who are not Christian,” Thomas Burns, Belmont’s provost, clarified in a response to questions at a town hall on Wednesday. “So the ones who are not Christian will not be eligible to work at Belmont. That’s just part of who we are.”

[...]

“It broke my heart,” Sasha Campbell, a junior, told Artnet News. “Watkins was my first choice.”

LGBTQ students like Campbell, who identifies as bisexual and trans, are also worried about how welcoming a campus like Belmont will be for students like them, although the university does have a club for queer students.

Imagine hating Christianity so much that you’d faint and cry at the news that your preferred school has become a Christian institution. I guess getting a degree in “art” is more or less a joke anyway, and most students are probably joining up with these programs with the intention of having a 3-year sex and drug party.

In that sense, being in a “Christian university” would be something of a buzzkill.

Unfortunately, all these students have an easy way to escape being forced into a disciplined and righteous lifestyle – going to any other school in America.

We need to take this purge to the national level. Fire ALL degenerate professors, and forcefully turn art school whores into slave-brides for incels. Only then will America have a chance to walk the right path.

Vincent Cheung #fundie vincentcheung.com

If you knew a non-Christian who had died in one of the great disasters of recent years – someone who was killed by warfare, by terrorism, by flood, or by fire – do not weep for him because of how he died, but weep for him because of what he is suffering now. This person might be your father or mother, your brother or sister, your son or daughter, your spouse, or a friend. At this very moment in hell, he is screaming in extreme agony, and being tortured by an unearthly pain. He curses God, but God laughs at him. He begs God to release him, but God only increases his suffering. He calls out your name, but you cannot hear him, you cannot help him. He recalls the times when the two of you made fun of the Christians and mocked their God. He thinks about the time when one of them stumped him in a debate, but he hardened his heart even more.

He remembers how he was encouraged in his unbelief when he read a certain novel that portrayed Christian history as just one great conspiracy. Now he realizes that all it contained were old theories that were refuted long ago. One of the newcomers in hell had told him that they even made it into a movie. The devil overheard and chuckled, “Could you people be any more gullible? You claimed to be so rational and so knowledgeable, so advanced…Ha! And you were fooled by a novel? Well, you will meet the author in a just a few years. You can get his autograph then!”

No matter how he died, or what kind of person you thought he was, if he died a non-Christian, then he is now in hell – burning, burning, burning! Combine all the mental distress that you have ever suffered and all the physical agony that you have ever endured, multiply its intensity by a million times, and extend its duration to endless eternity, and you will have a faint idea of what he is going through right now. But our imagination fails us, for anything that we can imagine is far weaker than what God is now doing to your friend or relative. So I will restrain myself, lest my description makes hell sound too pleasant. God does not do a half-baked job at anything – what he promises, he delivers, and when he punishes, he goes all the way.

Lindzie #fundie forum.myspace.com

"The choice should be out there

Not everyone is a christian honey. Should non-christians have to live by your morals at the expense of themselves?"

I am not ignorant becuase i am christian, i know that non belivers want abortions, but i am a beliver and i am called to be strong in my faith and to abide by the bible and obey God COMPLEATLY, so i will do just that. I am sorry if I offened you but this is no place to bring anger and negativity. People are not dumb they know sex gets you pregnant, they need to deal with the consiquences of thier actions, and not by killing innocent peole becuase it makes thier life eaiser. " at the expence of themselves" that sounds funny seeing how they dont want to die themselves but with rip out and throw away another human being. Women have choices, to use protection, to not have sex or to give the children up to families who can support and love the children. That is the choice. If going by your theory then people should have the choice to kill anyone, not just fetus's.

Jack Chick #fundie chick.com

We are losing the battle against the sodomite agenda because of our silence. Most of us would rather not even think about this nasty subject much less talk to a stranger about it. But we had better start! Most non-Christians feel sodomy is wrong, but lack courage to speak up. If we will lead out, they will join the revolt against this steamroller, and we can put sin “out of the camp.” We have to be the spark that starts the fire.

Carrol Mitchem #fundie lincolntimesnews.com

The delivery of Christian prayers prior to county government meetings is a tradition that won’t dissipate anytime soon, as long as some Lincoln County commissioners have their way.

In response to a question concerning Rowan County, which was recently ordered by a federal court judge to cease its pre-meeting prayers, Lincoln County Board of Commissioners chairman Carrol Mitchem said that not only will invocations remain in Lincoln County, but that he would see to it that no non-Christian prayers are delivered on his watch.

“A Muslim? He comes in here to say a prayer, I’m going to tell him to leave,” Mitchem said. “I have no use for (those) people. They don’t need to be here praying to Allah or whoever the hell they pray to. I’m not going to listen to (a) Muslim pray.”

In a ruling filed on Monday, Judge James A. Beaty ruled that Rowan County violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution. According to the court document, commissioners there started each meeting with phrases such as “let us pray” or “please pray with me” before delivering the prayer. Those prayers normally included references to “Jesus” and “The Savior.”

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the suit in 2013.

According to Chris Brook, legal director of the ACLU of North Carolina, Rowan commissioners erred by leading public meetings with prayer, asking the public to participate in that prayer, making derogatory comments about religious minorities to the press and almost uniformly confining the prayers to one religion.

“I think that governmental officials should aim to have public meetings that are as inclusive and welcoming as possible,” Brook said. “We talk all the time as a society about wanting to encourage greater public engagement with our government and have greater public involvement in government decisions. When you construct obstacles such as obstructive prayer practices, then I think you’re falling short of an ideal government meeting that is welcoming and encouraging.”

Beaty awarded the plaintiffs $1 in damages and said that they may pursue attorney’s fees and costs from the county.

Mitchem said he doesn’t agree with anybody, religious minorities especially, altering the way things are done.

“Changing rules on the way the United States was founded, Constitution was founded (I don’t like),” Mitchem said. “I don’t need no Arab or Muslim or whoever telling me what to do or us here in the county what to do about praying. If they don’t like it, stay the hell away.”

Sara #fundie blog.myspace.com

There is nothing more stupid [in my eyes] than not being a believer. Not believing only brings you suffering, pain, confusion, and more. So.... why not be a believer?

There can't not be a God. If there wasn't, then how would there be a prayer language? How would we even exist?

The number one thing I'm faced with through non-believers is proof. The thing is, there is proof, if your eyes and ears are open, which unfortunately, most non-believers eyes and ears aren't.

The most revealing form of proof is one we're all familiar with. Prayer. Certain non-believers think all that prayer is just a bad enough wanting of something [in other words, determination] that it just comes. But as we all know, it's not like that. God knows what's best for you, and doesn't always give you what you pray for, or say "Yes" to your prayers. For example, if you're praying about some guy to like you, God may answer you by showing you that the guy doesn't like you back, or that he doesn't want to date anyone, or anything like that.

But when you pray for someone to receive salvation, and they end up seeking salvation like a month later, that's God acting. Unfortunately, non-believers are usually so blinded that they don't notice this.

Another form of proof is the prayer language, otherwise known as Tongues. The night I got annointed with Tongues [April 14th], all my doubt was destroyed. It's not always like that, but it certainly was to me. True faith comes through spending time with God and reading the Bible. But once again, non-believers don't know that.

They also don't know that the answer to all of their questions are in the Bible. I was talking to a friend of mine on the phone one day, and looking in my Bible to answer some of his questions, and I didn't have a clue how easy it was to answer the questions he had that I thought would be difficult to answer.

And another thing. Why would there be a Bible if there was no God? The Bible isn't just a book of guidelines. It's the key to living a good life, and to bringing others happiness. The Bible reveals things to Christians and believers that they need to know to become a better Christian. It also reveals how to bring non-believers to Jesus and how to bring yourself peace, and much more.

The Bible isn't a lie. These people wouldn't have written it if they didn't want other Christians to believe it. It wasn't just written by one person; it was written by several. The Bible is like a testimony. It's like advice, coming from real people at real times in the world. It can also be considered as a warning to non-believers--of what will happen if they don't come to Jesus on time. The Bible is another form of proof, right in front of your eyes.

There is another one that I want to mention. It's Jesus Christ. Christ isn't actually His last name. The name "Christ" means "The Annointed One". I'm very sure that not very many people are aware of that... at least not as many that should be. Non-believers will ask, "What is Jesus annointed to do?", and every Christian should be able to answer that. Jesus is annointed to save the souls of everyone on this earth!

To all non-believers or non-Christians: there is proof. You just have to open your eyes.

Beejai Richardson #fundie theriverwalk.org

browsing through my internet newsfeed when I noticed an offhand comment in an article saying that Westboro Baptist was protesting the Olympics. Occasionally curious to see this trainwreck in action I tried briefly to do a little more research. In a brief look see I didn’t see much more about it but that doesn’t surprise me. Their shenanigans are mostly ignored by the rational world at this point. It also wouldn’t surprise me if they were actually protesting Rio. After all, the Olympics shifting stance about transgender athletes does seem to be right up WBC’s protest alley.

Not to be deterred, I did something I frequently do for theological or political research but have apparently never done for something as base as Westboro Baptist Church. I went to the source. At least, I tried to. Apparently their church domain is “www.godhatesfags.com”? Really? Somebody please tell me this is a parody site. Before digging into Rio I tried to figure out if this was their real page or not. As best as I can tell, it is and quite frankly, that sickens me. After a few minutes, I had to get out of there and go take a shower to wash that filth off before I could come back to the keyboard and start typing here.

React: In case you didn’t guess, I can’t stand Westboro Baptist Church. But you might be a little bit surprised to know why. I mean, if they want to be all stupid and angry and protest everything from Pokemon Go to the Olympics to military funerals, that’s fine. Go right ahead. America has a long standing tradition of protest and the frivolous are just as free to do so as the deadly serious, the not quite politically correct just as much as those on the cutting edge of social reform. What gets me is they call themselves a “church” and they blame God as a motivator for their evil. If they want to sin, go ahead and sin… just don’t call yourself a Christian as you revel in it.

The same thing is true for pretty much another issue. If someone wants to go out and get drunk every weekend, that’s their choice. While I won’t be going out with you, I have no problem sitting down for a cup of coffee (or çay here in Turkey) any time you want to chat. The same is true with the practising homosexual, the white collar embezzler, the porn addict, the drug dealer, and the gossip. However some person choses to live their life… its their life and I have no problem showing my love and friendship to them even if I might not participate in, or even endorse, their choices.

But is someone wants to get wasted every night and then call themselves a Christian… I want nothing to do with them. If they are Christian and proud. Go somewhere else. If you want to be verbally abusive, or openly cheating on your spouse, or spreading every rumor that finds its way to your ears while pretending to be a faithful follower of Christ… I want no part of it. Either turn around or shut up. Don’t call yourself a part of the spotless pride while gloriously wallowing in the mud. If you are fighting a sin, I will work with you and pray with you and storm heaven’s gates on your behalf. If you are engaging in sin while not claiming to be a Christian I will pray for you and meet with you and storm heaven’s gates on your behalf. But if you call yourself a Christian while proudly holding that God hate’s fags sign, or that rainbow flag… I might still storm heaven’s gates on your behalf but here on earth I will do everything I can to disassociate from you. Westboro Baptist protester, you are not a Christian. Stop lying to yourself and the world. Actively openly proud gay church member, you are not a Christian. Stop lying to yourself and the world.

Many inside the church are very quick to judge society and culture and “the world”. Many in that world and even other Christians are quick to say, “Don’t judge.” We are called to judge, but we are called to judge only those who claim to be part of God’s family. So, judge for yourselves. Am I right on this or am I just a hate filled bigot?

John Horvat II #fundie #wingnut #conspiracy #transphobia #homophobia tfp.org

Achieving Christendom Is America’s Best Chance at Overthrowing Abortion, LGBT Reign of Terror

Christendom Is the Solution for the Emptiness of our Nihilistic Society
Grave moral problems are tearing the country apart. For many, this is apparent in the form of broken homes, procured abortion, shattered communities and lost Faith.

Many people get it right when pointing out the problems. However, they get it wrong when looking for solutions.

Some get it wrong because they look for solutions that address symptoms, not causes. Others search for a way out that involves the least possible effort. In these politically correct times, people are told not to offend anyone by their proposals. Thus, they automatically exclude the only real solution, which is a return to Christendom. They are willing to consider any other solution, no matter how absurd or improbable—anything but Christendom.

Christendom! It may seem shocking since its days seem long past. We are supposed to be in a post-Christian era. However, the urgency of our times call for it. We need a Christian civilization if we are going to overcome the present crisis. It needs to be at least considered.

A Rejected Proposal

Because our problems are moral, our solutions must also be moral. The rich treasury of Western thought and traditional Church teaching prove that the natural law and Christian morality are the norms that are best suited to our human and social nature. We find our greatest happiness inside institutions and social structures that take us to the end for which we are created—God.

Thus, we should naturally tend to favor Christendom. Everyone, Christian and non-Christian alike, finds the best conditions for prospering inside a family of nations that facilitates virtue and promotes social harmony in this vale of tears.

But everyone avoids this conclusion. We have long been conditioned to reject this line of thought. This Anything But Christendom (ABC) Syndrome curiously applies alike to the political left, right and center. It embraces both secular and religious America. The most rigid tyranny bars anyone from thinking outside the materialistic box.

The ABC Syndrome and the Political Spectrum

Each political sector has its reasons for denying Christendom. For radical liberals, the ABC Syndrome makes sense. They resent any moral limits to their acts and do not care if there are harmful consequences. Individual pleasure reigns supreme regardless of self-destruction or the death of babies. Thus, a Christian moral code represents an unbearable restriction on their desires to do, think and be whatever they want. Their variant of the ABC Syndrome is to allow Everything But Christendom. Use any letter of the LGBTQ+ alphabet, but never use C for Christendom.

Those on the right have a different approach. We find Christians who truly desire a Ten-Commandment-based moral code, for example. However, they dare not propose Christian morality because the people and media who oppose it appear to be numerous. For them, it has no chance of winning. Thus, they subscribe to the Anything But Christendom approach on how society should be run. Every concession must be made to accommodate others who refuse to accommodate them. Christians dance around all the issues touching on Christendom, but no one dares say the word.

And then there are the radical moderates who want to appear non-radical. In their radicalism, these extremists purge all moral references from the debate. They prefer to tweak the status quo, hoping to avoid the Christendom issue altogether. As society falls apart, this effort proves elusive and ineffective.

Imposing the Christian Will Upon Others

Three main fallacies are used to justify the ABC Syndrome. The first is the mistaken belief that proposing Christendom imposes the Faith on non-believers.

Liberals think that establishing any moral limits means imposing Christianity on others. And yet they have no qualms whatsoever with imposing their anti-Christian will on Christians, on Christian feast days such as Christmas, and the Little Sisters of the Poor. They have no scruples about stuffing a Drag Queen Story Hour world of perversion down the throats of society, despite protests from concerned parents.

Christians cannot impose their Faith on those who do not believe because Faith is a gift from God. It cannot, by its nature, be imposed. However, Christians can and should enact reasonable laws based on the natural law that call for moral restraint to form a just and harmonious society.

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

Since Aristotle, moralists taught that this natural law is valid for all times, places and peoples. By advocating such moral limits in the law, Christians merely obey the nature of all law, which restricts what individuals might do for the sake of the higher common good.

In proposing Christendom, we are not imposing but returning to an order that conforms to our human nature and which favors our development and sanctification. In submitting their Everything But Christianity agenda, the left imposes on society a destructive system that brings it to ruin.

Hopelessly Outdated

The second fallacy is that Christendom is so far removed from society’s current state that it is impractical to propose it. The Christian agenda is hopelessly outdated for postmodern times, it is falsely claimed.

There is nothing more outdated than today’s anti-Christian agenda. As Catholic thinker Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira notes, there is nothing new about divorce, procured abortion, nudity, and moral depravity. Most “modern” proposals are merely recycled pagan vices from antiquity. Moreover, what could be more foreign to our American Christian heritage than the sudden appearance of transgenderism or the current mainstreaming of Satanic movements?

Indeed, most Americans identify with a return to our Christian roots. They have problems adjusting to the latest barbarisms proposed by a neo-pagan culture. The debate should not be centered on the age of the ideas proposed but their merits. The automatic exclusion of ideas because some claim they are outdated is foolish and wrong. The only thing that matters is if they are true or false.

A Long Time Frame

Finally, there is the fallacy that it is impossible to change society quickly, especially when most people seem to subscribe to the opposite of a Christian civilization. At best, a Christian restoration is a futile effort, they erroneously claim.

Again this argument sidesteps the merits of ideas. It focuses on the practicality of implementing them. However, this fallacy is as flawed as the other two.

Captivating ideas like homeschooling, for example, have drastically changed individuals and families in a short time. As the last elections have proven, voters will change their positions when convinced of the need to change.

Societies, too, can quickly and radically change. Consider the Sexual Revolution. Within the space of a decade, the sixties radically changed the mores, fashions and manners of that generation and all those that followed. Most people in the fifties were not hippies, but many adopted hippie ways in the seventies as these became mainstream.

The history of the Church is full of fervent missionary efforts in which whole peoples, burdened by their paganism, were quickly converted to the Faith by the efforts of men and the action of grace. These peoples changed their lives wholesale, adopting Christian ways in a short time.

People change their ways when times are empty, and ideas are exhausted. Indeed, it is in times like ours that grand ideas like Christendom have their greatest appeal.

Where Christ Is King

Thus, the time is ripe to debate Christendom. It should be done openly, unapologetically and enthusiastically. Many do not know what Christendom is. Indeed, the ABC Syndrome represents old liberal prejudices that distort the true nature of a Christian society. For too long, our shallow, materialistic society has suppressed the notions of wonder, sublime, and the sacred that correspond to the deepest desires of the human soul.

By engaging in the debate over Christendom, we address the emptiness of our nihilistic society that finds no meaning or purpose in life.

Above all, the failure to debate Christendom is fatal since it means the continued descent into an anti-Christendom of anarchy and unrestraint. This anti-regime is already seen in the dark yearnings of Antifa, anarchists and Satanic movements that call for a world without morality. They advocate the destruction of our nation and the persecution of those who keep the Faith.

Science Confirms: Angels Took the House of Our Lady of Nazareth to Loreto
These topics need to be discussed. We should not be afraid to proclaim our desire to see Christ as King. Numerous popes have described this Christian society as one that affirms the social Kingship of Christ. In his encyclical Quas Primas, Pius XI says that “Once men recognize, both in private and in public life, that Christ is King, society will, at last, receive the great blessings of real liberty, well-ordered discipline, peace and harmony.”

Only Christendom can be a truly just society for all.

Jim Carlson #fundie objectiveministries.org

The Internet was created by the United States of America - a Christian nation [ref. 1, 2, 3] - and should not be used to spread anti-Christian, secular, or non-Christian propaganda and hatespeech. This is our Internet, and we should exercise our position as its owners and as the guardians of civilization to stop its misuse.

For this reason, this website was created to try and stop one of the more vile and dangerous misuses of the Internet: using it to mock Our Lord Jesus Christ, His teachings, and His followers. And one site in particular stands out in need of stoppage: Landover Baptist.

Link to Landover Baptist website
WARNING: Should not be viewed by anyone under 21
Landover Baptist claims to be a church. Moreover, they claim to be the only church in America that understands the Bible! In fact, neither is true. Landover Baptist is a fraud. A joke. Their true purpose is not to spread the Gospel of our Lord, but to trick people - especially those who have not received the Word and Salvation or have been programmed by secular culture to distrust Christianity - into believing that Christianity is evil and rejecting it.

For this blasphemous atrocity, the Landover Baptist website must be removed from our Internet.

michael louwen #fundie #dunning-kruger christiannews.net

You are actually agreeing with me that the 1964 Civil Rights Act does not apply to or protect the gays/LGBTQs from discrimination in public accommodations.

The 1776 US Constitution enacted the "separation of Church and State" policy, not the separation of Mosque/Temple and State.

The 1776 US Constitution also prohibited the powerful US government from restricting her citizens' rights to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom to protest peacefully to seek redress and freedom to bear arms. In theory, this protection applied to Christian and non-Christian citizens. But in 1776, nearly all US citizens were Whites and/or Christians = about 99%, ie no Moslems or Hindoos.

In the early 1800s, Blacks were brought into USA as slaves, mostly to work in the cotton fields in the South. In 1861, the mostly Christian White citizens killed each other over slavery and politics and were henceforth split into Northern White liberals and Southern White conservatives = became perennial enemies. And 1 century later, US citizens would include sizable numbers of Moslems and Hindoos who were mostly immigrated into USA by the vote-pandering White liberals of the Blue States in the North and West.

Government is Not God - PAC #fundie gingpac.org

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA Will Move America to...

…Force Christian organizations to pay for abortions

…Force Christian schools to hire non-Christian teachers

…Force all states to permit same-sex “marriages”

…Force military chaplains to perform same-sex “marriages”

…Force doctors to assist homosexuals in buying surrogate babies

…Force employers to give illegal immigrants the jobs of U.S. citizens

…Force States to pay the college tuition of illegal immigrants’ children

…Force courts to accept Islamic Sharia Law in domestic disputes

…Force police agencies to allow Muslim brotherhood to select staff

…Force local authorities to allow Occupy protestors to live in parks

…Force creation of a permanent government funded “underclass”

This is the true agenda of Barack Hussein Obama,
the only President in history who has deliberately removed the words “endowed by their Creator” when referring to our Declaration of Independence, not once, but several times. Barack Hussein Obama believes human rights come from government, not from God, and that he as President can take those rights away for the “social good.”

Say NO to Barack Hussein Obama’s
vision for America on Election Day:
Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Anonymous Gossiper #conspiracy givemegossip.com

[Re. the Roseburg massacre]

Maybe it is a WOS false flag style event by false Christian to play the role of victim?

Possibly they did the same in Pretoria, Rome and burnt library records to hide sex ritual majik, and cannibalism, and human suffering as a means of raising dark energies?

If so, may be WOS-ing is similar to false Christians of Pretoria, Rome (Tares) burning records to hide and pointing finger at both non-Christians and Christian in order to hide violent wickedness?

May be the Oregon one had suffered prolong systemic sexual and other abuses by multiple Church goers raising dark energies?

Mack Major #fundie facebook.com

I have to 'go there' for a moment...

Christian women need to stop taking their relationship advice from whorish pseudo-Christians and non-Christian women. I was going to try and clean that up to make it sound more appealing - but it's time out for sugar coating. It's time to hear the straight up ugly truth.

Too many women who would easily be classified as the decent type are taking their relationship cues from two of the WORST type of women they can get advice from:

1. The whorish ones who hate men, despise masculinity and who see men as the enemy to be seduced, used and conquered. These are many of your friends, aunties, sisters, fellow church-goers and co-workers. For some of you it's even your own mothers.

They obviously like the company of men - which is why women like this usually have several kids by now. But they never seem to be able to seal the deal and get a decent man to walk them down the aisle in genuine commitment ending in matrimony.

You'll see them making comments like "Marriage isn't for everyone...singleness is a gift...I'm happily single...marriage is highly overrated...you can't trust men...all men are the same...never let your left hand know what your right hand is doing...I'll never submit to any man..."

Underneath all that slick talk and false bravado is one lonely, frustrated woman who will flirt with and take your man from you - just as soon as she helps you run him off by listening to her flawed relationship advice.

2. The women who ARE married - but they're far from happily so. They may APPEAR to be happy on the surface: but deep down within they married the guy who basically 'saved' them from looking bad to the rest of their family and friends.

They married guys who admire them and practically worship the grown they walk on - but the feeling is definitely not mutual. They basically settled for the guy they are with, cashing out of a life of promiscuity since they knew their window of opportunity was closing soon for them to be able to find someone to marry them.

These are the 2 types of women on my page trying to do the most damage, by pretending to offer sage advice to the unmarried women, as if they have become the doctor Phil of marriage simply because they found some poor sap to rescue them from looking like the whorish woman many of them really were/ are.

But the advice these women offer is tainted. Because they really have NO intentions on seeing other ladies within their circle happily married.

So they purposely give out bad advice that will ensure other women around them remain single longer. That way they themselves get to be the center of attention in their little circle of influence longer.

Be on the lookout for these 2 types. Just by reading this many of you know exactly who they are right now!

Ladies - stop taking your relationship advice from women with flawed logic and bad scriptural misunderstandings!

This is precisely why I wrote the ebook SAVED SEXY AND STILL SINGLE: WHY CHRISTIAN WOMEN CAN'T GET MARRIED EVEN THOUGH THEY LOVE GOD. Consider this ebook to be that wise male relative or platonic guy-friend who's advice is rarely ever wrong when it comes to your relationships.

God has gifted me amazing insight when it comes to relationship advice; coming from experience and having the gift (curse) of being born into a family with lots and LOTS of women.

Over the years I've honed my skills to near perfection by offering wise godly advice to different women in my own family going through personal relationship issues.

And time and time again I've been able to steer them down the right path towards help and success. They don't always listen to me - just like I'm sure some of you are hardheaded too. But they always admit later that I gave the right advice - even if they didn't follow it.

I now offer this advice to YOU. So consider yourself my honorary sister, auntie or cousin.

If you listen to the words written in this ebook (and yes it's an EBOOK - so please don't keep asking if it's a hardback or paper copy) I can virtually guarantee that if you WANT to be married some day soon you CAN be.

But you have to follow my advice TO THE LETTER. Failure to do so and - well, you'll end up with more of what you're already getting.

So download the ebook by clicking the link below - and please be patient enough to wait for me to send it. My support team and I are getting these out as fast as we can, but sometimes it takes a few minutes longer due to the high volume of women who are placing their order.

My goal is to get a million of these into the hands of every woman who wants one in the fastest time possible.

It's my pleasure to serve you in this capacity. Now let's get you ladies in position to get happily and richly married. I'm pulling for your success. God bless.

Josh Moore #fundie facebook.com

To answer this question "Why are Christians against gay marriages" one must look to an external source for truth. This truth comes from something that is not related to humanistic thought. The source is objective and it is the Bible.

Christians are against gay marriages because these marriages are against the nature that God has created. Christians and non-christians alike are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27, 9:6).

Humankind surrendered their natural state (the image in which they were created) to worship themselves rather than God. This behavior is against the purposes and intentions of God. Romans 1:24-27 says, "Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator - who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."

God's intention was for sexual pleasure between a man and woman (in a monogamous marital relationship), also for reproductive purposes. Gay marriages go against what God intended and this is another reason why Christians are against gay marriages. Genesis 2:22-24 lays out God's plan for marriage: "Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The man said, 'This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called "woman," for she was taken out of man.' For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh."

God did not make man for man in this context, God made the woman for the man. Christians are against gay marriages because it brings defilement into marriage (Hebrews 13:4).

Christians are against gay marriages because it is a lie, and people are deceived. God did not create anyone homosexual. It is a lifestyle that a person chooses.

If you are homosexual, we encourage you to look deep inside yourself. Are you joyful and happy? Look at your anatomy, what do you see? This is who you are created to be! There is help, just a prayer away. Acknowledge your situation, confess it, and turn to Jesus. He is there. Secure support from others who have been in your situation and have escaped the lifestyle

Theodore Shoebat #fundie rightwingwatch.org

Theodore Shoebat posted a video yesterday calling for the institution of a "Christian collectivist society" in America in which collective punishment is imposed and where those who refuse to submit to Christianity are put to death.

As Shoebat explained, the problem with America is that it is too individualistic, only punishing criminals for the crimes they have committed instead of imposing collective punishments in an effort to root out the beliefs or behaviors that led to the crime in the first place.

For instance, he said, the correct response to the crimes of serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer would have been to punish him for his transgressions, but then to also outlaw homosexuality because "it leads to serial killers, it leads to cannibalism, it leads to murder" and is a danger to the collective Christian society.

Non-Christians would be allowed to live in this society, Shoebat magnanimously stated, provided that they "respect and honor the Christian faith." Those who refuse to do so and seek to promote any sort of "diabolical belief system or an explicitly anti-Christian sentiment" would be put to death.

joe_christian #fundie libertynewsforum.com

["As a Christian Mental Health practitioner," what is it, exactly? ]

The application of biblical principles of spiritual knowledge of health and salvation to one's own mental health and other mental health systems.

Any Christian counseling based on scripture and the word of God is a form of Christian Mental Health activity as long as it is more theological than psychological.

[Joe, I would SERIOUSLY urge you not to go around playing in people heads without some real, authentic training.]

Why don't you seriously urge sinful secular psychologists and psychiatrists to stop practicing their evil sorcery (psychotropic pharmacology) on Christian kids in the public schools without real, authentic and proper Christian training?

[You can do ENORMOUS, lifelong damage to someone. And that's especially true of children. ]

What do you think the Christ-killing psychobabblers and psychiatric drug pushers are doing to children in US public schools - educating students?

[I really think this is something you really need to reconsider. What you're apparently doing is downright dangerous. ]

Secular psychos and drug pushers in US public schools are a lot more "downright dangerous" to Christian kiddies than an old man like me could ever be.

I guess you have gotten used to non-Christians attacking Christians and have never read anything negative about Christ-killing secular humanists practicing psychopharmacology on poor defenseless and harmless Christian students in US public schools.

Archie Montgomery #fundie oldmanmontgomery.wordpress.com

Time for LESS gun control

Everyone is talking about the mass murder in Las Vegas, Nevada. Last I heard there were fifty-eight dead and over four hundred wounded. Could be more by now. That is hideous. Senseless from a rational perspective. (It probably makes sense of a sort to the late murderer; I might intellectually grasp the concept if I was informed, but I cannot empathize.) I am horrified at the disregard of one human being for another.

As a Christian, I am directed to ‘love’ at least in the ‘agapeo’ sense of being concerned about my fellow man to my own expense. Certainly to value other human beings at the same level as myself. Included in that is the limitation of not murdering others for my own benefit, including amusement.

Manifestly, this did not apply to the murderer. At least at the time of his action, he didn’t value any of his victims in any sense I would understand. I do not claim to have magical or Divinely directed insight on his thinking, but his actions tend to give this impression. That mass murder that the murderer committed demonstrates a disregard for other human life. (From the circumstances one can rule out ‘just war’ or ‘self-defense’ as exemptions to the ‘murder’ concept; whether the reader accepts those concepts or not, they simply do not apply.)

In Christian terms, “sin” is disobedience of God. God’s will and or God’s direct command. Even without a Christian world-view, one can agree murder (killing another for personal reasons) is at least wrong, and ‘sinful’ by that criteria. (If anyone disagrees, please explain.) Therefore, murder, these murders is the result of sin. At least for us Christians; non-Christians are free to theorize the murderer committed the acts because his underwear didn’t fit, or his parents didn’t buy him a dog or a bad breakfast or something. (Feel free to disagree, but explain please. I’d really like to hear.)

In fact, Jesus once made the statement about the inner being of a human (called the ‘heart’ in both Hebrew and Greek language and thinking) is the source of wrongful thoughts and actions. I think ‘modern’ psychiatry would call this part of a human the ‘id’. (I could be mistaken, but most all authorities agree there is a ‘central’ or ‘core’ portion of the human which to some extent or other directs human attitudes and actions.)

In [the gospel of] Matthew, chapter 15, and Mark 7, Jesus is taken to task – criticized – by a small group of Pharisees because His (Jesus’) disciples didn’t follow a tradition (rule of conduct loosely based on the Mosaic Law) regarding the ceremonial washing of hands. To be clear, this was not a violation of one’s Mother warning one to wash hands before eating to avoid germs, but a violation of a ceremonial rule (possibly verging on superstition) regarding ‘legal’ preparation for eating. Ignoring this rule was not just bad manners or slovenly living, but a ‘sin’ against God, according to the tradition.

Cutting much of the discussion (read Matthew 15 and Mark 7 for two accounts of the whole treatment), Jesus summed up the matter by telling the Pharisees “Listen to me, everyone, and understand. There is nothing outside of a person that can defile him by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles him.” (Matthew 15:17 and Mark 7:15 both say essentially the same thing.) Later on, Jesus expounds a bit to His disciples by telling them (Matthew 15: 16-20 and Mark 7: 18-22) Jesus said, “Even after all this, are you still so foolish? Don’t you understand that whatever goes into the mouth enters the stomach and then passes out into the sewer? But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these things defile a person. For out of the heart come evil ideas, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are the things that defile a person; it is not eating with unwashed hands that defiles a person.”

From this, one understands that external ‘artifacts’ are not particularly in control of a person’s actions or attitudes, but one’s own desires and intents are in control.

The concept ‘artifacts’ cause human behavior is difficult to explain and quite absurd in practice. No one really believes ball point pens cause forgery, ball point pens cause mis-spelled words, flatware causes obesity, automobiles cause excessive speed or traffic accidents, windows cause peeping Toms, and my favorite, television causes insipidness of thought.

Of course, there is a political and life-style faction which holds firearms cause crime, especially violent crime. Which is as silly and irrational as any of the above.

The mass murder in Las Vegas is indeed horrific. As was the mass murder in the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida in 2016. As was the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995. As was several other mass murders without rational purpose. Reasonable humans want to prevent such things from happening again.

However, blaming artifacts is wasting time and effort. Not to mention those sorts of mass murders will continue. The instrumentality may be different, but the murders will be the same.

mrguitar #fundie christianforums.com

[The Golden Compass never proclaims to be truth, or an allegory (unlike narnia). It is purely fiction, thus you shouldn't have a problem with it.]

It's purely an Anti-Christian, Non-Christian, secular, of the devil movie. Only demons will make someone actually go see it.

Any form of secularism, especially this kind, is wrong and of the devil.

Gerardus Dingeman Bouw #fundie thenervousbreakdown.com

Before I left Gerard Bouw’s home, he mentioned to me that his fiercest critics are his fellow Christians. “Non-Christians certainly don’t have a problem with the idea that the Bible is geocentric,” he said. “I am kind of amazed at atheists not taking the creationists to task about geocentricity.”

I studied Bouw’s face, but the comment seemed to be a general one, not directed at me personally. I continued as if the idea of using geocentrism to expose the foolishness of creationism had never occurred to me. “Why do you think they don’t?” I asked.

“I think they’re afraid to do it,” said Bouw. “Because they might lose even worse.”

Jim Carlson #fundie objectiveministries.org

The Internet was created by the United States of America - a Christian nation [ref. 1, 2, 3] - and should not be used to spread anti-Christian, secular, or non-Christian propaganda and hatespeech. This is our Internet, and we should exercise our position as its owners and as the guardians of civilization to stop its misuse.

[The rest of the page is a veritable goldmine!]

Mark_Dice #fundie theresistancemanifesto.com

San Diego, CA – The Resistance is a nationwide Christian organization with over 2000 members focused on protecting Christianity and Christian values and are demanding Duke University change the name of their sports team to something not offensive to the Christian community.

Sports teams at the University are called the Blue Devils, a name Mark Dice says is blasphemous, and disrespectful to Christians and non-Christians alike. “If the team were named the Blue Nazis would that be ok?” asks Dice, who is the spokesperson for The Resistance. “There would be outrage across the country, yet naming a team after the Devil is ok?”

"Numerous college sports teams have faced opposition in the past to using ethnic names which were offensive to segments of the community, and this is no different,” explains Mark.

The Resistance has gained international news coverage for a variety of issues including a boycott of the implant able RFID tag, the VeriChip, the protesting an occult monument in Georgia called the Georgia Guidestones, and for demanding MTV pull Jessica Simpson’s 2005 music video these Boots are Made for Walking for being “slutty.”

Westboro Baptist Church #fundie cnsnews.com

The Westboro group says the Amish school girls were "killed by a madman in punishment for Gov. Ed Rendell's blasphemous sins against Westboro Baptist Church.

"Gov. Ed Rendell -- speaking and acting in his official capacity to bind the State of Pennsylvania -- slandered and mocked and ridiculed and condemned Westboro Baptist Church on national Fox TV," the group says on its website.

"Rendell also revealed a conspiracy to employ the State's police powers to destroy WBC in order to silence WBC's Gospel message. Co-conspirators identified by Rendell included state officials, citizens, lawyers, legislators and media," the website says.

Westboro Baptist Church said it is "continuing to pray for even worse punishment upon Pennsylvania."

Anonymous Coward #fundie godlikeproductions.com

The sooner all organized religion is banned in every nation, the better and safer we'll all be.

God bless the United Nations for starting to ban them.

Every religious organization should be labelled and investigated as a potential terrorist organization because they all have some types of crazy or violent beliefs.

we can start with banning the American Israel (pro-Zionist Jews) Political Action Committee (AIPAC) and all other organized religion-based political groups.

Religious political groups are the most dangerous.

Jesus and Abraham and Moses and Muhammed are all drinking a beer together and eating pork sausage as they cheer on the ban of all organized religion. All current religions violate the good spirit of their original messages. so all should be abolished.

long live logic and reason and science and imagination.

with or without a formal banning, organized religion is on its deathbed around the world. regular people are absolutely sick of it and all the division it creates.

even the stubborn ones are getting sick of religion, especially if they have a gay relative or believe that religion and politics is a very dangerous mix, like the former Bushian Christians learned about his war mongering. Jesus was a peace maker, not a war maker. People are sick of the hypocracy on all sides.

I hope Iran will lead the way. topple its currupt, rich Muslim, nut-case Islamic scum clergy leaders and ban all organized religion in their nation. this will be a sight to see, and it will happen. iran's people are sick of religion rule, theocracy, and all of its oppression. they are more sick of it than anyone. they just need organization and guns and bullets to overthrow their tyrant clergy. maybe then other nations near them will also imprison or kill off their crazy clergy too. is America and Israel ready for a secular Middle East? who will be their enemy if this happens?

in america, i foresee imprisoning the Christian clergy for inciting people into conducting an illegal, terrorizing war in Iraq. the american clergy are complicit in fomenting that major act of terrorism. love to see Bush and CHeney and all the right-wing Christian leaders in jail for advocating and then orchestrating crimes against humanity and terrorist activities against non-Christians.

Imprison the Christian clergy for condoning and encouraging America's fine young people to join the military and become cannon fodder for Haliburton, Exxon and all the rest of Cheney's and Bush's "Christian" friends.

Mark Jones #fundie premier.org.uk

[=Context and Authors Note: This is regarding a social worker Felix Ngole behing fired from a University for posts regarding gay marriage. The following conversation also has other fundie qoutes, is trimmed save for the most stand outish and relevant ones.=]

Martin: Christians cannot trust judges to act in a fair way toward them. We’ve seen a number of judgements like this that demonstrate the bigotry of the judiciary. It is perfectly OK, apparently, for social workers to apply their beliefs as long as they coincide with this judges beliefs.

Perfect Love casts out fear: you don't speak for Christians, Martin, you only speak for conservative evangelicals - a tiny proportion of those who hold the title of Christian. It is you who demonstrates bigotry in this case, not the judge. How could this man ever be a social worker when he holds and proclaims views that gay people are not entitled to equality??

Snoring: No most Christians think same sex sexual relationships are a sin I used to think it wasn't a sin until May. Then Jesu audiably told me it is a sin and marriage is only for one man and one woman. Same sex attracted people need to serve the Lord and be celebrated is also what Jesus told me as per Paul's teachings. Christians trust God not man.

....

Sandi Luckins: Because he recognizes that there is something much more important to the homosexual - a relationship with Jesus. And, just because we care to see them in a relationship with Jesus, does not mean that we don't want them working, etc. We just want to see them on their way to Heaven.
2 Peter 2:18 For, speaking loud boasts of folly, they entice by sensual passions of the flesh those who are barely escaping from those who live in error. 19 They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves[h] of corruption. For whatever overcomes a person, to that he is enslaved. As far as equality, we are trying to make them equal with us - forgiven.

Perfect Love casts out fear: get over yourself, Sandi. Homosexuals don't have the monopoly on sensual passions of the flesh and heterosexuals don't have the monopoly on forgiveness. We are already all equal in the sight of God.

Mark Jones: OK, so when scripture is brought into play, the best you have is “get over yourself”? Let me ask you one question, can you show me just one verse in the Bible that affirms the LGBT lifestyle? But, the verse you choose cannot contradict scripture elsewhere.

Sandi Luckins: thank you :)

Perfect Love casts out fear: we aren't discussing "lifestyle" here, we are discussing one man's right (or not) to discriminate about another's sexuality whilst claiming to be a fit person to work as a social worker, where his views will almost certainly cause uncomfortable situations in his chosen career. How could he make the necessary compromises to his beliefs if he were to be assigned as a case worker to a gay couple with children, for example? He couldn't and wouldn't. I actually do believe that conservative Christians should have the right to refuse to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding or let their B&B to a gay couple - I have no problem with that - it should be their choice with whom they do business. Social work is a different beast - it is about people, not business - and there is no room for discrimination.

Mark Jones: Actually we are discussing lifestyle here. See Ngole raised that he stands by a Biblical worldview, something that any true Christian should do. And was kicked off his course for the acquiescing to the demands of the minority but popular culture. Having a different opinion is not discrimination, however being removed from a course of a study because of religious beliefs is discrimination, and religion is a protected characteristic in the Equality Act. So it is actually Ngole who has suffered discrimination here. But that reality will be missed because he is a Christian and the subject is the LGBT lifestyle.

Perfect Love casts out fear: it isn't a religious belief - it is a personal belief. I am a Christian and I don't hold the belief that one can criticise another for their born sexuality.

Mark Jones: Actually in terms of the legalities it is a religious belief. And you may believe what you choose to believe, that doesn’t mean it’s Biblical, right, or even true.

Perfect Love casts out Fear: that goes for Martin and Sandi as well as me.

Mark Jones: It does yes, however they are on the right side of God here ... you, are not.

....

Joan Martin: And many homosexuals who remain celebate will experience Heaven

Sandi Luckins: No. They will be Christians plagued by the sin of s/s attraction. Christians do not identify themselves as sin. What a slap in the face to Christ. See my next comment to you, please.

....

Mark Jones: Sorry, but Ngole actually held to Biblical beliefs. As is Martin here, so if we’re bigoted that means God’s word is bigoted. Is that what your saying “perfect love casts out fear?”

Perfect Love casts out fear: I'm a God believing Christian who does not accept the inerrancy of the Bible. I am guided primarily by the prompting of the Holy Spirit in my life rather than documents written 2000 years ago in a different society and context and translated (often badly) by mere humans. As has been said many times on Disqus, subjects such as slavery, polygamy and male domination are treated as normal and acceptable in the Bible passages but are now considered out of time and context by Christians and non-Christians alike. Yes, God's Word is perfect and unchanging - just be careful, though, that you are listening to that Word and not the "words" of flawed human beings.

Mark Jones: If you don’t accept inerrancy then you’re really not a God believing Christian. Because the Bible which is breathed out by the Holy Spirit (the one you claim guides you) states such, quite clearly. But to clarify polygamy is never condoned in scripture, it is recorded ... because the Bible records history. I listen to God, not people, this clearly is not the case for you in reality.

Perfect Love casts out Fear: polygamy isn't condemned in scriptrure - not anywhere. Hence,by definition, it is condoned. I accept God's inerrancy but not men's and definitely not yours.

Mark Jones: Actually we’re told in scripture that marriage is to between one man and one woman, therefor polygamy is not condoned as it does meet the terms God lays out for marriage in scripture. And just to correct you, you don’t accept God's inerrancy, because God’s inerrancy is His word. So if you don’t trust the Bible you don’t trust God. Therefore you are not a true believer.

Conservapedia #fundie conservapedia.com

The possiblity that Hitchens' unfortunate death from cancer could have been directly or indirectly influenced by his atheism remains open. In the indirect sense, it is known that the atheistic philosophy of the objective meaninglessness of life correlates with vices and mental unwellness. Atheists and secular Americans are known to have higher rates of drug abuse(which in a broad sense could include smoking and drinking as well), and regular churchgoers are known to have much lower rates of mental illness and depression. The depression that sometimes persists alongside atheism could have conceivably influenced him to use harmful matericalistic pleasures like tobacco and alcohol as a coping mechanism, since an avowed atheist like Hitchens would not decide to seek spiritual health, attend a Christian church or look for "answers" in the Bible. This provides reason to speculate that atheism influenced Hitchens' bad habits, which lead to his cancer and death.

Whether Hichens' cancer death was influenced in any direct sense remains more uncertain. While a Christian should not speak directly for God, the Bible does show that, in specific instances, God has been known to punish sinners and the unrepentant with disease. The Bible has also made it clear that those who wish evil on others deserve no better themselves, and as Hitchens praised the sad and gruesome death of Rev. Jerry Falwell, the possibility of divine retribution remains as well depending on a Christians interpretation of God's word and actions.

On the flip side, God has been shown to bestow mercy on those who are sick and seek His help. The many stories of Jesus healing the blind, crippled, and ill are the first examples. Even during today's times, there have been claims of modern day miracles as well, such as the possible "curing" of a person's cancer by a Roman Catholic priest, through the power of prayer - something which Hitchens likely rejected to his deathbed. Again it would be presumptuous for a Christian to speak directly on God's behalf, as is Hitchen's most obvious eternal fate according to the Bible (for only God knows for a fact whether or not he repented on his deathbead) nevertheless the possibilities are a good topic of discussion among Christians and non-Christians alike.

angelsword #fundie christianforums.com

This is to all member of the Christiain forums, Christian and non-Christian. I want to inform you of a network (the name of which I do not know) headed by Satan and run by humans whose job it is to kill, steal and destroy!

Members of this evil network physically and spiritually attack by subtle means. They send out evil spirits to destroy your transportation, keep you in debt, make you late for work, important meetings, make it difficult for your children to maintain/obtain good grades, cause death or loss of pets, cause insomnia, slow you up in college, make promotions years over due,make you lose/misplace objects of value, put substances in your medication causing insanity or hallucinations, cause overeating, depression, stop church growth, etc.

They can negatively affect your goal orientation, your morals/morale, your peace and happiness; your life in general!

Their network is sophisticated and WORLD WIDE! They communicate just as we do by email and other means. These people occupy professions such as doctors, nurses, pre-school teachers, librarians, guidance councellors, factory workers, custodians, celebrities, authors, airline associates adn any other occupation you can think or!

Pat Robertson #fundie rightwingwatch.org

700 Club Viewer: Why [do] evangelical Christians tell non-Christians that Jesus (God) is the only way to Heaven? Those who are Hindu, Buddhist, Islamic, etc. already know and have a relationship with God. Why is this? It seems disrespectful.

Robertson: No. They don’t have a relationship. There is the god of the Bible, who is Jehovah. When you see L-O-R-D in caps, that is the name. It’s not Allah, it’s not Brahma, it’s not Shiva, it’s not Vishnu, it’s not Buddha. It is Jehovah God. They don’t have a relationship with him. He is the God of all Gods. These others are mostly demonic powers. Sure they’re demons. There are many demons in the world.

Stephenie Wolfstar #fundie quotev.com

This one should keep us thinking.
This is a true story of something that just happened a few years ago in USC.

There was a professor of philosophy there who was a deeply committed atheist. His primary goal was for one required class was to spend the entire semester proving that God does not exist. To prove that God couldn't possibly exist. His students were always afraid to argue with him because of his impeccable logic. Sure, some had argued in class time, but no one had ever really gone up against him because of his reputation. At the end of every semester, on the last day, he would say to his 300 students: "If there is anyone here who still believes in Jesus, stand up!" In twenty years, no one ever stood up. They knew what he was going to do next. He would say: "Because anyone who believes in God is a fool. If God existed, he could stop this piece of chalk from hitting the ground and breaking. Such a simple task to prove that He is God, and yet He can't do it." And every year, he would drop the chalk onto the tile floor of the classroom and it would shatter into a million pieces. All of the students would do nothing but stop and stare. Most of the students thought that God couldn't possibly exist. Certainly, a number of Christians had slipped through, but for twenty years, they had been too afraid to stand up.

Well, a few years ago there was a freshman who happened to enroll. He was a Christian, and had heard the stories about his professor. He was required to take the class for his major, and he was afraid. But for three months that semester, he prayed every morning that he would have the courage to stand up no matter what the professor said, or what the class might of thought. Nothing they said could ever shatter his faith...he hoped.

Finally, the day came. The professor said: "If there is anyone here who still believes in God, stand up!" The professor and the class of 300 students looked at him, shocked, as he stood up at the back of the classroom. The professor shouted, "You fool! If God existed, he would keep this piece of chalk from breaking when it hit the ground!" He proceeded to drop the chalk, but as he did, it slipped out of his fingers, off his shirt cuff, onto the pleat of his pants, down his leg, and off of his shoe. As it hit the ground, it simply rolled away....unbroken. The professor's jaw dropped as he stared at the chalk. He looked up at the young man, and then ran out of the lecture hall. The young man, who had stood, proceeded to walk to the front of the class and shared his faith in Jesus for the next half an hour. 300 students stayed and listened as he told of God's love for them and of His power through Jesus.

You have two choices:
1. Pretend you never read this.
2. Pass this along to your Christian and non-Christian friends, giving them encouragement we all need everyday.

When you choose option two, you have chosen to STAND UP.

In the light of jokes we tell to one another for a laugh, this is a little different.
but t
This is not intended to be a joke, it's not funny, it's intended to get you thinking.......

Isn't it funny how simple it is for people to trash God and then wonder why the world is going to hell?

Isn't it funny how we believe what the newspapers say, but question what the Bible says?

Isn't it funny how everyone wants to go to heaven, provided they do not have to believe, think, say, or do anything the Bible says? Or is it scary?

Isn't it funny how someone can say, "I believe in God," but still follow Satan? (who, by the way, also "believes" in God)

Isn't it funny how you can send a thousand jokes through e-mail and they spread like wildfire but when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people think twice about sharing?

Isn't it funny how the lewd, crude, vulgar, and obscene pass freely through cyberspace, but the public of discussion of Jesus is suppressed in schools and work spaces?

Isn't it funny how someone could be fired up for Christ on Sunday, but be an invisible Christian for the rest of the week?

Are you laughing?!

Isn't it funny how when you tell someone this, you won't because you're not sure what they believe, or what they will think of you for telling them?

Isn't it funny how I can be more worried about what other people think of me than what God thinks of me?

Will YOU pass this on?

I did.

Butterfly35 #fundie rr-bb.com

I'm wondering is this is another sign of the times: Being Tired!
Seriously though, it seems like everyone I have been talking to lately is just plain worn right out. Christians and Non-Christians alike.
Could this maybe relate to the verse about us running to and fro in the end times?
Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely not lazy. I work, I exercise, I clean. But I have NEVER felt this tired! I just don't get it.
And then I start talking to other people, and they say the same thing, Tired, Tired, Tired. I sometimes don't even have to ask, I look into peoples eyes and can see that they are tired.
I'm not just goofing around, or trying to make conversation, I'm TRULY wondering if you all think that this could possibly be another sign of the times?

Watermark Community Church #fundie rawstory.com

Proving once again that plenty of Christians still don’t have a clue what Jesus was talking about, a Dallas-area church’s members have been publicly shamed by a gay man who was ejected from their community after revealing his sexuality to them, Pink News reported. On the one-year anniversary of his being cast out of the community, Jason Thomas posted his response to the Elders on Facebook

In its original letter, Watermark Community Church told Thomas that it had exhausted its attempts to help him see the error of his ways. In a letter dated October 9, 2015, the Elders wrote: n our attempt to shepherd you, we have recognised a destructive pattern that prohibits us in caring for you and playing the role you desire for us to have in your life (1 Peter 5:1-4; Acts 20:28). Specifically, your desire to actively participate in a same-sex relationship with another man, and your unwillingness to heed biblical counsel from your church to turn from that relationship, has made it exceedingly difficult to shepherd you during this time.” The verses selected to justify their actions argue that elders are responsible for guarding the community of believers.

Thomas was told that if he wished to remain a part of the community, he would have to submit to a series of actions. These included: “1. Faithful attendance of Re:Generation targeting the above issue, while following counsel to not be in a dating relationship during that time. 2. Meet with a Watermark staff member who shares in the same struggle (same sex attraction) who has found freedom, healing, and victory through our Savior Jesus Christ (just let Brandon know when you’re ready to meet with him.” (Notice that the Elders “outed” a member of the church who may not have wanted to have his sexuality revealed to Thomas.)

A year later, Thomas posted his response on Facebook in which he told Watermark that he had never been happier, thank you very much, and told the church that it should subject its own behavior to scrutiny. He wrote: “Here we are a year later and you are still doing to others what you did to me. You are tarnishing the name of God to Christians and non-Christians alike; you should be ashamed of yourselves! Do not forget, Jesus was a angry with people just like you who said certain groups of people were not worthy to be followers of Him.”

Thomas is clearly disappointed that in its year away from him, the church failed to reflect on how it has made life for its gay members hell, and how its actions make God look bad in the larger community. He says that while he was struggling to understand his sexuality, the church “turned its back on me.” He also insisted that Jesus would take his side in this battle, telling the church Elders that they are not worthy to be Jesus’ followers.

George Herbert once said that “Living well is the best revenge.” Thomas lets the church know that it has failed in its attempts to ruin his life: “Thank you for removing yourself from my life! I am who God made me to be. I cannot change my sexual orientation and nor would I want to. I now have internal peace and happiness unlike ever before.”

Embarrassed by the onslaught of the attention, Watermark church issued a statement, which is reprinted in the Dallas News. The statement insists that it continues to love all its members, but then says that a member can lose their standing when they stop trying to “resist sin” and “refuses our help, care, and encouragement.”

RepentYouFools #fundie imdb.com

Why does Hollywood push complete lack of morals as a good thing? Call me an angry redneck or a Bible thumper if you must, but only a true fool could deny Batman Begins is a dirty liberal propaganda. The hero of the movie, Bruce Wayne, is a moral-less manwhore, who enjoys drinking, parties, and company of assorted sluts. Not to mention wasting his money on materialistic possessions, as opposed to using them to help the poor, as the Lord commands. Bruce Wayne is every bit as deplorable as Paris Hilton, yet we are asked to sympathize with this man? He is a socialite, which gets him points with the liberals that run Hollywood. Granted, he is redeemed somewhat by the fact that he is Batman, a selfless hero who protects the weak from evils of villany. However, Batman’s training comes from Ra’s Al Ghul, an anti-Christian Buddhist scum. What is the film’s message? Christians are weak, and only non-Christians can learn to become like Batman? Also, Batman takes on the shape of a demonic bat, which is unforgivable. Anybody else feels the same way?

Accept the Lord Christ as your savior my friends.

Anonymous #racist cambriawillnotyield.wordpress.com

The Inhunamity of Utopian Europe

Instead of the religion and the law by which they were in a great politick communion with the Christian world, they have constructed their Republick on three bases, all fundamentally opposite to those on which the communities of Europe are built. Its foundation is laid in Regicide; in Jacobinism; and in Atheisim; and it has jointed to those principles, a body of systematick manners which secures their operation. – Edmund Burke

When Russell Kirk published his book The Conservative Mind, Thomas Molnar commented that Kirk had proved there were conservative-minded American thinkers but had failed to show they had any major impact on the American experiment in government. A point well taken. At every critical juncture in the early days of the American republic, it was the secular utopians, men like Franklin, Madison, Jefferson, and Marshall, who won the day and put their radical imprint on the American government. The ideals of liberty, fraternity, and equality were lurking in the foundational documents of the U. S. Constitution. And there was great bloodshed; when the radical nature of the American government was challenged in the 1860s, the savage god of the utopians unleashed his terrible swift sword on the offending white, Christian Europeans of the South. The war cry then, as it is now, was liberty, equality, and fraternity!

It’s significant that Lafayette, a supporter of the American Revolution, also became part of France’s regicide government. There are many differences in style between the two revolutions, the American and the French, but the spirit animating both is the same: it is the spirit of the archangel Satan.

The presence of an anti-Christian, anti-white nation such as the United States on the world stage would not be as great a danger to white people as it now is if the other European nations were not smaller caricatures of the United States. Every European nation is following in the United States’ footsteps, at slightly slower rates, because they have more traditional European baggage to throw away before they completely succumb to liberalism and its attendant negro-worship.

It is always encouraging when a European nation objects to any part of the American liberal agenda. For instance, I don’t think Russia is a sound nation – they did not, as Solzhenitsyn had hoped, reject the materialism of western democracy when Russia abandoned communism. And they have some negro athletes (one is too many) on their sport teams, but they did issue a counter-attack against America’s deification of sodomy. It was quite heartening to see Russia celebrating the traditional family over and against America’s satanic family ideal.

I wish more European nations would resist American influence, but unfortunately the hatred of the white race and the Christian religion is a virulent virus throughout the European world. It will take more than the removal of the United States to kill the virus; it will take a resurgence of the European spirit, which is undemocratic, militantly Christian, and unapologetically racist.

It grates on conservatives’ nerves (something akin to fingernails scraping a blackboard) when you suggest that America was not founded on sound conservative principles, but isn’t it quite obvious that our negro-worshipping, sodomite present is linked to our anti-European past? What was good in America had nothing to do with the democratic idea men, but it had everything to do with the European Americans who brought the faith and ethos of the white man to America. What binds together the American Revolution, the French Revolution, and all the European revolutions that have followed in their wake is a commitment to an utopian, democratic future that has no place for a God with a heart of flesh and for the people who championed that God. What Butterfield admired in the English, prior to the 20th century, was that they went into the future holding onto the strings of their past. Once England followed the American and French example and cut those strings connecting Britons to their past, the sacred soil of Christian Britain became fertile ground for the growth of Islam and negro-worship. Without a past, we are not a people, we are just abstractions of the liberals’ utopian minds, to be eliminated whenever it becomes politically expedient to do so. And the expedient moment has come: The white man must be eliminated, to make way for a new people purged of the sins of the past and ready to live and strive in the new non-Christian, non-white utopia of the future.

One of the great movies of all time is The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm. The movie tells the story of Wilhelm Grimm’s (the ‘impractical’ brother) efforts to preserve the folk tales of his people that we now call Grimms’ fairy tales. At one point in the film, Wilhelm becomes sick and appears to be dying. He has collected the tales in his head, but he has not yet put them on paper. All the people from Fairyland – Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Little Red Riding Hood, Hansel and Gretel, Cinderella, the Frog Prince, and so on – come before Wilhelm in a dream sequence and beg him not to die so that they will not die. On Wilhelm Grimm rests the fate of fairytale Europe.

Wilhelm does not die and the fairytale people live to nourish and enrich the lives of all true Europeans. But their fate, the fairytale people of Europe, once again hangs in the balance. Such folk tales, many that go all the way back to the time of our Lord and perhaps were told by Him when He trod on England’s green and pleasant land, came from the lifeblood of the European people. If Europeans no longer believe they are a people with a great spiritual heritage, they will not preserve their past; they will be Undines, resembling human beings on the outside, but inwardly lacking an animating spirit. Our Lord told us that unless we become as little children we will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. The fairytale comprehension of life, represented by those tales collected by Wilhelm Grimm, is all in all. Only the Europeans saw that it was not tragic that “we are such stuff as dreams are made on.” A dream that is grounded in the visionary heart of the European people is a dream that brings us face to face with our Lord on the road to Emmaus. “Did not our heart burn within us while He talked with us by the way, and while He opened to us the Scriptures?” Of course the apostles’ hearts burned within them, and did not our hearts burn within us when we lived in fairytale Europe rather than in multicultural Europe?

The churches have played their part, a diabolical part, in killing the European people. “Of what use is a past when you have the anointed ones to tell you about God?” Of what use indeed? I think an antique European would answer the godded men with this question: “Of what use is the historical Jesus?” If you reject the flesh-and-blood people who loved Christ enough to build their civilization with Him as the incarnate center, then where is our incarnate Lord to be found? In the midst of multi-cultural Babylon? Or is He to be found in the future? If that is the case, then how do we differ from the Jews, who reject the historical Jesus but look to the future for the coming of their God. In Ian Maclaren’s great masterpiece Beside the Bonnie Brier Bush, in the chapter called “His Mother’s Sermon,” a young minister returns to his hometown to preach his first sermon. He is filled with Biblical history and the latest university-taught theology, but right before he ascends the pulpit, he remembers the words of his mother on her death bed:

“I canna see ye noo, John, but I know yir there, and I’ve just one other wish. If God calls ye to the ministry, ye’ill no refuse, an’ the first day ye preach in yir ain kirk, speak a gude word for Jesus Christ, an’ John, I’ll hear ye that day, though ye’ll no see me, and I’ll be satisfied.”

As the bred-in-the-bone Europeans die out, the Europeans with hearts of flesh, there is no one left to “speak a gude word for Jesus Christ.” Our fairy king of Europe has faded away and been replaced by the negro, because His people have faded away.

I don’t know if Christ actually set foot on England’s green and pleasant land when He was on this earth in the flesh. I like to think He did, but it is not of vital importance. The important thing is that He visited Europe in the flesh through His people. When we are in contact with His Europe we are just as close to Him as the apostles were on the road to Emmaus. I shall never forget the feeling of awe that came over me some forty years ago when I set foot in Britain. The land of Shakespeare, Scott, and Dickens, an important part of His Europe! How can we allow such a fairytale land to become the haven of Muslims and colored heathens? Anthony Jacob, after listing the white man’s considerable material accomplishments, proceeds to the real significance of the white man’s accomplishment: It is white people who built the only civilization that was dedicated to something more than material things; their civilization was consecrated to Him who was and is the personal God above the material dust of this world. I can’t read any classic work of European literature or view an old movie that depicts Europeans from long ago without feeling sadness and anger. Sadness because of that which is lost, anger against those who destroyed Christian Europe and against those Europeans who refuse to fight for its restoration. Our love of our people in and through the historical Christ built Christian Europe. A renewal of that love, for them and for Him, will restore Christian Europe.

I’m at the age when a lot of my friends and relatives are getting sick and dying. Last year, for instance, I watched my father die very slowly and inhumanely in the hands of an inhumane medical staff. And in the past four months I witnessed the slow painful death of a friend, who also suffered a needlessly painful death at the hands of an inhumane medical staff. My run-ins with modern “medicine” are not isolated incidents. There is an overwhelming testimony building, from liberals, grazers, and conservatives, that there is something monstrous going on in the medical profession. How could it be otherwise? The churches jettisoned the European Christ for a theory of God, and the liberals abandoned Him for the negro gods. The issue isn’t whether there were or were not American conservative thinkers; both Kirk and Molnar were wrong when they placed thought, divorced from the lifeblood of the European people, at the center of existence. To hell with that kind of abstract existence. Everything in modern Liberaldom now consists of statistics. My father was past ninety; what difference did it make if he starved to death; at best he had one or two more years. My neighbor had two terminal diseases; what difference did it make if she was left in bed without any attempts to move her limbs except when her husband or friends came in to do it? What difference does anything make since we all are doomed to suffer and die? It used to make a difference to Christian Europeans. They did not make their humanity the slave of inhuman statistics. You prolong life, even if it is aged life, because He wants it that way. We all die, certainly, but doesn’t it behoove Christian Europeans to place a Christ-like presence before the sick and dying so that they pass into eternity with Christ’s name on their lips? The brave new world is upon us. When He is absent, because the Europeans have gone whoring after other gods, then all is “cheerless, dark, and deadly.” The Murdstones are two of the most consummate villains in all of literature, and they commit all their villainies in the name of religion despite the fact that there is nothing Christian in their religion: “’And do you know I must say, sir,’ he continued, mildly laying his head on one side, ‘that I DON’T find authority for Mr. and Miss Murdstone in the New Testament?’” Indeed, that is the point. What is the liberals’ and the church men’s authority for this ‘utopia’ they have thrust upon us? It is certainly NOT His authority. And what other authority is there for a European?

Dostoyevsky’s underground man said that, “A man lives his whole life to prove he is not a piano key.” Yes, but let us deepen the underground man’s defiant declaration: “A man lives his whole life so that he can say, ‘Into thy hands I commend my spirit, O Lord.” That is what being a European is all about. +

The Nationalist Republic of America #racist nationstates.net

Okay, I'll agree here. But let's look at their supporters in the American government. The politicians who demand that Israel must be a nationalist Jewish state, yet view America as some open-border safe haven for the entire world. I'll admit though, many of these people are white Americans.

Funnily enough, Israel and Japan will be the last First World nations on Earth to experience cultural marxism, as their non-white, non-Christian status seems to give them a little freebie in the eyes of SJWs.

ThomasER916 #racist dailybruin.com

The real problem is whites need to stop thinking there's a "human race" and they're the source of all problems in the world. No white should ever support non-white, non-Christian immigration - ever. The goal of the Left and their immigration policies are to make whites a hated, cultureless minority with no identity in their own country.

Don't believe me?

Try and suggest that whites need explicit and exclusive political, scholastic, and cultural groups that work in their collective self-interest. Go ahead and every moron will scream racism. You'll have Whites lecture you on how we're all "part of the human race." They won't lecture non-whites ever. A black preacher or politician can talk about "my people" but whites are forbidden. Das rassist!

Whenever you hear the word racist just know it means - I hate you because you're white.

Tim Dukeman #fundie afellowtruthseeker.blogspot.com

[Regarding the recent lesbian couple on Good Luck Charlie]

This post is more of a public service announcement than anything, since I know many Christian parents who allow their kids to watch hours and hours of the Disney Channel. It seems to be harmless. Perhaps, in the past, it was harmless.

That is no longer the case. The Disney Channel is no longer safe for your children.

...

If you know any Christian parents (or non-Christian parents who don't want their kids to be indoctrinated into thinking that homosexuality is morally acceptable), pass this post along to them. Get the word out.

The Disney Channel is not safe for your children. Please, protect them from Satan's lies.

Hope #fundie religionethics.co.uk

Shakes, I know a number of evolutionary scientists, both non-Christian and Christian, and talking with them they all say that whilst there is some evidence, none of it comes anywhere close to being definitive.  They tend to use the legal term - circumstantial - to describe it.  As for the idea of 'evolution in general' as opposed to 'evolution in particular', there is plenty of evidence for microevolution, but very little concrete evidence for macroevolution.  Most of the latter is conjecture, and sometimes contradictory.

David Paszkiewicz #fundie nj.com

['YOU BELONG IN HELL' -- Kearny High preacher teacher uses classroom to condemn non-Christians]

Sixteen-year-old junior Matthew LaClair says he was shocked when history teacher David Paszkiewicz, who is also a Baptist preacher in town, spent the first week lecturing students more about Heaven and Hell than the colonies and Constitution.

He said Paszkiewicz told students that if they didn't accept Jesus, "you belong in Hell." He also dismissed as unscientific the theories of evolution and the "Big Bang."

Atheists R Faithly Impotent #fundie forum.myspace.com

(After seeing a funny Jesus picture from TheMuseumOfTolerance.org)

How telling that this was made up by the the Museum of Tolerance.org I gues lust like Comedy (Cowardly) Central, ABC (Anti-christian Bigot Chan), NBC (Non-christian Bigot Chan), CBS (Commie Brainwashing Station), CNN (Commie News Net.) & PBS (Public Brainwashing Syst) their tolerance & respect is for every religion except christianity.

S Michael Houdmann #fundie gotquestions.org

What does it mean to be unequally yoked?
unequally yoked
Question: "What does it mean to be unequally yoked?"

Answer: The phrase “unequally yoked” comes from 2 Corinthians 6:14 in the King James Version: “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?” The New American Standard Version says, “Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness?”

A yoke is a wooden bar that joins two oxen to each other and to the burden they pull. An “unequally yoked” team has one stronger ox and one weaker, or one taller and one shorter. The weaker or shorter ox would walk more slowly than the taller, stronger one, causing the load to go around in circles. When oxen are unequally yoked, they cannot perform the task set before them. Instead of working together, they are at odds with one another.

Paul’s admonition in 2 Corinthians 6:14 is part of a larger discourse to the church at Corinth on the Christian life. He discouraged them from being in an unequal partnership with unbelievers because believers and unbelievers are opposites, just as light and darkness are opposites. They simply have nothing in common, just as Christ has nothing in common with “Belial,” a Hebrew word meaning “worthlessness” (verse 15). Here Paul uses it to refer to Satan. The idea is that the pagan, wicked, unbelieving world is governed by the principles of Satan and that Christians should be separate from that wicked world, just as Christ was separate from all the methods, purposes, and plans of Satan. He had no participation in them; He formed no union with them, and so it should be with the followers of the one in relation to the followers of the other. Attempting to live a Christian life with a non-Christian for our close friend and ally will only cause us to go around in circles.

The “unequal yoke” is often applied to business relationships. For a Christian to enter into a partnership with an unbeliever is to court disaster. Unbelievers have opposite worldviews and morals, and business decisions made daily will reflect the worldview of one partner or the other. For the relationship to work, one or the other must abandon his moral center and move toward that of the other. More often than not, it is the believer who finds himself pressured to leave his Christian principles behind for the sake of profit and the growth of the business.

Of course, the closest alliance one person can have with another is found in marriage, and this is how the passage is usually interpreted. God’s plan is for a man and a woman to become “one flesh” (Genesis 2:24), a relationship so intimate that one literally and figuratively becomes part of the other. Uniting a believer with an unbeliever is essentially uniting opposites, which makes for a very difficult marriage relationship.

Rev. Dr. Jerry Schmoyer #fundie sw.christiantrainingonline.org

MARTIAL ARTS While many Christians participate in marital arts, I personally feel they are to be avoided by believers, especially by those who are open to demonic attacks. It is very hard to separate the physical aspect from the meditation techniques. These can be not just physical gym exercises but actually are seemingly innocuous doorways into non-Christian religions.

Some Christians practice the martial arts for exercise, or even as a way of evangelizing, but don’t really know what they are getting into. If it works they don’t ask questions about what it means. Eastern religious techniques often are portrayed as neutral so anyone from any religion can use them, but I think this is very deceptive. We can try to ignore the spiritual dimensions, but spirituality is their ultimate purpose historically. The Encyclopedia of New Age Beliefs considers the martial arts as “forms of spiritual education that function as means toward self-realization or self-enlightenment.” It can be difficult emotionally for a person to give up the martial arts, because they may be so involved with them. Rather than considering they may be dangerous they vigorously defend their right to practice them.

apostalism #fundie apostalism.tumblr.com

one-single-verse asked:

Also: thoughts on deism as a belief system? What other sort of philosophical frameworks are acceptable in/compatible with/encompassing of Christian law?

Deism more or less suggests God abandoned His children which I find rather offensive speech in reference to my Father.

Again, speaking from a strictly religious angle? None. Non-Christians cannot abide by Christian Law because the centerpiece is being Saved!

But translated over to state law, I think practicing Jews/Buddhists/Sikhs, and Right-wing Atheists/Agnostics/Pagans have a good chance of assimilating to a Christian Law based country depending on some details. Hinduism expresses a rigid caste system and I Indian culture tends to be very abusive towards women (I don’t know if that’s a Hindu or an Indian thing) and Islam has its obvious problems. All the above have the very real potential for conflict with the system, but I think assimilation probabilities would be significant.

rlhuckle #fundie christiandiscussionforums.org

REAL humans are the elect and life is a humanization process (coming to a knowledge of the truth), the rest are mere shadow (they are already de-humanized) and live an illusion. People will understand WHO the reprobate actually are--wicked, evil, and self-deceiving individuals (in spirit) that only care for themselves and hate their Creator (and those who belong to the Creator--the source of all that is good) with an eternal animosity. To the elect, every reprobate is merely another Nero,Hitler,Stalin etc..

(contributors note: elect means Christians and reprobate are all non-Christians)

"Kendra" #fundie answers.yahoo.com

"Atheists": Why can't you simply say you're "non-religious," or better yet, "non-Christian"?
At least you then you can't say you're being labled, but rather just distinguishing yourself from the norm.

[Added Later]
Because Christians, Muslims, and Jews do have a specific belief system--you atheists claim that you do not. Hence, why it's necessary for us to make these distinctions.

Are you atheists now saying that you so have a specific belief system?


We don't call ourselves non-Jewish/Muslim because we're not subject to or dominated by them. You are subject to us.