Similar posts

Ted Cruz and Colonel-Knight-Rider #racist #wingnut thehill.com

COLONEL-KNIGHT-RIDER: Way to go, Ted! :clap:

(Lauding Ted Cruz for saying this quoted in the Hill article linked)

———————

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) lashed out at Oprah Winfrey for saying white privilege is an “advantage,” accusing the Black media mogul of spewing “utter, racist BS.”

“Billionaire Oprah lectures the rest of us: ‘You still have your whiteness. That's what the term "white privilege" is. It means that whiteness still gives you an advantage, no matter,’” the senator wrote on Twitter in response to an article from Glenn Beck’s conservative outlet The Blaze.

“What utter, racist BS,” he added.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #racist #homophobia deviantart.com

image

Image transcript
(Drawing of an overweight man with glasses and light brown hair/beard. He only wears light blue pants and „FSTDT“ is written across his belly.)


The Neckbeard SJW Atheist
- Has no religious friends because he treats people of all religions like they‘re fundamentalists.
- „When Bernie is President...“
- Forms his ideology around My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic.
- Still thinks former President Obama can do no wrong.
- Majored in gender studies in college and now works as a GameStop cashier.
- Believes all traditional displays of masculinity to be „toxic“.
- Sees a social media post from an ordinary person he disagrees with and shares it on FSTDT, not caring how it might affect the other person.
- Thinks „Baby, It‘s Cold Outside“ should be banned.
- Believes political conservatives have no redeeming qualities.
- Will stop at nothing until he publicly humiliates everyone who disagrees with him into converting to his cause.

(Drawing of the typical Chad from the Incel vs. Chad meme but bald instead of the iconic triangular hairdo, dressed in a police uniform)

THE CHAD OPEN-MINDED ATHEIST
- Loves his many religious friends and is particularly interested in Buddhism.
- „I don‘t particularly care for Sanders. He‘s not even a democratic socialist.“
- Forms his ideology around experiences of personal growth and learning.
- Has legitimate, fair, constructive criticism of former President Obama.
- Was a first responder for five years and has gone back to school to study medicine.
- Relishes in traditional masculinity by riding his motorcycle, listening to metal, celebrating Viking culture, and building or fixing things.
- Sees a social media post from an ordinary person he disagrees with and doesn‘t do anything with it because he knows there are more important things in life than bashing ordinary people who disagree with you on the Internet.
- Likes metal too much to care about „Baby, It‘s Cold Outside“.
- Admires some political conservatives like President Eisenhower and Wilhelm Canaris, the latter of whom was notably deceived by Hitler.
- Doesn‘t care if you agree or disagree with him. Too focused on healthy personal growth to even bat an eye.


A gift for [redacted] in light of people over the past summer taking some of my comedically intended conservative commentary on this site, misinterpreting it as "racist" or "homophobic," and then making their smear campaign of me on the Website Fundies Say the Darndest Things a top search result for "Colonel Knight Rider," which I fear will cause people to think I'm a fundamentalist hack, or at least a racist or homophobe, when I'm not. It's a variation of an Internet meme which I've dubbed too explicit for my family-friendly gallery (hence my also tastefully censoring what lies below each figure's waist) designed to explain the difference between the sociopathic troll atheists from FSTDT vs. one so kind, selfless, and friendly that he makes the blog The Friendly Atheist look like Voldemort by comparison.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #sexist #fundie deviantart.com

[Highlights from “100 Truths by Colonel Knight Rider”.]

[…]
26. First crush?—My babysitter. But it was an innocent love of her personality, the kind I hope to apply to a real adult relationship.
[…]
28. Any talent?—I may not be a genius in the literal sense of the word, but I am one of the fastest-thinking men alive with a unique set of memory techniques that not even I can fully explain. If I could, I'd be in MENSA.
[…]
38. Drink?—Milk, the signature, calcium-enriched drink of Colonel Knight Rider. *In Sean Connery's voice,* Fat-free, not whole.
[…]
45. Fallen in love with someone?—Yes, but it's never been reciprocated because this is a post-feminist world. The problem with girls in my generation is that, as another former babysitter of mine told my mother, there are too many of them whose mothers have told them that they "don't need guys" to live long and fulfilling lives.
46. Celebrated Halloween?—Formerly. Now I just make Deviations about it.
47. Had your heart broken?—I guess I just answered that one.
[…]
52. Deleted an entire paper?—No, but I've heavily revised a few to the point where it feels like deleting and starting over again.
53. Did something you regret?—Yes, but it brought me to DeviantArt, proving that all things work together for those who love God…and those who choose not to listen but work hard to be good people anyway.
[…]
59. Left the country?—Not yet, but hopefully some day on vacation! Or I could leave when America becomes so politically divided that I'm the last man in my church, at which point I'd go into self-imposed exile Yoda-style.
[…]
66. Stayed single for two years since the first time you had a date?—For nearly 26 years, yes.
[…]
71. Plans for today?—Struggle to find a decent job, play superhero on the Internet, repeat. So, the usual.
72. Waiting for?—A girl who's sweet, innocent, thoughtful, deep, listens well, gives good hugs, is not a feminist, and wants to date me.
73. Want kids?—Naturally!
74. Want to get married?—So much that I admit to unintentionally sounding like a girl when I talk about it.
[…]
81. Hook-up or relationship?—Relationship. Have you ever met a true knight who does casual hook-ups?
[…]
85. Held a gun or knife in defense?—Only in a dream where I killed a childhood nightmare with one bullet. It was a few months before my 18th birthday, so I like to think of it as my own personal rite of passage into adulthood. =P Today, whenever I think of the dream, which ended when I woke up seconds after the kill, I imagine it continuing with the sun rising out my bedroom window at the time as I hear that guy from the first shot of The Lion King shout his famous Zulu lyrics: "NAAAAAAAAAAAAAANTS' INGONYAAAAAAAAAAAAAMA BAGITHI BABAAAAAAAAAAA!!!" signifying the dawn of a new, prosperous era free of childhood nightmares.
[…]
86. Killed somebody?—There are three types of folks who could answer this question affirmatively: psychopaths, law enforcement officers, and people in the Armed Services. In truth, I'm none of the three.
[…]
97. Is there one person you really want to be with right now?—My wife, whom God has already chosen but I haven't yet seen.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #dunning-kruger #conspiracy #elitist #fundie #pratt deviantart.com

(congrats, Colonel-Knight-Rider, you discovered the debate tactic of pointing your finger and screeching No You!)

Following my most recent journal, one of Niam's friends, who's known as ryu238 on DA and whom I will hereafter refer to as "Jake" because of the real name he posted on his DA profile, was quick to spam me with anti-Trump articles from liberally biased sources, including the ever-dubious Reddit, hoping he could gain a new convert because of that. These instances, of course, aren't the first time someone from Niam's niche collective of degrading, condescending, and insulting leftists have actively tried to turn me to turn against Trump and make me question the conservative values I was raised with, thinking that doing so will somehow make me "better." Too bad I don't kowtow to people who obsessively bully me and my friends. Last time I checked, the Internet is not a police state, and they are not in charge.


So, what's my realization based on all this? Simple: Niam, Jake, and other regular users of the anti-conservative Website Fundies Say The Darndest Things (I would've sooner said anti-extremist conservative before learning they like taunting moderates just as much) are what they fear most: the nonbeliever equivalents of religious fundamentalists! Like religious fundamentalists (which I know I'm not—I don't read Genesis literally), they regularly heckle anyone who doesn't share their views in any way, and they emotionally blackmail people into feeling guilty for having views different from them by framing them for all kinds of bigotry they know they didn't commit. On top of that, they spam people like me with articles supporting their views, thinking that anyone who reads them will immediately accept them as fact and change their views accordingly (their version of Biblical literalism sans Bible).

In that sense, the title of the site refers to themselves more than it does their quoting targets. Ironic, isn’t it?

Colonel-Knight-Rider #racist deviantart.com

image

[Transcript: “I’ve been called a racist. Who cares.]

[And in the comments…]

In the meantime, I'm going to do a tried, tested, and true method to make sure FSTDT vanishes from my top Google search results: simply create more social media accounts bearing my user name and draw more crowds to them, starting with Genius Lyrics. I've got 245 "IQ" points already, 100 just for adding an avatar!

Eric hyde's Blog #conspiracy ehyde.wordpress.com

I write very little in the area of Christian vs. atheist apologetics anymore, and for good reason.

It was in atheist chat-rooms and blogs that I first cut my teeth in theology many years ago. Since those days I have not heard anything new from atheists.

It seems that many atheists today (some like to use the title ‘New Atheists’ to distinguish them from the more profound philosophical atheists of yesteryear) have very little to add to the discussion. To be fair, the same goes with most Christian apologists.

However, I thought it would be fun to comment on the ten arguments I hear the most. My hope is that it will help expose some of the more obvious problems with them and maybe help both sides—atheists and Christians alike—to move on to more interesting debate material.

One additional note: another reason I do not enter into the atheist-Christian debate world much anymore is because of the sheer discourtesy that both sides tend to show the other. I will not delete any comments, no matter how uncivil or juvenile they become, because, for me, it is an important part of the article. The responses (if there are any) will demonstrate the current state of atheist vs. Christian banter. Also, I will not respond to rude posts. This is advanced warning so please don’t think me rude as well if I ignore them.

Okay, here we go:

1. There is no evidence for God’s existence.

There are a couple of problems with this line. Starting with the idea of ‘evidence,’ what exactly does one mean by evidence? What is sufficient evidence for one person is often not sufficient evidence for another. A court of law provides innumerable examples of how two parties can possess the same collection of data, the same power of logic and reasoning, yet argue for completely different interpretations of the data. The old saying is true: the facts do not determine the argument, the argument determines the facts.

When confronted with the charge that there is no evidence for God the Christian often does not know where to start with a rebuttal. It’s as G.K. Chesterton once said, asking a Christian to prove God’s existence is like asking someone to prove the existence of civilization. What is one to do but point and say, “look, there’s a chair, and there’s a building,” etc. How can one prove civilization by merely selecting a piece here and a piece there as sufficient proofs rather than having an experience of civilization as a whole?

Nearly everything the Christian lays eyes on is evidence of God’s existence because he sees the ‘handiwork’ of God all around him in creation. But this is hardly sufficient evidence in the court of atheist opinion, a court which presupposes that only what can be apprehended by the senses rightly qualifies as evidence (in other words, the atheist demands not evidence of God’s handiwork, but rather material evidence of God Himself). For the Christian who believes in a transcendent God, he can offer no such evidence; to produce material evidence of God is, ironically, to disprove a transcendent God and cast out faith. If one desires God to appear in the flesh, well… He already did. But even if one lived at the time and could touch Christ in the flesh, this would still not “prove” God’s existence in the scientific sense (science has no such categories).

The second part of the line is equally short-sighted. What does one mean by ‘existence’? If one means, ‘that which has come into existence,’ then surely God does not exist because God never came into existence. He always was; He is eternal. This was a famous assessment of the matter by Soren Kierkegaard (dealing with Hegel’s dialectic of existence). The argument is a bit involved, so for times sakes I’ll just have to state it and leave it there.

2. If God created the universe, who created God?

This is one of the more peculiar arguments I’ve ever come across. Those who use this charge as some sort of intellectual checkmate have simply failed to grasp what Christians understand as ‘eternal.’ It is an argument usually levied once a theist posits that God is required for the existence of the universe (a necessary Being upon which all other things exist by way of contingency). Some atheists then shift the weight over to the theist saying, “Well then who created God?” (which demonstrates a failure to understand God as the source and ground of being rather than God as simply one more being among other beings in existence, follow this link for more.) What is a Christian to do but smile at such a question? God is the antecedent of all things in creation and is eternal. If God had a Creator then His Creator would be God. God is God precisely because He does not have a creator.

3. God is not all-powerful if there is something He cannot do. God cannot lie, therefore God is not all-powerful.

Bang! Owned.

Not so fast. This argument would be fantastic—devastating maybe—if God was more of the ancient Greek god persuasion, where the gods themselves were subject to fate and limited to their specific roles in the cosmos. The Orthodox doctrine of God is much different. Christians (at least Orthodox Christians) view God’s ontology as subject to His perfect free-will. Why is He good? Because He wills to be good. Why does He not lie? Because He wills to be honest. Why does God exist as Trinity? Because He wills it. He could just as easily will to not exist. And yes, He could just as easily will to lie. The fact that He doesn’t is no commentary on whether He could.

(Note: Due to the immense amount of discussion that this point has raised, one clarifying statement is worth noting. An argument based on strict logical word games can render the idea ‘all-powerful,’ or ‘omnipotent’ self-defeating. When one considers the juvenile question, “Can God create a rock so big that He can’t lift it?” this point becomes clear. But in reality, such an argument winds up further solidifying what Christianity means by an all-powerful God. For the Christian it simply means that all power and authority are God’s. Following the logical word game above forces the believer to make a redundant proclamation in order to remain consistent: “God cannot overpower Himself.” But this fact is anything but confounding, it merely stresses the point that there is no power greater than God, so much so that one is forced to pit God against Himself in order to find His equal.)

4. Believing in God is the same as believing in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Clause, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

What I love about this well-worn atheist ‘argument’ is that it actually serves to demonstrate how vastly different a belief in God is to these myths and imaginations. When one honestly assesses the Judeo-Christian doctrine of God he will find multiple thousands of years of human testimony and religious development; he will find martyrs enduring the most horrific trauma in defense of the faith; he will find accounts in religious texts with historical and geographical corroboration; etc (these fact are of course not ‘proofs,’ but rather ‘evidences’ that elicit strong consideration). Pit this against tales of the Tooth Fairy, Santa, and Spaghetti Monsters and one finds the exact opposite: no testimony or religious refinement, no martyrs, no historical and geographical corroboration, etc. Instead, one finds myths created intentionally for children, for point making, or for whatever. It’s strawman argumentation at its worst.

5. Christianity arose from an ancient and ignorant people who didn’t have science.

Indeed, those ancient, ignorant people who believed in the virgin birth of Christ must have believed it because they did not possess the knowledge of how babies were born. Goodness. The virgin birth of Christ was profound and of paramount concern to the ancients precisely because they understood that conception was impossible without intercourse. Ancient man considered the virgin birth miraculous, i.e., impossible without divine action (and at the time most people scorned the idea), and the same could be said with every miraculous story in Scripture.

Indeed ancient people did not have the Hubble telescope, but they were able to see the night sky in full array, something almost no modern person can claim (thanks to modern lighting which distorts our ability to see the full night sky). On average, ancient people lived much closer to nature and to the realities of life and death than many of us moderners.

In terms of a living relationship with these things the ancients were far more advanced than we are today, and this relationship is essentially the nature of religious inquiry. If people lack religious speculation today, maybe it is because they spend more time with their iphones and Macs then with nature. Maybe.

But the claim that Christianity was viable in the ancient world because it was endorsed by wide spread ignorance is a profoundly ignorant idea. Christianity arose in one of the most highly advanced civilizations in human history. The Roman Empire was not known for its stupidity. It was the epicenter of innovation and philosophical giants. I would wager that if a common person of today found himself in a philosophical debate with a common person of first century Alexandria, the moderner would be utterly humiliated in the exchange.

6. Christian’s only believe in Christianity because they were born in a Christian culture. If they’d been born in India they would have been Hindu instead.

This argument is appealing because it pretends to wholly dismiss people’s reasoning capabilities based on their environmental influences in childhood. The idea is that people in general are so intellectually near-sighted that they can’t see past their own upbringing, which, it would follow, would be an equally condemning commentary on atheism (if one was consistent with the charge), but the idea is fairly easy to counter.

Take the history of the Jewish people for example. Let us say that to ‘be’ Jewish, in the religious sense, is much more than a matter of cultural adherence. To be a Jewish believer is to have Judaism permeate one’s thinking and believing and interaction with the world. But is this the state of affairs with the majority of the Jewish people, whether in America, Europe, Israel, or wherever? One would have to be seriously out of touch to believe so. The same phenomenon is found within so-called Christian communities, that is: many sport a Christian title, but are wholly derelict in personal faith. “Believing” in Christianity is a far more serious endeavor then merely wearing a church name tag. Indeed, being born in a Jewish or Christian centric home today is more often a precursor that the child will grow up to abandon the faith of his or her family, or at least be associated with the faith by affiliation only.

7. The gospel doesn’t make sense: God was mad at mankind because of sin so he decided to torture and kill his own Son so that he could appease his own pathological anger. God is the weirdo, not me.

This is actually a really good argument against certain Protestant sects (I’ve used it myself on numerous occasions), but it has no traction with the Orthodox Christian faith. The Orthodox have no concept of a God who needed appeasement in order to love His creation. The Father sacrificed His own Son in order to destroy death with His life; not to assuage His wrath, but to heal; not to protect mankind from His fury, but to unite mankind to His love. If the reader is interested to hear more on this topic follow this link for a fuller discussion.

8. History is full of mother-child messiah cults, trinity godheads, and the like. Thus the Christian story is a myth like the rest.

This argument seems insurmountable on the surface, but is really a slow-pitch across the plate (if you don’t mind a baseball analogy). There is no arguing the fact that history is full of similar stories found in the Bible, and I won’t take the time to recount them here. But this fact should not be surprising in the least, indeed if history had no similar stories it would be reason for concern. Anything beautiful always has replicas. A counterfeit coin does not prove the non-existence of the authentic coin, it proves the exact opposite. A thousand U2 cover bands is not evidence that U2 is a myth.

Ah, but that doesn’t address the fact that some of these stories were told before the Biblical accounts. True. But imagine if the only story of a messianic virgin birth, death, and resurrection were contained in the New Testament. That, to me, would be odd. It would be odd because if all people everywhere had God as their Creator, yet the central event of human history—the game changing event of all the ages—the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ had never occurred to them, in at least some hazy form, they would have been completely cut off from the prime mysteries of human existence. It seems only natural that if the advent of Christ was real it would permeate through the consciousness of mankind on some level regardless of their place in history. One should expect to find mankind replicating these stories, found in their own visions and dreams, again and again throughout history. And indeed, that is what we find.

9. The God of the Bible is evil. A God who allows so much suffering and death can be nothing but evil.

This criticism is voice in many different ways. For me, this is one of the most legitimate arguments against the existence of a good God. The fact that there is suffering and death is the strongest argument against the belief in an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving God. If suffering and death exist it seems to suggest one of two things: (1) either God is love, but He is not all-powerful and cannot stop suffering and death, or (2) God is all-powerful, but He does not care for us.

I devoted a separate article addressing this problem, but let me deal here with the problem inherent in the criticism itself. The argument takes as its presupposition that good and evil are real; that there is an ultimate standard of good and evil that supersedes mere fanciful ‘ideas’ about what is good and evil at a given time in our ethical evolution, as it were. If there is not a real existence—an ontological reality—of good and evil, then the charge that God is evil because of this or that is really to say nothing more than, “I personally don’t like what I see in the world and therefore a good God cannot exist.” I like what C.S. Lewis said on a similar matter: “There is no sense in talking of ‘becoming better’ if better means simply ‘what we are becoming’—it is like congratulating yourself on reaching your destination and defining destination as ‘the place you have reached.’”

What is tricky for the atheist in these sorts of debates is to steer clear of words loaded with religious overtones. It’s weird for someone who does not believe in ultimate good and evil to condemn God as evil because He did not achieve their personal vision of good. So, the initial criticism is sound, but it is subversive to the atheist’s staging ground. If one is going to accept good and evil as realities, he is not in a position to fully reject God. Instead, he is more in a position to wrestle with the idea that God is good. This struggle is applauded in the Orthodox Church. After all, the very word God used for his people in the Old Testament—“Israel”—means to struggle with God.

10. Evolution has answered the question of where we came from. There is no need for ignorant ancient myths anymore.

This might be the most popular attempted smack-downs of religion in general today. It is found in many variations but the concept is fairly consistent and goes something like this: Science has brought us to a point where we no longer need mythology to understand the world, and any questions which remain will eventually be answered through future scientific breakthroughs. The main battle-ground where this criticism is seen today is in evolution vs. creationism debates.

Let me say upfront that there is perhaps no other subject that bores me more than evolution vs. creationism debates. I would rather watch paint dry. And when I’m not falling asleep through such debates I’m frustrated because usually both sides of the debate use large amounts of dishonesty in order to gain points rather than to gain the truth. The evolutionist has no commentary whatsoever on the existence of God, and the creationist usually suffers from profound confusion in their understanding of the first few chapters of Genesis.

So, without entering into the most pathetic debate of the ages, bereft of all intellectual profundity, I’ll only comment on the underlining idea that science has put Christianity out of the answer business. Science is fantastic if you want to know what gauge wire is compatible with a 20 amp electric charge, how agriculture works, what causes disease and how to cure it, and a million other things. But where the physical sciences are completely lacking is in those issues most important to human beings—the truly existential issues: what does it mean to be human, why are we here, what is valuable, what does it mean to love, to hate, what am I to do with guilt, grief, sorrow, what does it mean to succeed, is there any meaning and what does ‘meaning’ mean, and, of course, is there a God? etc, ad infinitum.

As far as where we come from, evolution has barely scratched the purely scientific surface of the matter. Even if the whole project of evolution as an account of our history was without serious objection, it would still not answer the problem of the origin of life, since the option of natural selection as an explanation is not available when considering how dead or inorganic matter becomes organic. Even more complicated is the matter of where matter came from. The ‘Big Bang’ is not an answer to origins but rather a description of the event by which everything came into being; i.e., it’s the description of a smoking gun, not the shooter.

That’s it… my top 10 list. Thanks for reading. Cheers.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie #wingnut #dunning-kruger deviantart.com

{Submitter‘s note: Have you wondered what Colonel-Knight-Rider has been up to lately? Well, here‘s the gist: He‘s been harrassing a fellow DA user. There followed an attempt at apology. (Archived link)
That didn‘t last long.
Here (archived) and here (archived) is some interesting stuff but the real meat is here: (archived) which I quote from, bolding original, redacted the name of the OP:}

Ok you know what screw this where is that gun *grabs a revolver and takes one bullet and places in the revolver and spins the cylinder*

I'm just gonna come out and say it since no one else is brave enough to do so.

You, [REDACTED], are single-handedly the stupidest man on the entire planet.

Your right when you said I'm the most stupidest man on the entire planet I guess I am stupid

"Most stupidest?" Really? Was that intentional or accidental?

Yes, you are. And you know why you're dumb, [REDACTED]? Because you keep whining and moaning and complaining like, "I WANNA KILL MYSEEEEEELLFFF WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH POOR MEEEEE!!!! HAVE SYMPATHY FOR ME ME ME ME ME ME ME!!!!!!!!!!!" But you never do! It makes me wonder if these suicidal thoughts are even real.

I've told you once. I've told you twice. I've told you a thousand, thousand, THOUSAND TIMES that constantly complaining about how you're going to kill yourself and how much you hate yourself and your life does not attract people to your gallery. Have you noticed that no one is commenting on these suicidal status updates to show you sympathy anymore? That's because they've had it with seeing your same stupid shtick of round-the-clock raging about people you hate and whining about wanting to die so much every time they visit your page. So, go see a therapist, go talk to God, go talk to family, or go talk to a friend or a trusted coworker OFF THE COMPUTER because you need an attitude change. *Grabs you by the front of your shirt and pulls you up to his nose.* DO YOU UNDERSTAND ME??? DO I MAKE MYSELF CLEAR, YOU IGNORANT, UNGRATEFUL, WEAK-MINDED MOONBAT??????

Ok jeez

"Ok jeez" isn't gonna work this time, son. That usually means, "Okay, I'll do it, and then I'll forget about it the next day and do my same shtick again." Listen: I've been on this site longer than you have, so I know what it takes to bring people into my gallery: putting on a HAPPY FACE.

Now, I need you to show me some respect when I say that you need an attitude change. From now on, when I give you an order, I expect you to say, "Yes, sir." After that, I want you to follow up on that order. Any breaks from that order will result in disciplinary action. Do you understand?

Colonel-Knight-Rider #racist deviantart.com

[Not the complete work. Just the, ahem, “highlights”.]

[…]

In Missouri, my mother found the public education system was clearly flawed, as evidenced by the Montessori preschool model, so homeschooling became our choice of education from grades K-8. With that, my brother and I gradually became conscious of persistent politically liberal bias and racial discrimination against Caucasians in education, so we developed strong rebuttals to incorrect assumptions and overgeneralizations of political conservatives and Caucasians like us. While our parents emphasized education with minimal time for many (but not all) of the films, TV series, and video games that many of my peers love (and every summer was spent studying something!), we received a rich cultural knowledge from all decades preceding 2000. In adulthood, though, we have increased our knowledge of 21st century popular culture thanks to Web searching and being more actively involved in reading the news. Altogether, we two brothers were raised to succeed and to think deeply about life.

As time passed, I learned more and more of the legacy of my mother’s father, a renaissance man in whose honor I was named. He proposed to his future wife the first of two times at age 10 […] and he had Herculean strength that let him balance people on one hand. Most of all, he saw good in everything and everyone, something I aspire to do even when faced with the fiercest of adversaries.

[…] The San Francisco Bay Area was where I spent my elementary and most of my middle school years. There, I attended various homeschool “park days” and made some acquaintances, but I wish I had more social skills to make lasting friends—come to think of it, some of them needed social skills improvement, too.

The family moved up to the Seattle Area in September 2005 for 8th grade through high school. I discovered the power of distance learning, which I found was like homeschooling with remotely submittable homework. At a homeschool co-op, where I attended extracurricular classes, I met Stephanie, an aspiring impressionist painter whom I assumed would be the love of my life until six years later, when I learned I’d been accidentally convinced that her family didn’t drink alcohol when they did (but I learned not to raise my expectations in women too high, so that was good). In 2007, I met another girl whom I assumed would be the love of my life—Jana, a possible incarnate angel (not an incarnate winged humanoid but an incarnate thought from God) who encouraged me to pursue singing on stage—until I chose to email Stephanie more frequently over her (regrettably! ^^;) and we lost touch.

[…]

At about age 9, I watched the film Super Mario Bros., loosely based upon the eponymous video game series, and believed it my destiny to remake the commercial and critical failure, confident that my work would succeed.

At age 16, I saw 2008’s attempt to reboot Glen A. Larson’s classic 1982-86 TV series Knight Rider and became fascinated with the idea of having a hyper-competent automobile for a sidekick. Since I’ve always loved the idea of suits of armor as symbols of protection and strength, I pictured an actual, armored Medieval knight inside a talking car, and the image of superhero “Captain Knight Rider” was born. I soon after changed the name to “Colonel Knight Rider” after watching an episode of the classic period sitcom Hogan's Heroes, whose main character happens to be named Colonel Robert E. Hogan (Bob Crane), because I felt “Captain” was an overused title for costumed vigilantes. Until I volunteered to help out with the Webcomic Nash & Friends, this image was nothing more than an abstract concept in my head. He had no defined world, personality, friends, or enemies for years.

[…]

Today, I’m a young accountant who consults with a startup where my father acts as CFO, and I have a contract accounting job with a customer base relations aid company that may become a full-time position—if God decides it's a good match, of course.

Colonel-Knight-Rider fav.me

(The title of the journal entry was “'Be Politically Correct!' Reprise Revised” and is colonel-knight-rider’s reworking of the Be Prepared song from The Lion King.)

[Spoken]

[HYENA MESSENGER]
Scar! Guys! Good news!

[SCAR]
Silence, fool! Can you not see that I’m taking a moment to grieve the loss of my most famous musical number?

[HYENA MESSENGER]
That’s what I was coming to you to talk about! We’re gonna sing our song after all!

[SCAR]
Oh? Do go on.

[HYENA MESSENGER]
Yeah, but…uh…the vocals and lyrics are reworked to sound all shouty and scary and psycho. So, it might not capture the spirit of the original. It’s also a lot shorter.

[SCAR]
[Pauses]
Very honestly, I’m not sure what to make of that. It certainly sounds intimidating, but is it worthy of my original piece, especially when the new me lacks the human facial characteristics?

[2019 SCAR]
You’re just saying that because my voice actor is black, aren’t you, RACIST? Now, give me my privilege!

[SCAR]
*Gah!* What are you even doing here, Reboot Me?! I thought you were above getting triggered like social justice warriors. The problem isn’t the voice actors. It’s the realism. The very disturbing near-shot-for-shot reshoots of classic scenes with too much realism and not enough colorful facial expressions, body language, or other ways of expressing human emotion.

[SHENZI]
Yeah! And your hyenas ain’t even a little funny!

[BANZAI]
Get out before we eat you alive!

[Singing]

[SCAR]
It’s time Favreau came to his senses!
“Be Prepared” will receive an encore!
But, as per the audience consensus,
The Uncanny Valley’s in store.

[HYENAS]
Amid all the feuding and rages,
There’s one thing we do know for sure:
O.G. Disney lasts through the ages!
Live action remakes don’t endure.

[SCAR]
So, prep—

[2019 SCAR]
2-D films are yesterday’s message!
A clapped-out, distracted regime
Whose failings undoubtedly presage
The need for a different dream!

[SCAR]
*Hah!* You just plagiarized your own thesis,
Which now shows how lazy you are!

[HYENAS]
Like your film!

[SCAR]
I don’t care how lifelike your face is.
YOU’LL NEVER OUTWIT CLASSIC SCAR!!!

Still, prepare for a dark age for Disney.
Be prepared for the brand’s suicide.

[HYENA #1]
I heard they’ve for sure made
A black Little Mer—

[HYENA #2]
If we don’t spill details,
It might increase gross sales!

[HYENAS]
Our lack of emotion
Will lead to commotion!

[SCAR]
The Disney we once loved has died!

[ALL (–2019 SCAR)]
SJWs won’t leave us spared.
Be prepared!

[HYENAS]
SJWs won’t leave us spared.

[SCAR]
Be prepared!

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie #homophobia #transphobia deviantart.com

I don't know whether it was because of social media sharing, a generous $20 donation, or both, but my petition to end Fundies Say The Darndest Things now has 275 signatures. That's over five times the average daily active user base on FSTDT and an increase of over 250 from when I last checked. Serves FSTDT right for quoting me, a guy whom even they acknowledge is harmless compared to most people they quote.

You can't win, you sons of guns. You're outnumbered now. Oh, and you may want to consider quoting Mickeymac96 instead of me if you must. He fits your definitions of "fundie," "psycho," and "moonbat" because he sends routine death threats to Donald Trump and Taylor Swift despite his claims of Christianity. Or maybe you don't want to quote him because you obviously share his Trump death wish.

{The following is from the comment section}

ShePhylis:
Yeah, the internets do not work that way and neither does US law. We "win" whenever you post more offensive bullshit, which you do a lot. You had your chance to talk but dunno if you forgot to mention it but you ran the fuck away whilst screaming something about how we are all blinded by hate to see your position and that was after you supposedly wanted to discuss things. You had to admit to us that you do not in fact see queer folks as valid people and consider them sick and in need of something, most likely the given iteration of the cosmic horror you worship. Face it, you're a fanatic, Bobby, touting that childish, simplified view of reality around like it's a virtue. You seemed like someone who could be reasoned with, until of course it came down to disputing your own bigotries, which you so delightfully hide behind your faith, like any good religious toadie. Yes, you're far from the monsters we often quote but you are far from harmless either. You're vocal about your bullshit, your cynical use of "inclusivness" to include your bigotries as valid convo points but disallow any offence to them and play the injured party at a drop of a hat. You mix an "ally" and a person who simply understands we're all valid people and deserve to be the final judges of our lives and how we want to live them, to you however, even that would be some sort of an autocratic dictate, as you've admitted plenty to both me and the guys. There is no "winning" this for you, Bobby. Each time you post some bigoted shit publicly on the web, we will quote it, just like that. There really ain't a thing you can do in this situation, except I suppose have a change of heart and decide to start living and letting live not just as a window dressing but in your actions and words as well.

Colonel-Knight-Rider:
Well, if it isn’t everyone’s favorite Satanist. I see you’ve finally resorted to trolling by showing up on my page, something you specifically said you and your fellow FSTDT users would not do. Consider this an epic fail to uphold one of the few standards you supposedly live by.

I never said that I should be the final judge of how you want to live your lives. If you want to mash private areas of the same type together or surgically alter your bodies so they match how you think your brains are wired, go ahead. That’s your life, not mine. I personally think doing that stuff is gross, but it doesn’t mean I see you as less than human. You live in Canada, the Great White North of the Free World, where there is literally nothing stopping you from living your life your way, so why whine about what some stranger says? You need to be more and less about what other people say about your sexual identity. You’ll be a lot happier when you do. I do not want to convert you. I could care less if you joined my church tomorrow and became friends with this lesbian realtor I know in our church (I still could use an explanation as to how she’s in our church). All I ask is for you to accept that I am not a “fundie.” I do not need to have a “change of heart” and see gays and trans folks’ bedroom behaviors and surgical operations as not gross. That stuff will always be gross to me, but it does not mean I think it’s a “disease.” Thinking it’s a disease would directly contradict our teaching that everyone and everything is useful and harmless, which is something everyone can choose to see for themselves to make the world a better place.

I cannot overstate that you are NOT the police of the Internet. You cannot tell me how to think, so, for the love of your juvenile parody religion, stop acting like you think you can.

Come to think of it, my church can’t tell me how to think either, but it does stress that actions have natural and logical consequences. Also, I don’t know if you were paying attention, but my God does not live exclusively in the sky or in space.

Oh, and this “Bobby” nonsense is not nearly half as funny as you think it is. You FSTDTers often fail to realize your own childish actions by fighting fire with fire. My name is Robert, and, while I will see people who do not identify as straight as friends so long as they embody such common virtues as lovingkindness, generosity, and a solid work ethic, I will never support homosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality, or transgenderism in general, even if doing so would cause you to de-quote me immediately. I am not a “toadie.” I’m a leader. The leader of the revolution to expose the bitter truth about the most hotly opinionated liberal blog on the Web since RationalWiki, a site that goes sniffing around for “bigotry” while failing to acknowledge their own (seriously—you actually think “most” American conservatives are like the common stereotypes that FSTDT seeks to perpetuate!).

Universal Rights #conspiracy universal-rights.com

What Came First, The Military Or The Government?

Without the Knights Templars, Christianity would not exist in its current form.

Without the Knights Templars, the Protestant Reformation would not have happened.

Without the Knights Templars, the European Royal Bloodline would not exist.

Without the Knights Templars, the fiat banking system would not exist.

Without the Knights Templars, the Jesuits would not exist.

Without the Knights Templars, the Masonic organizations would not exist.

Without the Knights Templars, the Natives of the Americas would not have been slaughtered and their land stolen by Christians.

Without General Washington's Masonic Army, which overthrew the governments of the thirteen colonies, the corporation titled the United States of America would not exist.

Without the people that control the United States Military, WWI could not have happened.

Without the assistance of the United States Military, the USSR could not have been formed.

Without the assistance of the United States Military, WWII could not have happened.

Without the consent of the United States Military, the State of Israel would not have been created after WWII.

Without the assistance of the United States Military, Iraq's Saddam Hussein would not have had the forth largest military in the world.

Without the assistance of the United States Military, the events of September 11, 2001 could not have happened.

Without the assistance of the United States Military, Chemtrails could not be sprayed over America.

Without the consent of the United States Military, the criminals in Washington DC could not continue to operate.

Without the consent of the United States Military, not a single radio or TV transmission could be broadcast in America.

Without the consent of the United States Military, foreign bankers could not operate in America.

Without the assistance and consent of the United States Military, big pharma could not peddle poisonous drugs and vaccines.

Without the assistance of the United States Military, the march towards a new world order, whatever that NWO may or may not be, could not continue.

The fact is, the United States Military is the enemy to every American person and has been for a very long time. Without forming and controlling the U.S. Military first, the District of Columbia would not exist. Those that are responsible for all the criminal actions perpetrated by other United States institutions, such as operations run by politicians working from Capital Hill, the CIA, the Department of Justice with its FBI, and the Federal Reserve Bank, would not be able to do what they do.

Without enemies abroad, there would be no need for the United States Military in the minds of Americans. To ensure those enemies exist, and to ensure Americans perceive the need and justification for a large military, the Pentagon uses the politicians in Washington, the agents at Langley, the officers working from the J. Edgar Hoover Building, the Justice Department, the world's religious organizations, even the bankers (the founders of the United States Military started the fiat banking system) to raise enemies around the world.

They are able to do all this by lying, finger pointing, and stealing money from American people and American businesses. They call those lies counter-intelligence. They call those thefts taxes. They don't need the money though, but they need Americans to be financially disabled so people concentrate on earning wages rather than realizing just how simple things really are in the realm of control. They have fooled governments the world over, including the royals in England. They are masters at subterfuge and mind-control and they are really good at getting others to do the dirty work so they can appear as the good guys.

(more on this later, and it'll make so much sense you'll shit your pants)

Colonel-Knight-Rider #homophobia deviantart.com

I thought it was too late, but, due to the calendar period ever Emmys ceremony covers, Steven Universe episode “Reunited” got the Creative Arts Emmy nomination I thought it would.

*Sigh,* Does it really need to be said why? :roll:

Oh, well—now I can give the episode in my review journal the parody title I always wanted: “Creative Arts Emmy Bait IV: By the Power Vested in Me through the Animators and CN Executives who Willingly Resort to Using a Lesbian Wedding as a Cheap Gimmick to Boost Ratings, I Now Pronounce You Rubellen and Sapportia.”

Colonel-Knight-Rider #homophobia fav.me

[Parts of CNR’s journal included extra information just about the project they were working on. I edited those out for (relative) brevity’s sake.]

Back in January, [name of person who CNR has an issue with], whom I enlisted as Nintendo Cinematic Universe fanfiction project collaborator four years earlier, made a controversial move by attempting to squeeze a gay couple in to the Pokémon movie idea he had planned, but there was no character development reason why they should be gay. The fact that he wanted to include them simply because “other shows are doing it” means he included them solely to follow a trend for diversity points. I refused to allow such a thing, as I do not support (but that doesn’t necessarily mean hate) the LGBTQ+ ideology for secular reasons way more than religious ones. My goal was to protect the innocence of children, who, from my observation, don’t even know what that sort of thing means until it’s taught to them in schools (in contrast to heterosexual relationships, which they are naturally aware of as part of our survival instinct). You, the reader, have every right to disagree, and I respect your right to your point of view. But all I ask is for my point of view to have some respect, too. What some call “homophobia" and "censorship," I call respect for the innocence of youth.

My mother has always said, “If everybody jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge, would you?” This is her poetic way of saying, “Don’t do something just because everybody else is doing it. Think for yourself!” This is why I want to stress that Realshow unconsciously admitted riding the bandwagon was his entire motivation for including gay Pokémon. He alluded to the presence of this “inclusivity” in other TV cartoons such as Adventure Time and Steven Universe, believing that we should follow their trend. He called the values I was raised with “wrong” and argued that “Times have changed, and so should you.” He did not understand that, when someone says things like that to me, that person not only insults me, whom he/she has met, but also my entire immediate family, whom he/she hasn’t met. Given the choice between remaining faithful to my family and their virtues and rebelling against them just to make one random stranger I know nothing about happy, I chose the former. Realshow has since adorned his avatar with a rainbow graphic, as you can see—his way of spitting in my face.

That aside, remember: if I really did hate gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgenders, etc., I would have sooner barred them all from watching me, but I haven’t and never will.

Seriously, though—he says he doesn't want to reopen any old wounds, but one of his hashtags is "not homophobic." It's hysterical.

Anyway, after realizing he had blocked me because of our gay Pokémon argument, I felt the urge to confront him in some way. Impulsively, I evaded his block with an alternate account to call out his behavior, leading to my one-day suspension.

Let’s face the facts: 2019 hasn’t been an easy year for me so far on DeviantArt. I’ve failed to get DA’s support staff to do anything about a smear campaign digging up my past about decisions I regret making on other forums (hence my “Vengeful Heckler” comics). I’ve mistaken an agnostic for a militant atheist bigoted against Christians, not realizing she adopted one of us as her figurative brother. And my efforts to end a toxic friendship and to put a project on pause indefinitely resulted in a five-man revenge journal post. In my church, we teach that things go wrong when people don’t listen to God, and my actions against Realshow’s controversial journal leading to my suspension only proves that.

However, not all hope is lost. As long as I continue to receive inspiration from the wonders of nature, cartoons drawn by my friends, scheduled artistic challenges, and life in general, the Colonel Knight Rider artistic enterprise will continue as happily as it has these past few years. If there’s anything my Internet history proves, it’s that, no matter how many times I get knocked down, I stand up 20 feet taller than before. No one other than God can turn things around for me, so I will listen for His voice.

In the meantime, one question remains. Should I go after this guy for copyright infringement? Or should I just accept that I’m outnumbered five men to one and move forward with what makes me happy?

Thanks for understanding. Keep being awesome, everybody. May you never have to deal with relationships as toxic as some of my past ones have been, and may whatever Pokémon some of you may catch be as asexual as they are in the games!

Connor R #fundie debunkedevil.blogspot.com

[Someone attempting to debunk this webpage http://www.evilbible.com/common_lies.htm]

CTS- Common Lies Christians Tell
Ok, a few apparent lies that Christians tell. For the sake of being thorough I'll go through all of them, even the ones mentioned in the introduction. Before I begin, I'd like to make a point about lying. A lie is defined as "a false statement with deliberate intent to deceive". This means that Charlotte is accusing Christians of, completely on purpose, deceiving everyone that they discuss the following topics. That is one large accusation. I would contend that most, if not all, Christians don't fully understand the Einstein, Darwin, or American topics. Now I'll begin the explanations.

Einstein

This is a hotly debated issue. I'm not sure whether or not there is enough evidence to say it one way or another, but there are two basic conflicting views. Richard Dawkins (wrote "The God Delusion") sees Einstein as a pantheist, which he goes on to say is basically "sexed-up" atheism. He believes Einstein's use of the word 'God' was always used only in a poetic and metaphorical sense. On the other side of the issue, Susan Wise Bauer (wrote "The Well-Trained Mind") doesn't try to portray Einstein as a Christian, but argues that Einstein believes in one god and had a tendency toward deism. This view basically portrays God as a universal clock-maker, who winds everything up and then lets it tick without interfering. So those are the differing views, I'll post a few links below so you can see both sides. What we can say about Einstein is that he absolutely believed in the existence of Jesus as a historical figure. He also believed that religion and science can cooperate, they are not in contention.

Evidence for Jesus's Existence

First of all, the Bible is absolutely reliable as a historical document. Archeologists frequently discover artifacts that confirm the events recorded in the Bible. For a video on these findings click here. The writings of Josephus, a Roman citizen who lives from c. 37-100 wrote about Jesus. He calls him "a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man", and says that he performs paradoxes and won over many Jews and Greeks. He even calls him the Christ. In a later writing, he also calls James the "brother of Jesus, who is the Christ". Many other early scholars reference "Christus", a Latinized Greek translation of the Hebrew word "Messiah". Justin Martyr mentioned an "Acts of Pilate", a record of some cases Pilate was involved in, but only Tertullian also mentions this. The evidence for the Bible and Jesus's historicity is to numerous to do more than touch on, so look around for yourself.

Darwin Recanted on his Deathbed

I don't believe this to be true. There is very little evidence for this. This story became popular when it was preached by an evangelical woman named "Lady Hope". She may have visited Darwin, but if she did it is most likely that she did so around 7 months before his death. At this point in time he would not have been bedridden as she had said, and therefore was unlikely that he was studying the Bible then. As Charlotte said, his daughter opposed this and his wife made no comment on it. It's likely she would have, as she was worried about the "godless nature" of his views. This doesn't rule it out entirely, but it doesn't have the background to be stated as fact.

Evolution is false (or only a theory)

This is an interesting one for sure. I agree that micro-evolution is as close to a fact as you can get with our limited knowledge. All it does is explain the variation we see every day as humans. Charlotte goes on to admit that "macro evolution remains a theory", and then contends that it is a fact (by saying "EVOLUTION DID HAPPEN"). I know a certain line of resources (look to the right) that would contend otherwise, and with scientific observations of their own. The theory of evolution by natural selection is at this point in time filled with far too many holes to be assumed to be a scientific fact. I'm also going to stray away from saying it is a flat-out falsity because of the evidence on the other side of it. Hopefully time will tell, but for now, Christians saying it's only a theory aren't lying.

Atheists Have No Morals

Once again, Charlotte using a statistic to prove her point and does not give a source for it. It is a gross generalization to say that no atheist alive has morals, so I don't agree with this statement. I do, however, take issue with Charlotte's accusations that Christians cause true immorality (genocide, slavery, etc). I've already disproved the slavery point, see here. I've also argued many times that genocide is not often caused by Christians, but when it is there are absolutely not following the Bible's teaching. The only wars backed by God were against societies taking part in extreme immorality (demon worship, human sacrifice, sodomy, etc).

Regarding women's suffrage, the Woman's Christian Temperance Union was one of the most influential groups pushing women's rights. Eleanor Roosevelt, a huge influential leader, was a theist (although not a Christian). The Christians who believed that women should not vote misunderstood the historical context of verses like 1 Corinthians 14.35 and Colossians 3.18. Women do have a different God-given role than men, but that is a different topic.

Back to atheists' morals. The Bible teaches that "the Law is written on our hearts" (Romans 2). This would imply that every person, unless their conscience has been severely fragmented by sin, has a basic moral awareness. Furthermore, many values consistent with Christianity are encouraged in our society. However, an argument exists that atheism, if left unchecked, will cause moral deprivation. If there is no God, there exists no standard for ethics beyond what is helpful for society. When no objective standard exists, it is easier to argue that choices like homosexuality, bestiality, abortion, prostitution, etc can do no material harm to society. In fact, one of the only atheists against gay marriage is Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard, who has been labeled a hypocrite by fellow atheists. Food for thought.

United States Founded on Christianity

Charlotte is correct here, but I'm going to add some perspective. There is no disputing the fact that the majority of the founding fathers and colonists at the time were Christians. This means that America was founded on a number of biblical Christian values (equality, respect, etc). However, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison were all deists. They believed in a generic god, but did not accept orthodox Christianity. Charlotte is correct, one of the principle reasons for the voyage to America was freedom of religion. I've said this before, and I'll say it again: State sponsorship is not conducive to a strong Christian faith. There's no need for Christians to push this idea. This "lie" is likely based on ignorance, not deception, I've not met one Christian who knows the information I just posted above. Atheists, please inform my brothers of this respectfully, there are not lying to you.

There Are No Atheists In Foxholes

You can wikipedia this to understand it. This is meant as an expression, not a statistical fact. The Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers, which Charlotte referenced, stands against the use of this as a statistic. It's simply meant to show that many people re-evaluate their positions on God's existence when under circumstances of extreme stress. This common idea is backed up by the experiences of people who encounter NDEs, or Near-death experiences. I've posted a link below for some information about atheists in particular who encounter this phenomenon.

Near-death experiences: http://www.near-death.com/experiences/atheists01.html
Einstein opinions:
http://www.clockbackward.com/2009/02/08/was-albert-einstein-religious/
Historicity of Jesus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#Non-Christian_sources
Julia Gillard: http://gayrights.change.org/blog/view/atheists_against_gay_marriage

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.

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.

natsumihanaki20 #fundie deviantart.com

A reply to TheEyeOfTheLight

I blocked you because you are crazy. In this world there are two type of persons: those whose values are defined by society and do not like to think (you) , and those whose value are defined by reality and like to think (me). You are amongst those whose values is defined by society and do not like to think. I warned you lovingly that what you do is wrong, but you keep on denying reality and God to satisfy your delusions. I can see which kind of person you are, and you are the type with whom talking about reality and showing proof is a waste of time. You are a hypocrite, and delusional. You are the kind who has blindfolded themselves from the truth. You claim to respect my beliefs. Yet, you came here with the purport to change them. You claim to believe in God, and yet in the comment you said that probably God is not true. You claim to be interested in learning, but when confronted with evidence you ignore it and plunge your head into the sand. I don't hate you, but I don't see the point in repeating the truth when you have unwilling ears. It seems you have not read the Bible. If you had read it, you wouldn't say such biblical myths.

I'm not being a hypocrite. All I'm saying is what is written in the Bible and what facts support. Facts show that asexuality is as healthy as heterosexuality, that's why priest practice it. Jesus himself said that being eunuch ( not interested in sex) is okay, whilst God condemned homosexuality in the New Testament and in the Old Testament and homosexuals were listed as those who will burn in Hell. God commanded his followers to hate sin, and to love the sinner. One can love a homosexual man whilst detesting his homosexuality. One can love a murderer whilst detesting the murder he committed. One can love a man without loving his sin. And, by 'love' God means that we should do our best to help the fella turn away from sin and to help him whenever his in trouble (for example, if a sinner is starving, we should give him food).

Sin is something that one can stop doing. We are all born wicked, and with a tendency to sin. But, through God we can all overcome sin. Homosexuality is not inborn; there's no evidence to support that. Homosexuality can be changed, and there are many studies which prove it. For instance, a study performed by Robert Spitzer ( a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, who was amongst the groups of psychologist whose efforts contributed to homosexuality stopping to be considered a disorder) showed that highly motivated homosexuals can change their sexual orientation. Thus, homosexuality is a condition which can be changed as long as the gay individual is has enough desire to change. In the same way a highly motivated drug-addict can stop being so, a highly motivated homosexual can change his sexual orientation. Thus, it is not a pointless battle to fight against addicting sin, but a battle that the one who perseveres will eventually win. God did not condemn people who suffer from homosexuality to the lake of fire, for he gave them the ability to change. It's up to homosexuals to decide whether they want to keep on committing atrocities with their bodies or change. It's up to them to decide whether they want to go to Hell or Heaven. Having said this, there's no such thing as homosexuals, but rather people who suffer from homosexuality. Since homosexuality is an illness with a cure, there's no such thing as homosexual, since homosexuals are neither born gay nor condemned to remain that way.

What's the point of the study? Not too long ago, many Christians believed whites were superiors to blacks, and thought the Bible supported their beliefs, when it is written that in God everyone is equal and that we are all descendants of Adam and Eve. The fact that a majority of Christians are being brainwashed by public schools since tender ages to accept homosexuality does not mean that homosexuality is accepted in the Bible. This shouldn't surprise you but, many studies have shown that an alarming number of Christians has never read the Bible, and believe myths about it. Many Christians even believe certain sins to be okay whilst they are condemned in the Bible, and other laughable falsehoods. Homosexuality is literally condemned in the Bible, by God, Jesus, and Paul. But since most Christians do not read the Bible, it's not surprising that they practice heresy.

What I told is the opposite of what you accuse me of. I said that our duty is to forever help sinners overcome their sins, and their worldly troubles. Look, we are all sinners, and we all forever be so. But only to those who forever try to overcome their mistakes, God will reward them with Heaven. Our duty is to eternally try to overcome our sins. Our duty is persevere as we walk the thorny path to Heaven, and at the same time lovingly help those who we find lost in the way to our destination. But, those who give themselves up to evil and practice it will burn in Hell (unless they repent). God loves all of his creation. But, He is just, and his love will not pervert His justice. There's Heaven and there's Hell, and wicked people will not go to Heaven (unless they repent since repentance will cleanse a man of all his evil and make him good) Those who sin are not forever cast away from God (whilst they live), as God is always willing to forgive them and help them overcome sin. I dare say, God weeps and feels sad when any individual chooses to sin and lives a sinful live without ever repenting of his mistakes. Men who suffer from homosexuality will burn in Hell unless they repent and try to overcome their illness. Men who steal will burn in Hell, unless they repent and try their best not to steal again.

The ten commandments do not state anything in relation to homosexuality, but there are other sins not mentioned in the Ten Commandments which God will punish people from. That is why, Christian should read the whole Bible, rather than cherry-pick a few parts of it. Homosexuality is condemned anywhere where it appears in the Bible as vile degrading feelings which are an abomination unto God, and God always punished homosexuals, who did not repent, for it. Homosexuality is condemned alongside zoophilia and adultery in Leviticus. It is condemned in a particular section dedicated to sexual immorality:

Leviticus: “If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. If a man lies with his father’s wife, he has uncovered his father’s nakedness; both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death; they have committed perversion; their blood is upon them. If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. If a man takes a woman and her mother also, it is depravity; he and they shall be burned with fire, that there may be no depravity among you. If a man lies with an animal, he shall surely be put to death, and you shall kill the animal. If a woman approaches any animal and lies with it, you shall kill the woman and the animal; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

In the new Testament homosexuality is condemned. Besides the many verses condemning sexual immorality (as defined in the Bible), there are a number of verses exclusively condemning homosexuality. For brevity’s sake, I will include only one. Also as there’s a controversy over its accurate translations, I will include the original text as well.

Corinthian 1: “Or don't you know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't be deceived. Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor extortioners, 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, and in the Spirit of our God”

....

(arsenokoites): homosexual, men who sleep with men
Composition:
Arsen (variant of árrhen): male
Koíte (variant of koité): marriage bed, sexual intercourse, bed, mat.

Extra: arsenokoites was first used by Paul as a reference to Leviticus. So, claims that it does not mean gays do it being used later to describe other acts are invalid (though it was still used to describe homosexuality). The word clearly means homosexual, and is a reference to Leviticus.

?a?a??? (malakos): soft, effeminate, doing things that women do, acting like a woman, feeling or doing stuff appropriate for women.
Extra: malakos comes from a myth about a king named malakos who acted like a female by dressing like a woman, and did other things considered to be womanly. But, by Paul’s time it had come to mean other things. It came to describe any sort of action considered appropriate for women, or anything associated with the female sex. It meant cross dressing, women were considered morally weak thus it also meant morally weak, emotional, homosexual, and other stuff. Taking into account that Paul and his disciples were emotional and cried in a number of times (weeping was considered feminine, and thus; men who cried were considered malakos), and taking into account Paul’s statement that spiritually men and women are equal, in this case it refers to homosexuals (men who harbored homosexual feelings were considered effeminate since those were feelings women were supposed to possess) and transgenders. It could also mean being morally weak, but considering Paul’s statements that women and men were spiritually equal, it seems unlikely he meant morally weak. Taking into account Paul’s statements condemning homosexuality (both in emotions and actions just like adultery) and transgenderism, it must mean both of them. However, considering homosexuality is condemned in the same text (see arsenokoites), it could mean solely transgenderism. I myself believe that in this case, malakos means homosexuals and transgenders due to historical reasons. Contrary to a common myth, it does not mean catamite. The belief that it means catamite stems from a passage in which malakos (malakos can also means softness of clothes, and the like) is used to describe the softness of catamite’s clothes. But, this conclusion ignores the fact that it is also used to describe the clothes of the nobility and other figures who were not catamite.

Anyway, back to the given task of preaching the truth to delusional ears, judging is not a crime. Judging is not condemned in the Bible, hypocrisy is. Judging is essential for life, as it’s something necessary for every action we take. Unless we exercise judgement in every facet of our life, from going to the grocery store and when confronted with sin. Unless we judge, we will be weak before Satan, as we will be unable to distinguish righteousness from unrighteousness. In the Bible, one must take heed to the context of every passage. In this “judge not” passage, Jesus is preaching against hypocrisy. If he was condemning judgment (as determining whether one of our brothers is doing wrong or not), he would not have said that we can help our brother take the splinter out of his eye, if we have taken the log out of ours (in other words, implying that we can judge whether our brother has a splinter in his eye or not, whether he is doing wrong or not). In other words, we can help our brothers overcome sin and judge whether they are sinning or not (so as to help them turn away from the path to Hell), but only if we are not practicing the same sin (note how both men have wood in their eyes, the same sin). It is a sin and a crime to judge someone as evil and preach against their sin when we are committing the same sin (like a man preaching against adultery when he is committing adultery). But, when we are committing a different sin, it’s okay to determine that someone else is sinning and help them overcome sin whilst we ourselves try to overcome our shortcomings, but we have to acknowledge that we are both sinners. Judgement is fine when it is educated and founded on God’s words. Thus, it is perfectly okay for us to judge or deduce that homosexuality is wrong based on reason, studies that has proven its unhealthy nature, and condemnation by God. It is okay for us to judge homosexuals as wicked, as long as we remember that we both are. It is our duty to distinguish the evil people do to help them.

Ezekiel: “ 'O wicked man, you will surely die,' and you do not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require from your hand. But if you on your part warn a wicked man to turn from his way and he does not turn from his way, he will die in his iniquity, but you have delivered your life.”

We are all wicked, but only those who strive to overcome their sins will go to Heaven. Salvation is not solely through faith, as Jesus himself confirmed. One may believe in God as one pleases. But unless we try to follow his statutes, we’ll burn in Hell.
Mathew: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

If it’s a crime to execute or incarcerate humans who commit crimes against humanities, we should not punish murders. History has shown us that evil should be punished, as it affects all communities. Homosexuality is a depravity and a crime against humanity, thus it should be punished. However, they should only be punished for the crime of committing homosexuality if there’s any evidence against them, rather than due to a witness or mere accusation. I myself believe all sinners should be put in jail rather than executed, so that they have a chance to repent. I believe sinners should be put in jail and put to do labor. But, I understand if sometimes circumstances do not allow for such lenience.
Love as defined by God and reason is about helping your brother, not letting them walk to their death. There’s no love in allowing your brother to walk to his death by doing evil, without attempting to save them.

I hope God will help you understand what love is, and that He will free you from your delusions. Now, don’t misunderstand me and think I’ve called you crazy out of hate. I’m the kind who speaks the truth or their thoughts out loud, without meaning any form of aggression. I’ve concluded you are crazy due to your writings and denial of reality. However, a more accurate term to describe would probably be stupid. But, regardless, I’m going to pray and hope God’s frees you the demon in your heart, and that all goes well in your life. May you live a long happy life with God by you side!

Colonel-Knignt-Rider #racist deviantart.com

Black Lives Matter: "We want progress!"

Also Black Lives Matter: "Progress is a white people value, and we must rebel against all white people values, so let's rebel against progress, and we'll make progress!"

lol wut? XD

https://www.newsweek.com/smithsonian-race-guidelines-rational-thinking-hard-work-are-white-values-1518333

https://nypost.com/2020/07/16/african-american-history-museums-whiteness-exhibit-raising-eyebrows/

I agree with the statement "Black lives matter." No one in their right mind would disagree. But who in their right mind would depict universal values unrestrained by skin color, creed, or nationality as somehow evil or oppressive?

Gwiber49
For me this was the straw that broke the camel's back. I used to kiss the ground they walked on, but after seeing this, I wouldn't spit in their direction.

ZackWriter23
that's it! it's official! in the future, instead of having flying cars and robots, being male and having white skin is gonna be the biggest crime next to murder.

GalvaEmperor
All Lives Matter, but these nutcases are ruining the world. Maybe they should I dunno leave America if they hate it so much

Colonel-Knight-Rider
Yes, we've descended into an age of anarchy. The reason they don't leave is that they believe they can change America by using an angry mob mentality and chaining themselves and others to the dark side of our nation's history. And yet, they don't realize that time spent dwelling in the past would be better spent making the most of the future. I know America isn't perfect, but I'm proud to be a part of this bold experiment in democracy.

I'm of the mind that life itself matters. If you think about it, life itself knows no color, creed, or nationality. Being alive is the gift we all share and share alike. For that reason, it should bring us together, not tear us apart.

Archived at https://archive.vn/TXMka

Colonel-Knight-Rider #racist deviantart.com

{Archived source: http://archive.is/M0cMz}

The way I see it, Black Lives Matter started out well-intentioned but has since become as corrupt and violent as the newsworthy police officers they oppose. According to George Floyd's brother Terrence, who's suffering the most from losing George, this level of violence that's giving people in LA another reason not to leave their houses—my brother included—is not something the late George would've wanted or supported. In his words, "Y'all doing nothing because that's not going to bring my brother back at all."
Yes, I believe that black lives matter. Think of the rich scientific, political, religious, artistic, musical, and literary contributions the black community has made for the benefit of the great nation that is the United States! But how many other lives have to be taken regardless of skin color before it's universally accepted that black lives matter? There is a better way than violent wars or verbal wars. I know it!
Speaking of which, I'm not a black person, but I know what it's like to be discriminated against. I once had a Hispanic teacher in my 2-year college days who gave lower grades to black, white, and Asian students all alike while championing Hispanic students. She even admitted to racism against whites when she said she was astounded that one of my high-scoring assignments came from a white person, implying that she thought of anyone not belonging to La Raza as intellectually inferior. Long story short, she doesn't work at my 2-year college anymore, and I didn't have to organize a violent protest to get her fired. Still, because of this experience, I can empathize with people of other races who've been judged based on skin color. Yes, being given lower grades based on race is not as severe as being arrested and killed based on race, but discrimination is discrimination no matter the level of severity or who the victim race is. And senseless violence is not the key to ending it. In my case, all I had to do was testify anonymously.
Unfortunately but unsurprisingly, a lot of left-wing corporations like the ever-woke Disney are in favor of the awful violence and destruction instead of supporting peaceful conflict resolution and use of words, not weapons, as means of stripping racism of its power.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #wingnut #homophobia deviantart.com

I wasn’t always like the person you described in this journal. For years on DeviantArt, I never said anything about homosexuality, knowing full well the risk of discussing what is still a touchy subject to this day. Plus, any real Christian will tell you that hatred is a sin. Not until my conflict with Realshow early last year did I give in to the temptation to be more openly conservative after seeing many other Deviants do the same. This in turn led to the domino effect of misdeeds you’ve convicted me of.

I don’t need to learn what homophobia is. I know what it is. That’s why I never said anything that could be read as such for the first 4.5 years of my DA career. Realshow’s demand that I change my views was the straw that broke the camel’s back. And now, I'm under the impression that you're demanding the same of me.

James D. Albright #fundie au.answers.yahoo.com

The Atheistic Science Cult has many sects including Heavens Gate and the Raleans. The Heavens Gate sect was told by demons that were posing as aliens that the Atheistic Science Cult told them existed in the Public Schools, that if they took their own lives that they would be rescued from the destruction of the earth, which is nothing other than a counterfeit end of the age scenario. The Ralean sect was told by demons posing as aliens, which the Atheistic Science Cult taught them in the Public Schools existed that if they built a flying saucer shaped building in Jerusalem, Israel, then and only then would they be rescued by aliens circling the earth in a space ship.
Whether you believe me or not you are going to miss being saved from being sent to the Lake of fire by Jesus because of your misguided beliefs that were instilled in you by the worse of the best secular businessmen in America. Jesus loves you and died for you too. I hope you change your mind and I will see you in the new heaven and the new earth where we will return to enjoying living a sinless state through the Holy Spirit instead of living through the Devil via the awareness of good and evil in the lake of fire.
James D Albright

David J. Stewart #conspiracy jesusisprecious.org

The Luciferian Occult Connection

Keep reading, you may lose some sleep tonight. Take a look at the occult illuminati eye in the photo below.

image

Above: A Mormon apron as seen on A&E TV, inside the Salt Lake City Temple in Utah.

This apron is located in the Mormon temple in Salt Lake City. Gallup polls for the past several years have consistent shown that approximately 60% of Utah's population claim to be Mormons. Below is the front entrance to the same Mormon temple. Notice the same Masonic handshake (as seen above) within the all-seeing eye.

image

Above: Another entrance to the Salt Lake City, Utah, Mormon Temple. Mormon founder, Joseph Smith, was a 33rd degree Freemason. See, Mormonism and Freemasonry.

You see, the Devil requires allegiance from those who would become successful in this world. This allegiance has infested the music industry, Hollywood, the corporate world and every facet of society, even the churches. Satan is working relentlessly to corrupt the masses. The image below is sister Faustina’s Image of Divine Mercy, worshipped around the world by Roman Catholics...

image

ABOVE: Notice the illuminati pyramid! Notice the shining eye above the pyramid. The Lord's waist belt detaches the capstone from the base of the pyramid

This is no joke friend, you have been deceived by the Devil, the father of all liars. Most people in the world today have churchianity without Christianity, and religion without truth. I’m not trying to be unkind; but to warn you about Satan’s works of darkness. Whether it be Mormonism, Catholicism, or the Jehovah’s Witnesses—they’re all in league with Satan! God never started a religion—Jesus simply came to save sinners, asking us to believe upon Him alone to forgive our sins (John 3:16-18).

image

Above is the logo for the Church of Scientology cult. Notice the two illuminati Pyramids!

Below is a photo of where Jehovah’s Witness’ founder, Charles T. Russell, is buried in the Greater Pittsburgh Masonic Center Cemetery. As you can see, Satan is behind ALL false religion. Notice the creepy illuminati pyramid with a capstone …

image

Above: This is the inscription on the same pyramid above, where Jehovah’s Witness’ founder, and occult Mason, Charles T. Russell, is buried. Freaky huh?

Freemasons Donate Illuminati Pyramid as Gift for Grave of Mary Baker Eddy
Christian Science is another False Masonic Religion

Mary Baker Eddy is the founder of the CHRISTIAN SCIENTIST religion. They have reading rooms all across the United States where you can go in, sit down, and be indoctrinated into their religious false cult. It is more than mere coincidence that the demonic Jehovah's Witnesses gave an Masonic pyramid to place on Eddy's grave, just as Charles Russell (founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses) has a giant illuminati pyramid parked on his grave (as seen above). Birds-of-a-feather flock together!

Freemasons are the visible organization, the work horse to carry out Satan's sinister plot for a Godless Global Totalitarian Communism Police State, aka, a New World Order. Russell even named his perversion of the Bible, the 'New World Translation.' That's about as blatant as you can get. Get it? ... New World Translation (New World Order).

When I witness to a Jehovah's Witness, I show them a photo of Russell's grave and the occult connection between the religions. I explain to them the Luciferian conspiracy. Most Jehovah's Witnesses are victims of their organization, they've been lied to and deceived. We as believers need to expose all these Masonic religions for what they are. Freemasonry is a diabolic, Satanic, religious cult; they operate in dual fashion, literally operating as two separate entities, an organization within an organization. Freemasonry is steeped in Kabbalistic mysticism, although Kabbalists themselves claim that their teachings are not mysticism. May I say, by very definition Kaballah is 100% mysticism, which is defined as, obscure and irrational thought. If you don't believe it, find a Kabbalah website and try to study it.

What is it with all the pyramids and all-seeing eyes? The explanation is simple. Satan uses images, just as “The Great Oz” in the movie, The Wizard of Oz. Satan is the little peon behind the curtain (Isaiah 14:16). The purpose of the IMAGE is to magnify a person, or thing, to give a bigger than life IMAGE. This is why king Nebuchadnezzar had a 90-foot tall, 9-foot wide, statue made of gold for the people to bow and worship, on his behalf.

1921 - On the 100th anniversary of Mary Baker Eddy's birth, an exact replica of the Great Pyramid, made from a single piece of granite and weighing over 100 tons and 11 feet on each side, was carved and placed near the house where Eddy had been born, in New Hampshire. It was a gift from Freemasons. In the "Mary Baker Eddy Letter," December 25, 1997, we learn that when "the Board of Directors noted that too many Christian Scientists were visiting the grand granite marker at Bow ... that marked Mary Baker Eddy's birthplace, they had it destroyed, dynamited to bits!"

Eddy's first husband, George Washington Glover, was a Mason, and “thereafter membership in the Masonic Order was the one single 'outside' affiliation that was allowed to church members by Mrs. Eddy.”

Christian Science and Freemasonry have maintained a symbiotic relationship. Many of the first churches established around the United States had gathered in Masonic Temples. To this day one can find the headquarters for many Christian Science associations having an address corresponding to the local Masonic lodge.

SOURCE: Oprah Winfrey, New Thought, "The Secret" and the "New Alchemy"

What you see on the tombstone of the founder of the Watchtower movement is the Knights Templar Symbol for the York Rite of Freemasonry (See below). This degree is equivalent to the 33rd Degree of Freemasonry and is the highest degree of the York Rite indicating that he knew whom he was serving. It was not Jesus Christ of Nazareth to be sure.

TL;DR Award

But I think everyone needs to read this homocidal lunatic's manifesto in order to truly understand and argue against this kind of murderous ideology and its adherents

Anders Behring Breivik #conspiracy info.publicintelligence.net

(These quotes are all taken from Anders Behring Breivik's manifesto, 2083: A Declaration Of European Independence)

As we all know, the root of Europe's problems is the lack of cultural self-confidence (nationalism). Most people are still terrified of nationalistic political doctrines thinking that if we ever embrace these principles again, new “Hitler’s” will suddenly pop up and initiate global Armageddon... Needless to say; the growing numbers of nationalists in W. Europe are systematically being ridiculed, silenced and persecuted by the current cultural Marxist/multiculturalist political establishments. This has been a continuous ongoing process which started in 1945. This irrational fear of nationalistic doctrines is preventing us from stopping our own national/cultural suicide as the Islamic colonization is increasing annually. This book presents the only solutions to our current problems.

You cannot defeat Islamisation or halt/reverse the Islamic colonization of Western Europe without first removing the political doctrines manifested through multiculturalism/cultural Marxism…

....

Political/Democratic/Apologistic Jihad (Rhetorical/psychological warfare)

Thousands of active Islamic apologetics on all arenas (ranging from internet forums to the public debate elsewhere). Their primary goal is to discredit, pacify and silence all whom criticise Islam and Demographic Jihad.

Objectives:
1. Terminate European freedom of speech by replacing it with hate-crime bills.
2. Wage a war of words using charismatic individuals who directly or indirectly promote
and defend Islam.
3. Engage the European public in dialogues, discussions, and debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another peaceful religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.
4. Nominate Muslim sympathisers to political office to bring about favourable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathisers by block voting.
5. Take control of as much of the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.

....

Christianity has increasingly become perceived as being linked by some, to a bygone culture, having already lost its political direction, cohesion, and influence. The wall that both Martin Luther and Thomas Jefferson spoke of has switched, in modern times it is no longer a means by which the Church defends its rights and position over the state, as in pre-modern times, but rather how the state increases its power over the Church.

Historically there have always been tensions between the powers secular and the powers religious, which in times gone by through the prides of men resulted in out right conflict between the two; however, with the emergence of the modern secular state and its incumbent ‘ideology of reason’. This ‘wall’, has become the means via which the state has secured power away from the church and is challenging the identity of Christians as well. Attacking our beliefs and values and presenting modern liberal alternatives in short all that makes us who we are as Christians by presenting alternatives with the assumption that these alternatives are better and the polemical engagement of the ‘enlightenment’ elite. The Liberal Moderns command the heights of the wall. This process is called differentiation: where the state, driven by the ‘ideology of reason’, ‘the religion of humanity’, or more simply - Liberal Modernity, seized what were once church roles. This forced conversion of society has pushed the Christian faith back into a metaphysical box, where some argued it would die an irrelevant death. Such as speculated by Marx and others, and assumed by Nietzche!

....

Mapping the enemy (definitions):
Traditional Marxists, cultural Marxists, suicidal humanists, career cynicists and capitalist globalists – all support and propagate multiculturalism Proving each individuals real intention is a complicated process as most of today’s cultural Marxists disguise their true agenda by using humanistic principles and rhetoric (at least publicly) as a basis for justifying their actions. However, we know that a good portion of them (more than 30% of our opposition) use this smoke screen of humanist deception to hide their hatred for everything European.

What complicates this process further is the fact that the ongoing European civil war is not a class war but a cultural war. Motives are overlapping and old definitions are outdated. The old fundamental definitions were nationalists vs. communists, or socialists vs. capitalists. Many of today’s multiculturalists are capitalists and some of today’s cultural conservatives support a very solidaric economical system. More or less every humanist/social democrat etc. is a multiculturalist as they support liberal political mechanics such as family reunification and asylum arrangements which again facilitates Islamic demographical warfare. Some of these individuals are true humanists and just extremely naive, yet others are just hiding behind humanist rhetoric and really want to destroy European culture, traditions, identity, Christendom and national sovereignty.

An estimate showing the opponents of cultural conservative doctrines (antinationalists):

- Hardcore Marxists: 10% (hateful intentions)
- Cultural Marxists: 20% (semi hateful intentions)
- Suicidal Humanists/career cynicists: 65% (suicidally naive/egotistical)
- Capitalist globalists: 5% (greed) 100% of the above support and propagate multiculturalism

....

To qualify to act as a ”Justiciar Knight” the individual has to pledge the Knights Templar oath by completing the “Initiation Rite” (see: The PCCTS, Knights Templar Oath – Initiation Rite) and swear to follow the principles of the PCCTS, to protect the interests of all free, indigenous Europeans, European cultures and Christendom in general through armed struggle. Choosing the path of the Justiciar Knight is to walk the path in pursuit of becoming “The Perfect Knight”. Any candidate prepared to walk this road must be willing to forfeit his materialistic ambitions and embrace voluntary poverty and martyrdom. The Order and Tribunal has concluded that any and all Europeans have not just a right, but a duty to resist through political and military means; cultural Marxist/multiculturalist atrocities and crimes committed against the indigenous peoples of Europe. As such, any European Christian conservative can act as a Justiciar Knight. This includes Christian agnostics and Christian atheists. Although the PCCTS, Knights Templar is a pan European indigenous rights movement we give all Europeans, regardless of skin colour, the opportunity to become a Justiciar Knight as long as the individual is either a Christian, Christian agnostic or a Christian atheist. The European Military & Criminal Tribunal, PCCTS, request that any and all Justiciar Knights of Europe; identify and effectuate punishment for category A and B traitors - cultural Marxist/multiculturalist individuals for the violations specified and included in this document; charges 1 – 8.

....

In order to wake up the masses, the only rational approach will be to make sure the current system implodes. This will cause a lot of short term pain; cut in welfare payouts, increased unemployment even starvation in extreme cases. The bulk of our people will refuse to join resistance movements because they feel they have too much to lose. They have invested several years and a lot of resources in long educations and most people have mortgages/loans which they have no choice but to attend to. Many receive exceptional government incentives to stay “loyal” to the system. All of these responsibilities and incentives cause a symbiosis between the victims (people) and the exterminator (regime) to a degree where we have a collective mass-scale “Stockholm syndrome” (sympathies and loyalty to captor). Our objective is to break these bonds and this can only be achieved through contributing to creating a scenario where the antiEuropean hate ideology we wish to destroy perishes/implodes or dies from a thousand cuts. For every successful operation a new cut is applied and will contribute to this ideology’s demise. Wiping out Marxism in Europe will take us 30-70 years but we will succeed eventually. Every effort counts, have no doubt about that.

....

Once you decide to strike, it is better to kill too many than not enough, or you risk reducing the desired ideological impact of the strike. Explain what you have done (in an announcement distributed prior to operation) and make certain that everyone understands that we, the free peoples of Europe, are going to strike again and again. Do not apologise, make excuses or express regret for you are acting in self-defence or in a preemptive manner. In many ways, morality has lost its meaning in our struggle. The question of good and evil is reduced to one simple choice. For every free patriotic European, only one choice remains: Survive or perish. Some innocent will die in our operations as they are simply at the wrong place at the wrong time. Get used to the idea. The needs of the many will always surpass the needs of the few.

....

The PCCTS, Knights Templar Oath – Initiation Rite [The candidate kneels in front of the altar, while reading the oath out loudly] I, ________, of my own free will and accord, in the presence of Almighty God, the spirits of my ancestors and past martyrs, do hereby and hereon most solemnly and sincerely promise and swear, from now and forever, that I will hail, respect and obey the principles of the PCCTS, Knights Templar. I furthermore promise and swear that I will stand to and abide by all laws, rules and regulations of the Military Order and Criminal Tribunal - PCCTS, Knights Templar. Further, that I will always aid and assist fellow Justiciar Knights, their widows and orphans, knowing them to be such, as far as their necessities may require, and my ability permit, without material injury to myself and family. Further, that I will keep a brother Justiciar Knight secrets inviolable, when communicated to and received by me as such. I declare to take freely and solemnly this oath of obedience, this pledge of voluntary poverty and commitment. With this oath I state my strong and irrevocable intent: To pledge my sword, my forces, my life and everything that I own to the cause, defence, honour of my country and of Europe, my people, the Christian religion, of the PCCTS, Knights Templar and of my companions in arms; to the rescue of my country and of Europe as a whole from the tyranny of Marxist and Islamic oppression. To love my brothers the Knights and my Sisters the Ladies and help them, their children and their widows with my sword, my advice, means and wealth, my credit and everything in my power, and will favour them, with no exception, over those who are not members of the order. To fight the infidels and the non-believers with my example, virtue, charity and convincing arguments; and to fight with the sword the infidels and non-believers who attack the Cross with their own sword.

....

Creating patriotic youth movements in phase 1 How can we expect to safeguard our societies against cultural Marxism and Islam in the future (say in 2,3,4,5 decades from now) when Western Europe does not even have any well organised patriotic youth groups? Patriotic youth groups (also referred to as street activists) are the back bone of the resistance and the creation of such political entities should be a primary goal. An intellectual club (consisting of older professionals) who rejects the notion of offering political and intellectual guidance to the youths of the society will have limited impact. A large majority of the current European conservative intellectuals are cowards and unwilling to take responsibility. If they had taken responsibility they would have started to develop a Conservative Revolutionary Movement and/or several patriotic youth movements. If the “anti-Islamisation/anti-totalitarian organisations” refuse to start their own youth groups and start recruitment of patriotic youth then the so called totalitarian-minded, racist or criminal organisations such as Hells Angels will (as we are witnessing today). And when the time comes there will be one impotent “politically correct” intellectual club “without anyone who can physically protect it and its doctrines from “Marxist/Muslim lynch mobs” as most of the youths have been recruited by the other “competing” patriotic alternatives.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #sexist #racist #homophobia #fundie deviantart.com

Speaking of political tribalism, there's a Website that's been around since 2003 called Fundies Say The Darndest Things (FSTDT, for ease of reference). It's a safe harbor where staunchly leftist atheists and skeptics believe they're free to anonymously ridicule and mock whatever they take out of context. As a former 40-year atheist who calls himself Stan wrote five years ago, "…there is a link to context, but no one seems to have used it in my case [or in any target's case]. It's the sort of snake pit where the target du jour is countered with comments like '[censored],' and the standard logic errors which they insist are the logical answers to the 'idiot' they are trashing." I've been targeted by one such FSTDT member, who joined the site upon discovering my DA page: a third-wave feminist of likely British origin, given how she spells specific words, known only as JustAlongForTheRide. She's called me racist, sexist, homophobic, and a Christian Fundamentalist—all things that I know are completely untrue about me—simply because I'm a straight, white Protestant male who's politically and fiscally conservative. She's also done the same to Claire, a young lesbian friend of mine, plus a lesbian pornographic writer friend of mine who uses the pen name Sunny Johansen. I find both ironic on multiple levels.

In addition, I may have voted for Trump but only because I perceived him as the lesser of two evils (he knows what to say but not how to say it). John Kasich was my actual first choice because of his professional cadence. Not that the folks at FSTDT care because, to them, anybody who votes for Trump is "in love" with him and is required by law to be subject to as much public shaming as he is. :roll: :laughing:

So, be on the lookout for a completely anonymous British woman with no discernible features: if you say anything she doesn't like, she will take it out of context and use it against you.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie #sexist deviantart.com

After seeing this unsurprisingly biased Tweet (the comments are worth reading as well), I thought I should let you guys know that I'm not really against abortion, but I'm not technically for it either. On the one hand, if an unplanned pregnancy results from an unspeakable crime, then I say go ahead and abort! Who knows if the baby could inherit some level of criminal insanity or worse? On the other hand, if an unplanned pregnancy results from consent, then the mother-to-be should have the maturity to assume responsibility for her actions and live with the consequences of not planning ahead. It doesn't matter whether you think life begins at conception, or at birth, or anywhere in between—it's really more of a question of emotional maturity and self-control. Make sense?

Oh, and men should help women through the gestation and birthing process, then raising their children if the mothers want to keep the children, to the best of their ability since they’re 50% responsible for conception.

#DoNotFearResponsibility

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie #homophobia deviantart.com

You guys remember this status update, right?
https://www.deviantart.com/colonel-knight-rider/status-update/19258504

Well, now, some guy whose name I will not mention because it's (apparently) in violation of DA policy wants to suspend or ban me for it. :fear:

Please keep in mind that I don't want to physically harm :iconcharacterconsultancy:, whom I wrote an Atrocious Deviants Wiki article about. I simply said that I wanted to find her and make sure she doesn't stalk or quote me or my friends :iconyourclairygodmother: and :iconprince-riley: again. Although the original wording of this warning was vague, causing one Deviant to use his imagination and interpret it as a violent threat, I've changed it to reference my goal to report her to the police. I also told her that I wouldn't do anything police-related to her if she didn't do anything more to quote us. Perhaps I should've written in the email I sent her demanding answers that I would make sure she never again uses the Internet for malicious purposes. Yeah, that sounds more heroic.

I wish I had never met :iconrealshow:. I wish I'd never agreed to include him in my Nintendo Cinematic Universe fanfiction project. Our breakup over whether to include gay Pokémon caused my breakup with Hayley, alias characterconsultancy. I wish we could talk instead of blocking each other or threatening to remove each other from social media. I should know and frankly do know better than this because revenge never solves anything. It's better to talk things out and, if we can't reach an agreement, simply walk away rather than scare others away from each other's pages.

Well, DeviantArt, we had a good run, you and I. :tears: And Mom was right: you can't be a social media user and an outspoken conservative Christian, or you will be subject to a lifetime of humiliation for it. I can't believe it's gotten to a point where I could get banned for not supporting the homosexuality of two Nintendo fanfiction characters that don't even exist. Hayley needs to stop playing the victim card and refrain from sticking her Kevin Sussman-esque nose in conflicts that don't involve her in the first place.

At least I took a great act of courage to come out as a conservative Christian on a secular liberal-dominated Internet—something others like me are too scared to do for the right reasons. If I get suspended or banned, I hope I'll be remembered by you guys for my courage and my desire to make a difference on DeviantArt instead of what I might as well call the Gay Pokémon Controversy of 2019.

Liberty Counsel for Flogging of Deceased Horses Award

"We'll Sue You In England"

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie #racist #homophobia change.org

Have you ever had anything you've said on the Internet misconstrued as racist, sexist, homophobic when you know you're not any of the three?
Have you ever been labelled a dangerous fundamentalist or religious "fanatic/nut" for innocently saying that God has a romantic match for you?
Have you ever been called harmful to society even if you've never intentionally mistreated someone of another skin color, someone of the opposite sex, someone with a different orientation than yours, or someone with a different faith than yours?
Have you ever been insulted for how you choose to present yourself online when you adopt a creative alter ego to do so?
Have you ever been accused of a god complex for paraphrasing cartoon Batman to both describe your current mood and make your dearest friends who know you well laugh?
Have you ever had personal identifying information (PII in legalese) that you've put on the Internet shared on another site without your permission so the person who steals your information can encourage others to mock, demean, defame, or otherwise indirectly harass you, only to have the harassers claim that they have the right to mock you because it's public?
Have you ever been mocked for choosing milk over alcohol?
I have. And, if any of the above applies to you, you're likely a victim of the aptly-named Website "Fundies Say The Darndest Things," too. They have been monitoring my every move on DeviantArt since early June this year, continuously waiting for me to post anything they disagree with or they believe they can ridicule and persecute, and refuse to cease and desist.
People of faith outnumber those without faith in the real world. However, since the dawn of the digital age, militant anti-theists (not to be confused with more pacifistic atheists and agnostics) have ruled the Internet with an iron fist, seeing as the Internet is a new, virtual territory previously unclaimed by any religion, culture, or nation. They have robbed ordinary, innocent people of all faiths of our right to free speech and tearing down everything we say based on the belief that only they should have fun and our lives should be a living nightmare. "Fundies Say The Darndest Things," which singles out ordinary people of faith and gangs up on them for their beliefs, only adds to the problem. For 16 years, they have reigned unopposed, taking our social media activity at random out of context to mischaracterize us all as racists, sexists, homophobes, and fundamentalists—allegedly for "fun"—when we know that being any of the four would violate the teachings that Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, and most other leading religions were founded on. It's fair to say that they do sometimes find people who legitimately belong to the aforementioned hate groups, but those aren't most people of faith, and they know it, even if they refuse to admit it.
They are also guilty of confirmation bias—I once wrote an extensive rebuttal to their claims that I'm "racist," which they honestly requested, but they only quoted the parts they felt they could attack and ignored anything they could not.
Worst of all, they have willingly dug into my past DeviantArt journal entries and posted some of what I consider to be PII, including autobiographical information about me and my immediate and extended family, to encourage others to indirectly harass me. As a resident of California, I can honestly say that this is ILLEGAL per California Penal Code 653.2 PC.
In sum, FSTDT is a criminal syndicate that uses unethical and illegal means to accomplish a nihilistic goal that only worsens relations among people with and without faith. Despite their claims of innocuousness, the majority of FSTDT users has no respect for others' rights to their faiths. They will never post anything positive about whomever they choose to attack. Their entire business model is centered on tearing people down, and they continue to harass targets for as long as said targets continue to post anything that contradicts what FSTDT's populace believes, seemingly never losing interest in their targets. They are serial cyberstalkers who represent the very basic problem with the Internet and social media: a lot of times, we think we know someone we've never met in the real world, but we don't. And although I admit to making this mistake, too, at least I try to get to know the truth when I realize I've done wrong. FSTDT refuses to do likewise because they are mindless sociopaths who can neither feel guilt nor control their animalistic impulses. They are an infinitesimally small but obnoxiously loud group of Internet users hopelessly addicted to finding things they disagree with to fuel the hatred off of which they thrive. Therefore, unless they learn to agree to disagree (which they have told me to do but have made no effort to practice themselves), they must be vanquished from the Internet. In the meantime, you are advised to take extreme caution when dealing with FSTDT—they could distort literally anything you say. And don't be surprised if you find this petition posted on their Website and see them tearing it down. That's just their customary addiction at work.
And remember: the Internet has no real power to define who you are. You have the natural right to define who you are. Do not let hatred on the Internet destroy you in the real world. You are not racist. You are not sexist. You are not homophobic. You are not fundamentalistic. You do not have a god complex. You are loved. Because you are loved, no hatred can touch you. Internet negativity against you is not a power. It is nothing to fear. It is a direct insult to true strength which is bound to destroy itself.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #homophobic #sexist #fundie deviantart.com

So, yeah, my supposed "friend" Skide from FSTDT just publicly revealed my church's denomination, which she promised me that she would not do, just because she got triggered over my calling The Satanic Temple a joke or satire religion (and I'm not the first to have done so—even TST cofounder Lucien Greaves says it can be interpreted that way). I knew I should've never trusted a Web user who can only come up with painfully unoriginal insults. She has crossed a line she cannot uncross.

Contrary to their accusing me of saying that they didn't try to reason with me, I acknowledge that they did. For that reason, I thought they had a nicer side towards people who don't support the LGBT+ community. Sadly, from their point of view, everyone is required to support it. Those who don't are accused of not being mentally well. It's odd that they think that I think only my beliefs matter when they persistently insist that I agree with them on their beliefs, thinking they're superior to all other lines of thought because they're secular and liberal. Unlike them, I do not disallow dissent—just obvious attempts to convert me to other people's causes. There's a difference between saying, “I believe in XYZ,” and, “YOU MUST BELIEVE, TOO, OR YOU WILL BE MOCKED BY MANCHILDREN FOREVER!”

Three words: this means war.

No, I'm not going to hack them. That's illegal. There's got to be a better way. What are my options?

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie #conspiracy #wingnut #crackpot deviantart.com

Because you give folks like @VikingFox, who grew up with and feel the most familiar and comfortable with the politics of the left, all the better reason to now identify as centrists! I do not believe all leftists are like you—and I have leftist friends on DA to prove it—but people like you make my leftist friends look bad. From your perspective, it's not just enough to love and accept people of different colors, creeds, and orientations for who they are on the inside: we have to actively fight bigotry by starting riots and terrorizing people and their property until they give in to our demands. Just like you do every single day. On top of that, you spend every day terrorizing a 74-year-old man who gave up what could've been a happy and quiet retirement out of the public spotlight for the hardest job in the world because he loves America as much as I do. Have you no shame, you elder-abusers?

(in case its not obvious, he’s talking about Trump. He legit thinks opposing Trump is “terrorizing” him)

Colonel-Knight-Rider #sexist #racist #homophobic #fundie deviantart.com

[Highlights from a piece titled “My Complete Failed Attempts At Romance”]

[…]

When I was 19, I realized I had fooled myself into thinking Stephanie and her family didn't drink alcohol when they did.

When I was 20, my brother's then-girlfriend found for me Maria, a practice date, but I was so stupid and ignorant because of my ADD that I didn't even remember the plan. Then again, she was only a practice date because she was Hispanic Catholic, and we can't marry any Catholics.

When I was 23, I thought I had a shot with Kelsey, but she then decided she was a lesbian and moved to Canada.

When I was 24, I thought I had a shot with Chelsae before she never replied to my pseudo-date invitation. Later, I realized I would've betrayed my family principles if I'd dated her because she had a complicated floral tattoo on her neck's back, conveniently concealed by her hair.

Also when I was 24, I tried online dating and thought I had a shot with a cheerful, perfectly curvy, redheaded, God-fearing aspiring writer until I realized she had probably found a match three weeks earlier.

So, my single watchers: if you think you're struggling to get a love life, you haven't seen my own struggles.

Perhaps Mom was right: the best option is to move to the Southern U.S. and find one of an infinite supply of matchmakers at a church whose wisdom and male mind-reading skills could have me walking down the aisle in a month.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #racist #homophobia deviantart.com

After my last post on a thread created by the paranoia-inducing cyber-bully JustAlongForTheRide, whom I can only conclude has been monitoring my page this whole summer, waiting like a jungle predator stalking its prey for me to say anything that doesn’t line up with his views, I’ve decided to take a break from his Website and not feed the trolls with more conservative/non-SJW commentary on it until I can resolve this whole thing. I’m tired of them acting like victims, especially a trans woman named Sarah who got offended by something I wrote that didn’t involve her at all, because they can’t take a joke from us non-SJWs, which are a more racially, politically, sexually, and spiritually diverse audience than SJWs are willing to admit. I mean, sure, discrimination is the worst, but, if you want it to end, the key is not to quote people in a way that lets you mock and ridicule them in a “safe space” without opposition. Nor is it complaining about how you’re a victim in hopes of gaining sympathy. The key to overcoming discrimination is to not let it hurt you at all and only act in self-defense if it truly gets violent. Focus on what change you can bring about in the future, not how you’ve been discriminated against in the past or present. That’s what separates civil rights activists from Black Lives Matter, feminists from feminazis, and members of the LGBT group against SJWs of which my friend :iconclaireaimee: is a member from LGBT people like Sarah. Acting like a victim does not earn my respect. I know because, in the distant past, acting like a victim didn’t do any good for me.

With that in mind, what do you guys think separates non-SJWs from SJWs? Please discuss in the comments section of this status update—but please also keep it civil and don’t mock each other!

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie deviantart.com

-Why would I lie to you about empathy considering that’s what you want to see from me? Of course, we both got angry at each other eventually. But I will tell you that I wrote an apology last October, in which I even gave credence to his argument that I don’t understand how gay people work, to which he has yet to respond. On a related note, for a guy who’s going on and on and on about empathy and accepting people as they are, this journal doesn’t appear to contain any message like that. I wish you’d practice more of what you preach, but I doubt that’ll come true.
-Excuse me! You are not in a position to tell my parents, or anyone’s parents for that matter, how to raise a child without saying it directly to them. You don’t know them, and they don’t know you. And besides, they said I need to forgive them because forgiveness is what Christianity is ultimately all about, so I do forgive them. It’s not good to hold on to grudges, especially those towards people you don’t know. That said, I need to let go of my grudge against Realshow because I don’t know who he really is and because he’s moved on to other projects.
-I never said my parents yanked out my baby tooth. I said they wiggled it to test how lose it was at the time. When I disobeyed them by throwing a hissy fit, they punished me for disobedience so I would never again react like an immature child to having a deciduous tooth wiggled. And it worked!

Colonel-Knight-Rider #sexist #racist deviantart.com

[Excerpt from a short story in CKR's original universe, using an avatar of someone he has had a quarrel with as a villain, apparently without their knowledge or permission. In this bit, the hero stops to talk values with his dad.]

“I did, Pops! Feminism today isn’t what it was in the beginning. Nor are a lot of activist movements or their spinoffs. We now have women who vote, run companies, hold political offices, and much more. Discrimination against them is losing its grip on society. And all that’s terrific! But some people are just addicted to playing the victim card to get attention even after all those discrimination problems are resolved.”

“Aye! The same goes for people with darker skin. More families of theirs than afore are in the middle and upper class as well as the government, and that number’s growin’ daily on every planet you can name. And what’s more, the man in charge of Columbia’s workin’ tae aid those of them who are still stuck in poverty as a part of his mission tae put Columbia first. But hatin’ on their police and threatening tae kill the man in charge when he hasn’t ordered the death of anybody on his planet who doesn’t look like him? Those are takin’ it a wee bit too far.”

“Yeah, they’re all like, ‘Orange man bad!’” Robert and Angus laughed in unison. “I mean, I feel sorry for the guy because he doesn’t always know how to say what to say, but having him in charge of one planet won’t bring about the end of the universe.”

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie #racist #homophobia deviantart.com

Umm, yeah, no. No, I do care about those communities. I'm fine with them being represented in cinema. I wouldn't call Lillies of the Field one of my favorite movies of all time otherwise. What I'm not okay with, and what you don't seem to get (or want to accept) is why current 21st century Hollywood is doing that sort of thing: to make themselves appear more "woke" to their target audience and get their money and praise. Modern Hollywood is exploiting racial minorities and LGBT people in America by treating them as popular trends, or moneymakers, or attention-grabbers, or Oscar bait instead of as people. Maybe bigwig Hollywood producers do care about those groups, or maybe they don't—I'm not a mind-reader. But, either way, do you not see how dehumanizing being treated as fashion trends instead of as people is to those groups? The problem is not who gets represented in cinema but how they're being used for other people's personal gain. I feel sorry that people of color and LGBT people are being exploited by those greedy sons of guns at the top who want to look more "woke" but are as greedy as the average Hollywood producer has always been.

Another fundamental problem is that Hollywood’s handling of race relations has deteriorated over time. Consider, for instance, Lillies of the Field or Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner? They handled race relations beautifully by presenting both black people and white people as smart but in different ways (there is, after all, no such thing as one kind of smart), all while showing that we all have the same capacity for good regardless of skin color. Now, in the 21st century, we get movies like the aptly-named Guess Who? and Get Out or TV series like The Neighborhood, which convey messages such as “White people bad, black people good,” or “White people dumb, black people smart.” This is not to say that Hollywood is incapable of going back to how it used to handle race relations—a rare gem like Bob Hearts Abishola, created by the genius who brought us Two and a Half Men and The Big Bang Theory, presents both races as different kinds of intelligent and shatters cultural barriers to show how much we’re all alike even though we have different skin colors, accents, and manners of dress. But still, I’d like to see more of those positive messages from Hollywood.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #psycho #wingnut #fundie deviantart.com

Watchers: your new mission, should you choose to accept it, is to unmask Niam2020 WITHOUT publicizing info you find about him, then destroy Fundies Say The Darndest Things: the ivory tower from where he and his friends look down their noses on us "lowly" people of faith and think we're "bigots" for not agreeing with their pro-SJW agenda. And that includes destruction of FSTDT's Discord, Reddit, forums, and everywhere else it exists on the Internet.

(bring it on you fascistic dingbat)

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie #pratt deviantart.com

Remember, watchers: if you ever hear me speak out against the lockdown or how the media depicts the reasons for the lockdown, that does not mean I want to harm you guys by exposing you to danger. My words are only "harmful" if people act on them by putting themselves in danger. To the best of my knowledge, no one I know has acted on my lockdown criticisms or caught the virus as a result. Thank goodness!

I also do not condone any rash decisions people might make based on my speaking out against the lockdown—that's tempting fate, which I don't encourage anyone to do. There's a reason why I tell a group of knights in a cartoon of mine to keep their visors down in the presence of others.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #homophobia deviantart.com

What I meant was that I was trying to cobble together a collaborative Pokémon fanfic movie synopsis when my coworker threw in a couple of gay Pokémon from out of nowhere and played victim after I said no. He called me a homophobe for choosing my family values over his selfish interests, I called him out for non-Nintendo-canon stuff that he included but I didn’t want, and we split.

LGBT+ characters actually make up 8.5% of what’s on American TV now, even though only they make up only half that percentage in America’s real population. I assure you they are far from marginalized. And, fortunately for them, this is the Internet: the most powerful and pervasive media tour-de-force of our time, a land of virtually unlimited opportunities to make themselves heard and not be marginalized.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #homophobia deviantart.com

I sometimes like to joke that July is when the REAL month for Americans to be proud begins, but one radical SJW I met in a spirited game of RuneScape—an old MMO game that I started playing a couple of months ago since I needed a real game again after getting bored with smartphone games—told me that it's impossible for me to be proud to be an American unless I've done something to earn it. Not only does that statement make absolutely no sense (if interpreted literally, it only applies to the Founding Fathers and the Continental Army who liberated America in the first place), but it's also flat-out hypocritical. Being part of the LGBTQ+ community is not something one technically accomplishes any more than is having a certain skin color or being an American citizen. And I can be proud of others' achievements such as my brother earning his Ph. D., the historic Revolutionaries leading the Revolution, Civil Rights activists ending racial segregation, and so on.

Some people just aren't worth my time or attention.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie deviantart.com

(because child abuse is TOTALLY okay if the parents say you brought it on yourself. Keep in mind CKR wants a family of his own.)

-You think I don’t know that I’m “questioning” my parents by being on social media? Well, duh! Of course, I am! But that doesn’t necessarily mean I’ll abandon all of their teachings. What I didn’t say in the poem I wrote was that I was the source of their acts of physical aggression because I was a disobedient child in those instances. It’s not their fault. It’s mine.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #racist deviantart.com

As long as the hashtag “#racist” still appears in the top results when people search for my public display name, I figured I should take the liberty of explaining why this is not true. At the risk of being harassed yet again by the stranger who’s been monitoring my every move since June, these are the major reasons why I’m #notracist.

[…]

2. I call Jordan Peele’s Get Out the most racist comedy (emphasis on comedy) I’ve ever seen because it’s a Stepford Wives ripoff that presents a nonexistent and very peculiar dichotomy between African American culture and white American culture. I laughed my lungs out the whole way through because of that.
3. Speaking of which, while the Oscars were once biased against African Americans, I believe they’re now biased against white Americans, especially given the nature of last year’s Best Picture nominations. As it says in one of my favorite MLK memes ever: “Don’t be racist against blacks. Don’t be racist against whites. It’s not complicated, people!” Sadly, the United States has a long history of polar extremes at each other’s throats.
[…]
5. I have multiracial and multinational fantasy voiceover casts in my Nintendo Cinematic Universe fanfiction movie plot summary journals not because of their national origins or skin colors but because I believe they can best capture their assigned characters’ personalities.
6. Even if I were prejudiced against Russians, which I’m not, I still wouldn’t technically be racist because Russian is NOT a race. It’s one of many cultural expressions of the white race. Cultural prejudice would be a more accurate term. Nevertheless, calling the folks who steal DeviantArt accounts and replace all their content with bogus porn site links Russian and saying that they perpetuate negative stereotypes of Russians does not make me culturally prejudiced against Russians. I’m simply condemning the crooks for making peaceable Russians, which I acknowledge make up most of the country’s populace, look bad. Every color, culture, and creed in the world has a majority of law-abiding people and a small percent of crooks. My father once said that, to every stereotype, there is a tiny kernel of truth. Therefore, stereotypes are those tiny kernels of truth blown to obscene proportions.

[After that it either repeats itself or goes on long rants about the readership here at FSTDT which I didn’t include so as to avoid going to tl;dr. Feel free to look at it yourself.]

Colonel-Knight-Rider #wingnut #crackpot #racist #conspiracy deviantart.com

"And this talk of cancelling elections should concern you as much as anyone." Maybe he meant to say, "postpone until a later date…" The problem is that he knows what to say but not how to say it. Either way, I see this as more of his genuine health concern while misremembering that we can vote remotely now rather than a bid for an extended term in office. And he can get hysterical at times, so I doubt the election's gonna be cancelled.


I think of myself as a news skeptic: don't take everything on TV at face value. And right now, almost every news network in the country is committed to spinning this narrative of how Trump's severely flawed manner of speech automatically makes him a racist. One example is his describing Haiti as a "[bleep]hole country" compared to Iceland. He wasn't saying that Haitians are inferior to Icelanders—he was saying that Haiti is a poverty and natural disaster-stricken country, as any Haitian will tell you the same. It's like the word "racist" is now the be-all to end all arguments: "You're a racist! Nothing you say is valid beyond this point." The media wants to destroy him.


Thank you! :D What you call zombies, I call NPCs. In video game programming, NPC stands for non-player character. NPCs often have pre-programmed dialogue, which my enemies also appear to have as they reuse the same, tired logic errors that they insist are "needed" corrections to whatever I say that offends them. They prowl around my page looking for reasons to be offended and complain about it in their echo chamber instead of actually trying to fix what they think is wrong with the world.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #homophobia #fundie deviantart.com

saturdaystorytellers, alias characterconsultancy, is up to her tricks again, calling me "homophobic" and trying to convert me into an LGBTQ+ activism ally just because I didn't want to feel guilty for including gay Pokémon in a collaborative fanfiction that didn't involve her, knowing that doing so would compromise the virtues I was raised with. And, this time, she's posted an entire self-righteous journal entry about it on the second of these accounts.

Discrimination and the Work I Do, by characterconsultancy

Look, Rowan: I don't care what your sexuality is. Please just stop trying to force it on me, okay? Lord knows I don't force my heterosexuality on you. What if I told you it's heterophobic to assume heterosexuals are inherently homophobic? And never tell me that my parents don't love me unconditionally. They love me no matter what I do to unintentionally upset them. Even if I told them right now I use DeviantArt, they wouldn't like the fact that I use it but would still love me as a person with all their hearts. They were first to suggest that I should be a voice actor. The fact that you think they dislike me as a person even to a small degree only proves that you're still bitter about your parents' not approving of your being a lesbian. You can't tell me who to be. You can't tell Mom and Dad who to be. So, stop playing mind games and leave me alone. I will change only for God, not for a stranger I met online.

I hope the next voice acting talent agent I find doesn't have a god complex as big as yours.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #fundie #psycho deviantart.com

I think you're conflating two events by mistake, which is not surprising considering how much you've gotten factually wrong to the point where I find myself laughing. First, you still don't seem to understand that I made Dad mad. I pushed his patience past its limits that day. It's my fault that he punched me (although Mom scolded him for this afterwards and he apologized). Second, I wasn't trying to protect myself when running from my parents trying to wiggle my tooth. I was selfish. I was weak. I didn't defend myself. I made myself vulnerable. Running away from them was not a strength but a weakness. I should've toughened up and let them wiggle it no matter how much I feared losing a tooth, which would've prevented me being pinned to a bed. I was scared, sure, but I knew rightly that losing a baby tooth is part of the natural order of things. In reality, I was not at war with my parents. I was at war with myself, much like I am now.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #sexist #pratt #wingnut #homophobia #transphobia #racist rottenwebsites.miraheze.org

1. Overall, FSTDT is similar to RationalWiki in that it's a left-leaning, mostly atheist and agnostic echo chamber where members more often act like petulant jerks who, by their own admission, love mocking and "calling out" people for saying things they don't like to hear instead of defeating others' arguments rationally. The key difference is that, unlike RW, FSTDT does not masquerade as an encyclopedia.
2. In 2014, a former 40-year atheist and blogger named Stan described the site as a place "…where Atheists and skeptics can have a safe harbor in which to ridicule that which they take out of context. Actually there is a link to context, but no one seems to have used it in my case. It's the sort of snake pit where the target du jour is countered with comments like "asshole", and the standard logic errors which they insist are the logical answers to the "idiot" they are trashing
3. The fact that many users choose to remain anonymous proves that they know what they're doing, while not illegal per se, is unethical enough that they don't want to get caught doing it, especially by the religious friends that many members claim to have in real life.
4. Their whole business model is flawed because, if there were no more writings they don’t like for them to quote on the Internet, the enterprise would lose its purpose and collapse.
5. Their arguments against whatever quotes they find are generally one-sided and full of logical fallacies, often as extremely ideologically biased towards the left as are those on RationalWiki or SJWiki, especially since quotes are taken out of context.
6. They tend to give tags to quotes that do not reflect the quote authors' original intentions, including giving the tag "#fundie" to quotes that have only minimal to no religious connotations. This makes it clear that they want their interpretations of anything they quote to be the only true and correct interpretations.
7. Although they aim to provide links to context for every one of their quotes, users don't seem to reference or pay attention to that context.
8. Many of their arguments amount to nothing more than argumentum ad hominems, or personal attacks, with childish insults and name-calling as well as lazy, unimaginative sex jokes solely to get a rise out of people.
This is often the case with their comments on many quotes under their tag "#dunning-krueger," which refers to people that they believe are "not nearly as smart as they think they are." It's another way of saying, "You're dumb because we said so!" and renders them guilty of the same sense of elitism that they condemn various quoting targets for showing.
The same principle applies to their tag "#pratt," an acronym for "Point Refuted A Thousand Times," which indicates a sense of laziness and unwillingness to have a civil debate and basically says, "We’re right, you're wrong, so shut up already."
9. The people running and/or contributing to it do a terrible job at sourcing for their quotes: many links to context are dead (happens a lot with links aged 10 years or older); image only; and unarchived social media posts that can be easily forged, deleted, or modified.
10. They hate U.S. President Donald Trump so much that they normally avoid saying "Trump" like the Bubonic Plague and do not offer any impartial criticism or say anything forgiving about him, believing that anyone who shows any sympathy or forgiveness towards him is a racist, neo-Nazi, or "wingnut" by association.
They like to whitewash originally well-intentioned but nowadays corrupt and violent groups such as Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and the feminist movement.
11. They deny that feminism in history has come in waves and that, in the recent past with third-wave feminism/feminazism, the feminist movement is now a shell of its former self. They even accuse anti-feminist women of being "hypocrites".
12. Anyone who does not support toxic modern feminism is automatically a "#sexist" in their eyes.
13. Anyone who does not support BLM's violent behavior is automatically a "#racist" in their eyes.
They mislabel people guilty of ethnic hatred or xenophobia as "racist" even though individual human races/skin colors are not one and the same as ethnicities or national identities.
14. Like many social justice warriors, they promote minority groups in ways that even minority groups themselves might find offensive. For example, they support LGBTQ2+ characters being inserted casually into entertainment regardless of quality or consequences, force everyone to accept them and condemn anyone who doesn’t accept them or care about their activism, and suggest that anyone who isn’t pro-LGBTQ2+ is automatically a homophobe. All of this essentially gives the LGBTQ2+ community in the real world a bad name.
15. They give credence to the idea that there are more than two genders.
16. As their Website's title implies, they have no qualms in using Christophobic (anti-Christian) language. For example, when discussing matters of Nazism and religion, they often go on screeds about how Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party were (allegedly) Christian. In reality, Hitler was staunchly opposed to mainstream Christianity, according to his Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, and saw it as a branch of Judaism, which he of course hated even more. He thus invented the false religion of "positive Christianity" to deceive German Christians of the day into thinking that they were doing "God's work" by serving the führer.
17. Though one of their tags is "#moonbat" for quotes composed by "left-wing nutjobs," this tag is hardly ever used compared to "#wingnut" for quotes written by "right-wing nutjobs." This makes it even clearer that they are biased towards the left.
18. They like to present readers with crudely-made conclusions instead of letting the evidence speak for itself. This is more of an act of insecurity as they fear that people will not see things the way they do and expect every argument they make to be taken seriously.
19. Many of its members act toxically and intolerantly towards anyone who so much as disagrees with them.
Although they claim to have Christian users, hardly anyone ever comments on quotes to offer a Christian perspective nowadays.
20. They are extremely pro-social justice: they are primarily interested in attempting to correct people and being right, aggressively attacking all who disagree. They claim that this is for their own self-amusement when they write like they would establish dictatorial control over what people say on the Internet if they could, believing that what they do to their targets is somehow "needed". They admit that the only reason they support free speech is so they can have something to attack!
21. It underwent a major revamp in 2019, but its basic, blocky, blandly-colored aesthetics without any modern graphics or features make it look like it's from the late 1990s-early 2000s era.
22. That said, it suffers from a poor Website design overall because it lacks many features and technical conveniences that would be normally present on a message board. For example:
- There is no menu to select how many quotes/comments can be viewed per page, including in search results.
- Search engine filters/results sorters are not always as accurate as they could be.
- The search engine only works with finding quotes, not comments; nor does it list the number of results per search query.
- Sometimes, the last page of a search results list, for whatever reason, turns up completely blank.
- There is no option to report comments (probably intentional, given how the site encourages people to be mean-spirited).
- User pages are nothing more than lists of quotes users have found and comments they've made (probably to preserve their anonymity).
23. Its painfully unprofessional and outright immature logo features a "sexy flying Jesus penis," a crudely-photoshopped devil version of pop singer/songwriter Taylor Swift practicing martial arts, devils in flying saucers, a reptilian alien-type creature with devil horns, a NyQuil bottle with devil horns surrounded by fire, and what appears to be a Biblical leviathan in a bathtub (in reference to one of their more popular and infamous quotes from 2009) eating fast food from McDonald's.
24. If anyone dares to object to the 2020 Coronavirus quarantine or criticizes how governments handle it or how the media misrepresents data and statistics surrounding it, FSTDT will surely go on a witch hunt after them.
25. They do not take responsibility for their actions: they blame others for getting themselves quoted by FSTDT, even if they realize that they have the power and the choice not to quote people they don't like and not to let silly things people write online offend them so much. Moreover, no self-respecting FSTDT user will ever admit to SJW-type behavior.
Likewise, in their FAQ section under "But You're Defaming Me!" they try to rationalize their efforts to defame people by arguing that their targets are sabotaging themselves, not considering the possibility that the quotes they find might have different intended meanings than what they read.
26. When people on other Websites criticize or counter-mock them, they do not usually take the criticism or counter-mockery well.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #sexist #fundie deviantart.com

Today is the 100th anniversary of the 19th Constitutional Amendment, which gave women the right to vote. In the spirit of this glorious occasion, President Trump has pardoned Susan B. Anthony, who was unjustly fined $100 long ago for attempting to vote when it was still illegal for women and was never pardoned by any other president.


My message to anyone who calls Mr. Trump "sexist" is this: your argument never existed.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #racist #wingnut deviantart.com

I stopped watching SpongeBob ever since its seasonal rot. However, I still care about the show to a degree, especially since I learned today that Professor Holly M. Barker at the University of Washington just called SpongeBob racist and pro-colonialism. She says this is because it takes place in the Bikini Atoll, which has a checkered history with respect to World War II and its aftermath. Clearly, she's just begging for her 15 minutes of fame.

I guess Super Mario's bizarro nemesis is no longer the only thing with a purple W logo I don't like.

I've read about it...I still don't get HOW THE SHOW IS RACIST!!

Neither do I! Nor has anyone who's called the following song of mine racist explained why they think that.

'Be Politically Correct!' Reprise Revised

They just mock me instead of talking civilly about what I can do to better communicate the main point of the song: live action remakes of Disney classics suck.

Why has reality abandoned us?

Real history is still in our library books somewhere. The media just wants to censor it.

Which is why we must protect it

Yes, we must do so for future generations. Without anyone to carry on the truth that our contemporary culture is not as racist/generally offensive as the media has made it out to be, we have no method of preserving facts.

Colonel-Knight-Rider #wingnut #pratt deviantart.com

Wanna know why this quarantine is all based in fear?

We fought the Revolutionary War during a smallpox epidemic and were not afraid in those days. Not only that, but we fought World War I during a Spanish Flu epidemic, and fear did not stop us from victory back then either. The country has grown too soft, and we've been boxed in for too long. As my good friend Scott/SpecialGuestStar says, it's time to get out and go.

Joe Dallas #fundie exodusglobalalliance.org

Responding to Pro-Gay Theology

Major denominations ordaining homosexuals, priests and clergy presiding over same-sex weddings, sanctuaries invaded by boisterous gay activists, debates over homosexuality ripping congregations apart-who would have guessed we would ever reach such a point in church history?

A vigorous debate between Christians and homosexuals shouldn't be surprising in and of itself. If author and commentator Dr. Dennis Praeger is right when he says the Judeo-Christian ethic is responsible for the Western World's disapproval of homosexuality,[1] then conflicts between the Church and the gay rights movement are not only understandable, they are inevitable. (While acceptance of homosexuality in ancient cultures is well documented,[2] the past 2000 years of Western thought have, by and large, rejected it,[3] and the influence of both Old and New Testaments can be credited for that.)[4]

What is surprising, though, is the current trend in which these ethics are not only being challenged, but rewritten as well, most notably in the form of the pro-gay theology.

The pro-gay theology is much like the broader gay rights philosophy, in that it seeks legitimization (not just tolerance) of homosexuality. Gay spokesmen have made no secret of this as being their goal in secular culture; activist Jeff Levi put it plainly to the National Press Club during the 1987 Gay Rights March on Washington: "We are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a protection from wrong. We also have a right-as heterosexual Americans already have-to see government and society affirm our lives. Until our relationships are recognized in the law-in tax laws and government programs to affirm our relationships, then we will not have achieved equality in American society.[5]"

But pro-gay theology takes it a step further by redefining homosexuality as being God-ordained and morally permissible:

"I have learned to accept and even celebrate my sexual orientation as another of God's good gifts." -gay author Mel White[6]

When God is reputed to sanction what He has already clearly forbidden, then a religious travesty is being played out, and boldly. Confronting it is necessary because it (the pro-gay theology) asks us to confirm professing Christians in their sin, when we are Biblically commanded to do just the opposite. As Christ's ambassadors on earth, we unfaithfully represent Him if a professing believer's ongoing sin has no effect on our relationship with that believer...which is, in essence, what Paul told the Thessalonians:

In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers, to keep away from every brother who is idle and does not live according to the teaching you received from us. If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed. Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother. (2 Thes 3:6, 14- 15)

Likewise, when Paul heard of a Corinthian church member's incestuous relationship with his stepmother, he ordered the man be excommunicated (1 Cor 5:1-5), then explained the principle of confrontation and, if necessary, expulsion from the community of believers:

Don't you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough? Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a new batch without yeast. (1 Cor 5:6-7)

A healthy body purges itself of impurities; the Body of Christ cannot afford to do less. Error, like leaven, has a toxic effect.

The pro-gay theology is a strong delusion-a seductive accommodation tailor-made to suit the Christian who struggles against homosexual temptations and is considering a compromise. Some who call themselves gay Christians may be truly deceived into accepting it; others might be in simple rebellion. What compels them to believe a lie we cannot say. What we can say is that they are wrong...dead wrong.

But even as we say so, the caution of a proper spirit is in order. When we answer the pro-gay theology, we do so as sinners approaching other sinners, nothing more. Rev. Andrew Aquino of the Columbus Baptist Association expressed it perfectly during a recent interview:

My message to the homosexual is: We love you. Come and struggle with us against sin. Don't give in to it.

The Pro-Gay Theology in Brief

Exactly what do the "gay Christians" believe, and how did they come to believe it? The first question is more easily answered than the second. Explaining what a group believes is not hard. Explaining how they have come to believe it is another matter.

We cannot read minds or motives. That, I am sure, is one reason Jesus warned against judging (Mt 7:1). We can be certain the teachings themselves are false; why people have accepted them is something we cannot prove one way or another. Yet the Bible offers clues, and testimonies from members of the gay Christian movement are also enlightening, in helping to understand what the gay Christian movement believes, and what personal and spiritual factors may have influenced their beliefs.

The pro-gay theology is the cornerstone of the "gay Christian" movement (which is comprised of whole denominations, like the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches, as well as gay caucuses within mainline denominations) just as the Athanasian and Nicene Creeds are the foundation of most Protestant's beliefs.[8] The movement is diverse; some of its spokespersons-Episcopal Priest Robert Williams and Bishop John Shelby Spong, for instance -promote flamboyant and blatantly heretical ideas. But most groups within the gay Christian movement ostensibly subscribe to traditional theology. (The Statement of Faith of the Metropolitan Community Churches, for example, is based on the Apostles and Nicene Creeds.)[9]

Although the pro-gay theology claims a conservative theological base, it includes additions and revisions to basic, traditional ethics. First, homosexuality is seen as being God ordained. As such, it's viewed as being on par with heterosexuality. Gay author Mel White points out, quite accurately, that "if you don't see that premise (that God created homosexuality) then gay marriage looks ridiculous, if not insane."[10]

But to be seen as created by God, the traditional understanding of homosexuality needs to be discredited. This is done four basic ways within the "gay Christian" movement. First, prejudice against homosexuals is blamed for the understanding most Christians have of the Biblical references to it. The founder of the Metropolitan Community Churches, Rev. Troy Perry, asserts this is his writings:

To condemn homosexuals, many denominations have intentionally misread and misinterpreted their Bibles to please their own personal preferences.[11]

So, according to Perry and others, not only are most Christians wrong about homosexuality, but many or most are intentionally wrong- deliberately reading their prejudice against gays into the Bible.

White goes even further, stating that major leaders in the Christian community-Jerry Falwell, James Kennedy and Pat Robertson-take public stands against the gay rights movement for the sake of raising funds and increasing their visibility.[12]

Casting doubt on the motives of conservative leaders, and numerous denominations, makes it easier to discount their Bible-based objections to homosexuality. No wonder this tactic is so common in the "gay Christian" movement. Others within the movement contend the scriptures we understand to condemn homosexuality have actually been mistranslated. According to this view, the Bible should be taken literally in its original language; the problem with most Christians, they say, is that they don't know Biblical Greek and Hebrew well enough to realize our modern translations on homosexuality are all wrong.

Another claim pro-gay theorists make is that the Bible verses (Lev 18:22 and 20:13; Rom 1:26-27; 1 Cor 6:9-10; 1 Tim 1:9-10) which seem to prohibit homosexuality have actually been yanked out of context from their original meaning, or that they only applied to the culture existing at the time they were written. (Professor Robin Scroogs of Union Theological Seminary, for example, claims, "Biblical judgments about homosexuality are not relevant to today's debate."[13])

These arguments do not sit well with most serious Christians. The scriptures mentioned earlier are so clear and specific they defy interpretation of any sort. "Thou shalt not lie with a man as with a woman" requires no more interpretation than "Thou shalt not kill." It is intellectually dishonest to say conservatives "interpret" such verses out of prejudice against homosexuals. Those same "prejudiced" conservatives (Falwell, Kennedy, Robertson et al) also take scriptures against heterosexual sins quite literally. If they only prohibit homosexuality out of their own prejudice, why on earth do they, as heterosexuals, also condemn heterosexual sins? The argument makes no sense.

Neither does the "mistranslation" argument. We can allow some discrepancy in minor areas of translation, but, on something as important as sexual ethics, are we really to believe the Bible translators we rely on got it wrong five different times, in two different testaments? And only on the scriptures regarding homosexuality? (Pro-gay apologists seem to have no problem with the other scriptures condemning sins like adultery and child abuse.)

Equally poor is the "out-of-context" argument. The fact is, in Leviticus, Romans, 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy, homosexuality is mentioned in the context of sexual and immoral behavior! The context is quite clear-a variety of behaviors are prohibited; homosexuality-along with adultery, fornication and idolatry-is one of them.

The "cultural" argument fares no better. In some cases, a scripture may seem culturally bound (injunctions against long hair on men, or women speaking to their husbands during church.) But again-five times? Five different scriptures, from both testaments, addressed to highly different cultures (from the Hebrew to the Roman) are obviously not culturally bound. The cultures they address are just too different.

All of which leaves conservatives highly skeptical of the "gay Christian" movement's claim to respect Biblical authority. It takes mental gymnastics to accept these inadequate arguments; those not having a stake in accepting them are unlikely to do so. But those having a personal interest the pro-gay theology are another matter. Twist the Scriptures hard enough and you can make them appear to say anything you please. Author Paul Morris raises this very issue when he warns:

But if I were a Christian homosexual, I think this one question would disturb me most: Am I trying to interpret Scripture in the light of my proclivity; or should I interpret my proclivity in the light of Scripture?[14]

An unfortunate pattern of doing the former can be seen in the "gay Christian" movement's testimonials. Rev. Troy Perry writes about having already decided homosexuality was acceptable, then searching the Bible to equip himself to answer conservatives.[15] Mel White alludes, in his book, to some earlier studies of the destruction of Sodom[16] but his turning point seems to have come not from a careful, prayerful study of scripture, but from a psychologist who encouraged him to accept his homosexuality and find a lover![17] And gospel musician Marsha Stevens (composer of the beloved song "For Those Tears I Died" and now openly lesbian) gives a lengthy account of her acceptance of homosexuality without once explaining how she reached the point of believing homosexuality was scripturally acceptable. (The closest she comes is in telling how she prayed one night for confirmation that lesbianism was okay; the next morning someone gave her a pin saying "Born Again Lesbian.")[18] Considering the background and theological training of the above-mentioned believers in pro-gay theology, their acceptance of it is astounding.

Or maybe it is not. Paul predicts an abandonment of truth for the sake of personal fulfillment:

For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. (2 Tim 4:3-4)

Self over truth, man over God-can a Christian be so deceived? Evidently- Paul referred to the Galatian church as having been "bewitched" (Gal 3:1), and Jesus warned that a prominent sign of the days before His coming would be an increase in deception (Mt 24:14). To confront the pro-gay theology, then, is to confront a deceptive element of our time- the tendency to subjugate objective truth to subjective experience.

That is one reason confrontation is not enough to change a heart. Being knowledgeable enough to dismantle all the "gay Christian" movement's claims will not be enough to persuade a homosexual to repent. The heart, having been hardened through deception or rebellion or both, has to be softened. And that is the work of God alone. Ours is to simply speak the truth, trusting Him to quicken it to our hearers.

To that end, this three-part series will address the pro-gay theology by dividing its arguments-or tenants-into three categories: social justice arguments, general religious arguments, and scriptural arguments. A brief description of these arguments will be provided, followed by a response/rebuttal to each.

Novuso #wingnut #conspiracy #ufo deviantart.com

Trump's "space force" is a classified Secret Space Program that has existed for decades.

We are already living in a "Star Wars" type society.

Truth of the matter is humans have already walked on Mars. This happened decades ago when US astronauts landed on Mars in the 1970s. They never told the public because someone already beat us to the RED planet. Worst of all it was the Nazis who beat us. This could not be told to the public because it would cause panic and upend the entire world.

The top two pictures are German WW2 Mess kit spoons. The lower photograph was taken by the curiosity rover on Mars in 2016. The similarities between the German issue WW2 spoons and the spoon found on Mars are striking including the clip that holds the spoon and fork together.

image

History as we know it is a lie. The Nazis were never defeated at the end of WW2. They survived the war by hiding out in Antarctica at a NAZI military base called "Neuschwabenland."

An introduction to Neuschwabenland the secret Nazi base in Antarctica:https: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNnoKJHAEEY

In 1947 the US Navy under the command of Admiral Byrd attempted to wipe out this Nazi base but ended up being defeated by a fleet of advanced saucer shaped aircraft. These aircraft were at least 100 years more advanced than anything available at the time. The Germans had anti gravity and were powered by free energy Tesla tech allowing them to travel into space without rockets.

Admiral Byrd's failed mission to destroy the Nazis in Antarctica was called Operation Highjump.

image


Before WW2 ended America captured a few Nazi scientists and pardoned them on the condition they work for us. This transfer of technology from Nazi Germany to America was called operation paper clip. These scientist developed a parallel secret space program for the US government based on anti-gravity technology. This was all classified and hidden from the public.

In 1964 our most advanced aircraft was the SR-71. In 2018 our most Advanced aircraft is the SR-71. Do people really believe no advancement has happened in the last 54 years. It is time to get clued in.

image

We are light years beyond the SR-71 at this point. Our technology eventually caught up to the Nazis in the 70s but they had already beaten us to Mars and colonized the moon.

Although presented as fiction there is more truth to this than is written in the history books. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn4DW1uvsAE

This video was uploaded in 2008 and references 2018 as the time this would become public knowledge. Iron Sky is not a low budget movie but predictive programming for a planned disclosure of the secret space program that will take place in 2018.

Some say Trump works for the Nazis because on the day of the 2016 election John Kerry was summoned to Antarctica to meet with a Nazi representative of Neuschwabenland and was told Trump would become president.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/748249/John-Kerry-Antarctica-secret-Nazi-UFO-base

The Nazis haven't given up their final solution of ridding the world of international bankers.

image

Someday soon perhaps before the end of the year their plan will be put into action. Trump who has now taken command of US secret space force will not be going to war with Nazis to protect the bankers. In fact he will probably be aiding them as he declares martial law and executes 100,000 seal indictments.

Bill Keller #fundie votingforjesus.com

President Obama has proven by his words and deeds to be a true enemy of God as detailed in James 4:4. He has been the most pro-death President in history, supporting the legalized slaughter of innocent babies here and around the world, he is a staunch advocate of the radical homosexual agenda, and he has been a great friend to the enemies of Israel. On every major spiritual issue of the day, President Obama has proven to be an enemy of God and a true tool of satan!

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is a 5th generation member and a priest in the satanically inspired Mormon cult. He and others in his cult LIE when they claim to be Christians, since Mormon doctrine is 100% inconsistent with Biblical Christianity and a Mormon is no more a Christian than a Muslim is. He deceives people by saying he believes in "God" and "Jesus" is his savior, when the "god" of Romney's cult is NOT the God of the Bible, and their "jesus" is NOT the Jesus of the Bible. Romney and those in his cult believe the Bible to be a flawed and incomplete book and look at Biblical Christians as inferior and non-believers for rejecting the beliefs of their cult.

...

So who is a Christian to vote for with a clear conscience? The answer is simple...JESUS!!!

I am encouraging true followers of Jesus Christ to say NO to satan and say YES to Jesus! This November, write in the name JESUS for President! The option will be several third party candidates. Sadly, no candidate outside of the two major parties have any chance at winning the election. So rather than vote for a third party candidate, write in the name of Jesus for President.

Your vote for JESUS is not helping President Obama get re-elected, nor is it helping Mitt Romney get elected, it is telling satan you will not be responsible for either of his tools becoming our next President! Men need to quit looking to men for answers, but to the Lord!

Joshua Ude #fundie rapturewatcher.wordpress.com

I thank God Almighty who truly want to save all humanity, not willing that any should perish but come to repentance and be saved, belove, God want you to repent from your sin that He might forgive you, no mater how deep you have gone in your sin, no matter how long or years you have been living in those sins and no matter the name of the sin, God says come and let us reason together, come now let us settle the matter, God is full of mercy and forgives iniquty, yet cannot forgive unrepented sin, as far as you are a siner, God cannot 4give you exept you repent, and if you mistakenly die in your sin, you will be cast into hell fire 4ever. I dont know the sin you are into, it could be laing, anger, hatred, unfugiveness or bitterness, this things are terible sin, how about gossip, mormoring, backbiting, speeking evel of others or blasphemy, false witness, cursing people, this things are terrible sin. Masturbation is a gross wickedness, unlean or immoral thought, funicaton, adultry, homosexual or lesbian, this are terrible wickedness, man sleeping with animal is also a sin, i dont know the wickedness you are into, may be you belong to secreet or open cult, studdent cult, antichrist cult or church of satan, every kind of cult is sin, you must denounce it, gather there properties and burn then and give your life to Jesus Christ and God will show you mercy.you may be asking what is sin? Listen to me, 1st John 5:17a says all unritiousness is sin, going to the habalist to make cham i7 sin or may be you are a habalist, repent for 2morrow may be 2late, burn all those charms and surrender to Christ, are you into smoking? You smoke ciggarate, or marijuana, are you warking in tobaco company? You must resine, you dont neeed alcuholic drinks 1% or 2%, furieng or local or may be you are warking in brewry or sarving it in the hotel, you must resing, wemen wearing trauser is sin and men putting ö wemens garment is abormination Detronomy 22;5 says a man should not put on female7 garment and wemen should not put un males garment for it is aborminatiös unto God, putting earings and jewelries are sin,wemen pentting their mout, finger or putting artificial finger, heair is sin, you dot even need the bangles and rings in your hands, wedding ring is sin, the finger rossary and chaplate on your neck is sin, even the cross and skapula is idolatory, you cant enter heaven with those things, gather thøse things and burn them, you may be asking what is sin, listen, dressing to expose your laps is sin, cover your brest armpit and tommy properlly, a christian is n not a seducer and a seducer is not a christian amend yov ways Cirist is coming very very soon

Christian #fundie godlikeproductions.com

Why you can Believe in Jesus Christ - Backed up with REAL Facts.

Reality - The Way things actually are, NOT the way you think them or want them to be.
Most people today go through life believing in a World that
is made up of many big lies, this results in them making bad decisions.
This work will attempt to prove what is actual and real using both Logic and verifiable evidence to establish Facts from Fictions.

Fact #1: The God of Christianity is Real

1A) Creation of Life in all it's complexity, dependencies and interactive relationships witness to a God who Designed
the Material Elements in Precise amounts with a specific environment that allows life to exist.

1B) Preserved History, Only the Jewish people and Christianity have a preserved history that explains the Universe, Creation, Man, Animals, Plants and the relationship God has with his creation. This History is preserved in the Authorized King James Bible, and Earlier translations and manuscripts that agree with each other and validate ONE cohesive, unified Book of Books called the Bible.

1C) Prophesy fulfilled validates the credibility of God, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost that witness to the Power of God to know the Future and witness to His past deeds and future actions that people may have faith and believe in Him. Unfulfilled Prophesy remain to give faith to those
who yet live and witness their coming to pass, to help them believe.

1D) Miracles, God by himself and in answer to his peoples prayers has shown his ability to do things that only a REAL Living God could do.
Two main things made those who wished to Rule over man Jealous, His actions and Who he claimed to be.
Jesus performed many miracles and forgave sins made against God.
and who Jesus Claimed to be (the Only Begotton Son of God)
*** John3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. ***

1E) Persecution of both Christians and the Real Word of God by Cults. There are Three main types of Cults that mount these attacks.

E1)Those who claim to be Christian but are NOT. They follow False Doctrines that are supported only by taking specific scriptures out of context and Never comparing them with the rest of scripture.
*** Acts17:10-11 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. ***
Often these cults will use New Age Bibles full of alterations, missing words and added notes that create doubt in the credibility of Scripture. Sometimes this type of Cult will even include Books and Publications that claim Godly Authority with New Doctrines that put members under the Authority of Men and the Anti-Christ while trying to make them feel special, important, set apart from the rest of the world.
The REAL Word of God is found in the King James Bible and is supported by Earlier Translations and Manuscripts that are vast in number and overwhelming in
their agreement to each other. New Age Bibles that have been "translated" after the King James Bible are significantly different from the King James Bible and
Each other. The Copyright of modern New Age Bibles requires them to be different!
Promoters and Defenders of New Age Bibles Have Attacked the King James Bible as being to hard to understand, Authorized by an immoral king, and being defended by Christians who are not Educated enough. To these attacks I answer with the following.
Study of the Word leads to understanding, Judas betrayed Jesus allowing him to be sacrificed for the Sin of the World saving all who believe in him. God uses believers
to do his will, even if they have not been to Schools and suffered Indoctrinated into the Truth this world want's them to believe.

E2)Those who Worship Fake Gods such as Deamons (Fallen Angels like Satan) or Idols.
Those who submit themselves to Deamons or Men who rule over them may be given Signs(not Miracles) , Praise and Privilege to make them believe they are receiving Power as a result of their blind Obedience to Deamons or Men.
Their Blind Devotion to these Deamons and Men lack the following.
1)A credible historical record that Explains the Creation of Life and all things.
2)The chronological explanation of the world they live in and the Relationship between God and Man that goes back to the Beginning.
3)Prophecy validating the power of God to know and tell of the Future in detail.
4)Miracles, things done by God that no man could ever do.

E3)Those who worship Science, the Cult of Disbelief called Atheism
The Religion of Science uses made up facts to support doctrines that match the beliefs of Atheists, making it convenient to allow or justify Sin.
Theories Taught as Law to promote their Lawlessness include:
1) The Big Bang - All Stars and matter exploding from a singularity some REALLY long time ago.
2) Evolution - Life taking over Billions of Years to happen as an accident.
3) Fornication - Humans are just another Animal, therefore anything goes.
4) Dinosaurs - Destroyed by a Meteor Millions of Years Ago.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

You can lead a unbeliever to the Truth, but you can't make them think.

Ray Comfort #fundie facebook.com

"I believe in Christians and I believe that the agenda of the Christian right is to oppose human rights and seek to impose its will on all citizens. It is a science denying cult that denies any facts that don't agree with the bible. Evolution is important, but climate change is critical and Christians lead the way in pretending it doesn't exist. I think your beliefs are a real danger. Granted, arguing with you here is not going to accomplish much, but there are people who are having doubts or who aren't committed who will be swayed by reason. Hanging out at Atheist Central and engaging Christians is a great way to find out what and how Christians think." Milo Krat

Thanks for being here Milo. I believe that your sincere agenda is to change our minds about the weather, and women's and gay rights.
Ours is a sincere agenda to see you saved from death and Hell.
The moment you come to know the Lord (find everlasting life), you too will fight to save the lives of children in the womb, and love gays enough to want to see them saved as you would anyone else.

You will see that Darwinian evolution has no scientific basis, and that climate change isn’t a hill to die on, because you will know Him who controls it.

Christian Revival Center (Thomas Robb Ministries) and The Knights Party #fundie whitepridehomeschool.com

Ken Ham, the famous “creationist” is a favorite of the new apostate Christian church. He is heavily cited as an expert in Christian science textbooks. He misleads his followers into believing in evolution. How can a “creationist” mislead sincere Christians into believing in evolution? He teaches that Adam and Eve were the first humans (we know they were the first white man and woman) and that from them all Homosapiens resulted. After the tower of Babel incident when God confused the languages – Ken Ham teaches that people went to different parts of the world and in a few hundred years evolved into the different races. People in Africa became black and got tight kinky hair. People in Asia got extra eye folds from squinting at the sun and people in Europe – well they didn’t really change much at all. His theories are bizarre and based on Charles Darwin. Noah and his family who God spared because he was perfect in his generation (racially pure) He wasn’t really perfect – only Jesus Christ is perfect – were a mixed race family – we are told by “scientists” like Ham. He would have us believe that Noah had a racially integrated family. None of his teachings make any sense and smack of the ramblings of a small child who comes up with various fantasies as to why the sky is blue.

Brian Niemeier #fundie #wingnut #conspiracy brianniemeier.com

That's the Satanic Temple suing to stop an Indiana abortion law signed by Mike Pence. Is it a total abortion ban, a heartbeat bill, or even a bill requiring abortuaries to practice the same sanitation as Wendy's?

No. The Indiana law simply mandates disposing of fetal remains with the same dignity as other human remains, via burial or cremation.

The Satanic Temple is pursuing legal action to prevent murdered babies from receiving a decent burial.

These satanists claim the law could pose undue hardship to mothers seeking to murder their children.

Why? Because it might incline them to think of their dead babies as human beings?

There's another, darker motive.

The Death Cult which rules us, including the Satanic Temple, Disney, and Netflix, don't want these children buried.

They want them sacrificed.

Hollywood, the media, and academia belong to a heretical faith disguised with flimsy secular trappings. Their ultimate aims are not wealth and power. They instead seek warped spiritual ends that are perverted reflections of Christian graces.

Preferred pronouns are the Death Cult's version of transubstantiation. They believe they can turn men into women by uttering the right formula. This article of faith is so sacrosanct to them that they have enacted blasphemy laws protecting these incantations.

Erasing whiteness is an attempt to reverse the Death Cult analogue of original sin. But instead of immersion in water, the one whose skin announces his guilt can only be baptized in his own blood.

But the Death Cult's highest sacrament, the public liturgy which constitutes the deepest expression of their identity, is child sacrifice.

The glib rhetoric claiming they sought to protect women's best interests has been revealed as a sham. If abortion were a mere matter of civics, private companies like Disney would have no cause to risk involving themselves in a political controversy guaranteed to alienate huge numbers of their customers.

Disney, Netflix, and the Satanic Temple just want to keep murdering babies. They need to. The precepts of their diabolical faith dictate that the innocent blood must flow. The children must be fed to Moloch. They must not be interred in the ground--especially not ground consecrated to the hated Christ.

Eddie #fundie christiandiscussionforums.org

['See for an overview <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult</a>. See how easy it is for people to believe something totally irrational? We have the benefit of knowledge to be able see how amusing how these Cargo Cults seem.']

"The two are totally different, people believe in Jesus because 1) He really did exist 2) His words, His teachings were/ are real - we have them in the Bible 3) He really performed many miracles 4) He really did rise again after He was executed and was seen & witnessed by 500 people after His death 5) He really was/is the Son of God.

Cargo cults are based on false premises & local magik (believing idols will conjure up more supplies washing up on shore) Christianity is based on truths, they are totally opposite, if you can't see that you are blind......

Pure Christianity (believing & following Jesus) is not a cult because there is no form of mind-control, brain-washing, control by an organization or deception involved. In fact if you really look at it - living in the secular world with the secular media people are saturated with is more closely related to being a cult!

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

I don't mean to pick on Alex Jones, but he boasts of influencing 3,000,000 people every single day worldwide through his radio and internet show. I must speak up as a Christian!

Alex says that he has no problem with homosexuals. Well I do have a serious problem with homosexuals (improperly called “gays” by the sodomites themselves), because the Bible condemns such wickedness, as does nature (Romans 1:24-32). It's sickening, perverted and offensive to picture two men sodomizing each other in the anus. Homosexuality is LUST, not love. Christ-honoring, God-fearing, people-loving, sin-hating, faithful, Bible-believing Christians are sinfully being labeled by unsaved evil people as “EXTREMISTS” and “RADICAL FUNDAMENTALISTS.” Pastor Rick Warren has even public said that CHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALISM is the biggest threat of the 21st century (because we're the only ones Scriptural exposing his ecumenical bandwagon to Hell).

Alex openly supports Heavy-Metal Rock Music, which is very sexually immoral by very nature, and then he says he has no problem with homosexuals. At the same time Alex openly professes to be a Christian who loves God, saying that he is “spiritual” but not part of any organized religion (such as Baptist). As a born-again Christian and Independent Fundamental Baptist Preacher, I have to speak out against Alex's wrong attitude toward homosexuals. Alex openly admits that he is not perfect, and neither am I. I'm glad that Alex teaches forgiveness and loving one another, but he ought to speak out against homosexuality as a sin, which is what the holy Bible teaches. Being gay (homosexual) is a sin, a CHOICE, that God abhors. Alex says in one breath that his show is secular and not religious; but then in the next breath he teaches all sorts of spiritual views, many unbiblical, and that he has no problem with homosexuals (to the beat of Blue Oyster Cult, Van Halen, ACDC, Lenny Kravitz and Megadeth). Confused? Alex seems to be!

Let no professed Christian ever say that he or she has “NO PROBLEM” with homosexuals or homosexuality. We ought to have a problem with BOTH. We cannot be right with God and accept homosexuals.

David J. Stewart #fundie #sexist #homophobia #conspiracy jesus-is-savior.com

Every wife today, if you care at all about God's Word, must choose between obeying your husband or listening to insane feminist lesbians who hate God and every form of God-ordained authority. God will be vindicated and the wicked will be punished. Your time is running short, for the Lord's return is imminent. Isaiah 13:11, “And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.” Feminists and lesbians are steeped in arrogant sinful pride and rebellion against the God of the Bible.

Ecclesiastes 11:9 and 14, “Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment. ... For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.”

God is not playing games with anyone. Marilyn Monroe is burning in the fires of Hell this moment, having died in her sins without Christ. Monroe was a lifelong follower of the Christian Science religious cult, who openly deny Christ's deity and salvation by grace alone. As with Mormonism, Seventh Day Adventism, the Charismatic Movement, and Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science was founded by 33rd degree Freemasons to infiltrate religious circles and lead the masses to accept World Government through ecumenical one-world religion.

Bill Keller #fundie rightwingwatch.org

[Glenn] Beck likes to call out people for their lies and deception, yet he portrays himself daily as a Christian. The fact is, the beliefs of the satanic Mormon cult are totally inconsistent with Biblical Christianity. He uses the words "god" and "jesus," yet the god and jesus of the Mormon cult are NOT the God and Jesus of the Bible!

The 'god' of the Mormon cult used to be a human who rose to god-like status, just like Beck and all Mormons believe they will too after their death. The 'jesus' of the Mormon cult is the natural offspring of their 'god' Elohim who had sex with Mary, meaning their jesus is a created being and NOT a deity as the Bible teaches, and is the brother of Lucifer.

I could care less what Beck chooses to believe, but I do care that he lies to people by stating he is a Christian when a person who believes in the lies of the Mormon cult is no more a Christian than a Muslim is. Most appalling are prominent Christians who have sold out the faith to associate with Beck, more worried about what financial gain they will get from that association than helping him lead ignorant souls to hell for following his cult's beliefs.

Vern Sheridan Poythress #fundie frame-poythress.org

All scientists—including agnostics and atheists—believe in God. They have to in order to do their work.

It seems outrageous to include the agnostics and atheists. But by their actions people sometimes show that in a sense they believe in things that they profess not to believe. Bakht, a Vedantic Hindu philosopher, may say that the world is an illusion. But he does not casually walk into the street in front of an oncoming bus. Sue, a radical relativist, may say that there is no truth. But she travels calmly at 30,000 feet on a plane whose safe flight depends on the unchangeable truths of aerodynamics and structural mechanics.1

But what about scientists? Do they believe in God? Must they? Popular American culture often transmits the contrary idea, namely that science is antagonistic to orthodox Christian belief. Recitations of Galileo’s conflict and of the Scopes Trial have gained mythic status, and receive reinforcement through vocal promotions of materialistic evolution.

Historians of science point out that modern science arose in the context of a Christian worldview, and was nourished and sustained by that view.2 But even if that was once so, twentieth century science seems to sustain itself without the help of explicit theistic underpinnings. In fact, many consider God to be the God of the gaps, the God whom people invoke only to account for gaps in modern scientific explanation. As science advances and more gaps become subject to explanation, the role of God diminishes. The natural drives out the need for the supernatural.3

Chris #fundie rr-bb.com

ATTENTION: You can say your RCC relatives were saved, your Mormon relatives were saved, etc. Your words and declarations don't mean one iota of anything when it comes to determining salvation. It seems to me that you are just here to promote all kinds of false and pagan religions like the RCC, Mormons, and Buddhists. You are are pretty much saying that it's OK if people practice all kinds of ungodly and satanic rituals as long as they believe in Jesus.

Christian cults take the basics of christianity and then they add the special "seasoning" to it to make it what they want it to be. The RCC adds "works" to grace. The Mormons believe in a a different Jesus and wear funky underwear. The Masons bow down to every pagan idol they can find and end up worshipping the devil. satan is behind every pagan religion.

The Bible says that even the demons believe, and they surely aren't saved. Stucky, you seem to be "stuck" in pagan nonsense and it appears that you are not able to face the fact that if your RCC wife did not believe in faith alone in Jesus Christ, then there is a chance she placed her faith elsewhere. And placing your faith in anything but the Lord Jesus Christ will earn one a swift ride to Hell. That's not judgment, that is the Word of God. where your wife is now is between her and the Lord. He knows her heart.

However, we will not be promoting cults and running around here saying that if you are involved in them that is fine and dandy. so far, you have said your relatives involved in false, pagan, and ungodly religious cults are all saved, etc. This is basically refuting the Bible. We won't have anymore of that here.

Karla Maria 777 #fundie answers.yahoo.com

Darwin applied in his "science " what already existed in spiritualist cults and Eastern voodooists?
Spiritism is evolutionary because it supports the idea that man gets better for many, many reincarnations and goes to the most advanced worlds...

Although just in only 100 years, Kardec Spiritism copied much of what already existed in Eastern religions, among them the reincarnation to pay for the mistakes and evolve.

The concept of evolution was not born with Darwin, but the occult, spiritualism and voodooists diabolic cults existing in the East.

Darwin just copied a lie called reincarnation and disguised as pseudo-science called evolution, he was a charlatan just like Kardec which also copied of the eastern voodoo the concept of evolution and called it karma, reincarnation, and other nonsense from the doctrines of demons.

Darwin only used itlike pseudoscientific theory, Evolutionism has never been scientifically proven until now. Separate specimens do not indicate that there was an escalation of evolution.

Reflect before believing blindly in the first nonsense that is disguised as philosophy, science or religion, spiritualism, evolution, voodoo, Gravity, seicho no ie, voodoo, Buddhism (Japanese voodoo), spiritualism (voodoo on the French, of chic and intellectual busybodies ...). It is all the doctrine of the devil, diabolism, pure work of deception of the father of lies!

kingjameswriter1965 #fundie ihatetheinternetbutilovejesus.wordpress.com

ALL religions are CULTS; Biblical Christianity is the Real Deal!!

I am furious. I just got done watching a couple of videos, one about the Jonestown massacre and another about the Heaven’s Gate cult (which I couldn’t watch all the way through). Surely you knowledgeable folk out there must have heard of these.

I mean, are you serious? UFO’s? Some nut thinking he’s Christ, only in alien form? Taking Holy Scripture out of context because of demon-possessed mania? God will severely judge every one of these people who are cultic followers. Their leaders have their own special place in the Lake of Fire. Don’t get mad at me, God said so.

The only way of escape of God’s wrath is REPENTANCE through a CHANGE OF MIND, in which one acknowledges their sinfulness before God and that they are deserving of Hell. Then you BELIEVE in the Name of Jesus Christ to SAVE your soul from an eternal Hell (that He died on the Cross, shedding His blood for your sins; then was buried; then raised from death by the mighty power of God). Then you RECEIVE His free gift of eternal life. That’s the true Gospel, the power of God unto salvation to all who believe. That’s pure religion and undefiled, as James 1:27 in God’s Word declares. ALL ELSE IS VAIN, THE BROAD ROAD TO HELL.

Listed here are just a few well-known cults that deny the Scriptures and reject Jesus Christ as God. If you adhere to ANY of these, you are in big trouble with God Almighty!!

Atheism

Baha’i faith

Black Muslim

Buddhism

Christian Science

Church of Christ

Eastern Cults

Episcopal Church (just another, lesser form of Romanism)

Freemasonry (many of our leaders are Freemasons; even the Founding Fathers of our once great nation followed this abomination)

Greek Eastern Orthodox (my best friend’s parents believe this)

Hinduism

Humanism (none other than New Age reasoning)

Illuminati (the pawns of the Devil)

Islamic Muslim

Jehovah’s Witness (my father perished in his sins because he converted to JW’s)

Judaism (what modern day Jews believe; they STILL reject Christ as Messiah)

Kabbalah

Lutheranism

Modernism

Moonies (Unification Church)

Mormonism (perverts galore)

New Age (I swannee if I wasn’t a born again Christian with the Holy Spirit living inside me I’d fall prey to this)

Pagan Mumbo-Jumbo (Yin Yang)

Pentecostal / Charismatic (tongues NO LONGER exist; if you want to look like an idiot and have Satan laugh at you, go ahead and join)

Roman Catholicism (this is the greatest hoax of all, and every Romanist knows it; I know, because God took me out of it)

Russian Orthodox

Scientology (really?)

Seventh-Day Adventist (same as Mormons)

Unitarian Universalism

United Church of Christ

Witchcraft/Wicca/Satanism

JESUS CHRIST DISCIPLE #fundie #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

THE HARLOT CHURCH THAT RIDES THE BEAST WILL BE ATTACKED BY THE BEAST AND BURNED WITH FIRE!!!

WHO IS BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS THAT RIDES THE BEAST IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION???

To help us understand who the Great Harlot of Revelation is who rides the Beast, first we need to look into biblical history and examine God's relationship with the nation of Israel.

.............................................................​............

GOD'S RELATIONSHIP AS A HUSBAND TO ISRAEL...

(Jeremiah 3:7) I thought that after she had done all these things, she would return to Me. But she did not return, and her unfaithful sister Judah saw it.
8 She sawa that because faithless Israel had committed adultery, I gave her a certificate of divorce and sent her away. Yet that unfaithful sister Judah had no fear and prostituted herself as well. 9 Indifferent to her own infidelity, Israel had defiled the land and committed adultery with stones and trees. 10 Yet in spite of all this, her unfaithful sister Judah did not return to Me with all her heart, but only in pretense,” declares the LORD.

(Jeremiah 31:32) It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them, ” declares the LORD.

God’s marriage covenant with Israel (Eze 16:8-14) The covenant at Sinai was seen as a form of marriage. See also (Jer 31:32; Eze 16:59-60).

God as Israel’s husband (Isa 54:5) See also (Hos 2:7; Joel 1:8).

Israel’s early devotion (Jer 2:2) See also (Eze 16:43; Hos 2:15).

The breakdown of God's marriage and Israels unfaithfulness...

Ezekiel chapter 16 the whole chapter speaks of israels prostitution and harlotry to foreign nations-
(Eze 16:26-32) You prostituted yourself with your lustful neighbors, the Egyptians, and increased your promiscuity to provoke Me to anger.
Then you prostituted yourself with the Assyrians, because you were not yet satisfied. Even after that, you were still not satisfied. So you extended your promiscuity to Chaldea,a the land of merchants—but even with this you were not satisfied!
You adulterous wife! You receive strangers instead of your own husband!

Israel’s adultery (Jer 3:20) See also (Jer 2:32; Eze 16:32-34; Hos 1:2; Hos 9:1).

Israel’s alienation from God is likened to a divorce (Hos 2:2) Israel’s unfaithfulness led to a form of divorce between God and his people. This was sometimes identified with the exile. See also (Isa 50:1; Jer 3:6-10).

The renewal of God's marriage to Israel...

God calls his bride to return (Jer 3:12-14; Hos 3:1-3) See also (Isa 54:6-8; Hos 2:14).

The renewed relationship (Isa 62:4-5) See also (Jer 31:31-33; Eze 16:62; Hos 2:16,19-20)

.............................................................​............

NOW WE CAN EXAMINE THE RELATIONSHIP OF JESUS CHRIST YESHUA TO THE CHURCH...

We the Church, believers, are engaged to Jesus Christ Yeshua, we must be loyal spiritual virgins...

For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy, because I promised you in marriage to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ (2 Corinthians 11:2).

Jesus Christ’s love as a model for marriage (Eph 5:25-33).

Jesus Christ is described as a bridegroom (John 3:29). John the Baptist describes Jesus Christ as the bridegroom and himself as the best man. See also (Mt 9:15 pp Mk 2:19-20 pp Lk 5:34-35; Mt 22:2; Mt 25:1-13).

But soon when Jesus Christ Yeshua returns we spiritual Virgins who are engaged to him, will meet him in the air...

After that, we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord (1 Thess 4:17).

In an instant, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed (1 Cor 15:52).

And the witnesses heard a loud voice from heaven saying, "Come up here." And they went up to heaven in a cloud as their enemies watched them (Rev 11:12).

Then we will Symbolicaly marry Jesus Christ Yeshua in the air and come back down to earth...

Revelation 21:2 I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Revelation 19:7 Let us rejoice and be glad and give Him the glory. For the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His bride has made herself ready.

Revelation 21:2 I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Revelation 21:9 Then one of the seven angels with the seven bowls full of the seven final plagues came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.”
10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the holy city of Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God,

.............................................................​............

WE HAVE EXAMINED GOD'S MARRIAGE TO ISRAEL, AND JESUS CHRIST YESHUA'S ENGAGMENT, AND FUTURE MARRIAGE TO THE CHURCH, SPIRITUAL VIRGIN BELIEVERS...

We have learned that God hates disloyalty and immorality with foreign God's or the Kings of this earth, and is jealous for his son Yeshua's future bride, Virgin Believers, the Church (2 Cor 11:2).

.............................................................​............

SO NOW WE CAN DETERMINE WHO BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS IS???

We true Christians are Virgins because we are not immoral with the Kings of the Earth and do not ride the Beast!!!

But there are Christians who are Harlots, who are immoral with the Kings of the Earth, and ride the Beast, obeying the Beasts commands over God's commands
and worshiping the United Nations part of a Harlot church CHURCH AND STATE!!!

Then one of the seven angels with the seven bowls came and told me, "Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits on many waters (Revelation 17:1).

All the nations have drunk the wine of the passion of her immorality. The kings of the earth were immoral with her, (Revelation 18:3).

The kings of the earth were immoral with her, and those who dwell on the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her immorality.” (Rev 17:2).

And the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness, where I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast (UNITED NATIONS) that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns (Rev 17:3).

CONCLUSION: God hated when his own wife Israel cheated on him, and was disloyal to him, and made alliances with foreign God's or Nations.

CONCLUSION: God hates when we Christians, Believers, the Church, cheat on his son Jesus Christ Yeshua. God hates disloyalty, God does not accept CHURCH AND STATE, we are no part of Satans Kingdom his World.

CONCLUSION: We are Virgin Christians, we the Church must not be immoral with the Kings, Governments, World leaders, United Nations or the Beast.

CONCLUSION: We must not recieve the (MARK OF THE BEAST) The mark symbolizes obeying the Beasts commands over God's commands and worship of the Beast. We must not bend our knee to the Beast or be immoral with the Beast. CHURCH AND STATE is immorality. The Church, Believers, Christians must not obey the beasts commands over Gods commands or worship the United Nations this is considered riding the Beast being immoral with the Beast it is Harlotry.

.............................................................​............

SO WHO IS BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS THAT RIDES THE BEAST IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION???

It is the VATICAN PAPACY and her daughters and all Churches or Christian believers that are immoral with the Kings of the earth or obey the Beasts commands over God's commands and worship the United Nations and ride the Beast.
They have the MARK OF THE BEAST!!!

.............................................................​............

IS BABYLON THE GREAT ALL RELIGIONS???

Babylon the great the mother of harlots is not all pagan religions as some christian cults teach!!!

Pagan religions were never right in God's eyes in the first place, they were never in a spiritual relationship with him or his son, so how could they become a harlot???

It is God's Church his people Christians who have apostasized and have played the harlot!!!

You can not be immoral if you are not in a spiritual relationship!!! And pagan religions have never been in a spiritual relationship with God or his son Yeshua!!!

The Church, Believers, are in a spiritual relationship with Yeshua, and if they cheat on him or are disloyal, and lose their spiritual virginity... Only then can they be called spiritually immoral a harlot!!!

THIS IS WHY GOD SAYS COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE!!!

Then I heard another voice from heaven say: “Come out of her, My people, so that you will not share in her sins or contract any of her plagues (Rev 18:4).


WE MUST LEAVE ALL HARLOT CHURCHES!!!

Lady Checkmate #fundie disqus.com

Lady Checkmate's headline: "Purpose: Faith & Religion"

Peace to you:

I want to speak from my heart and I pray that others understand and receive what I have to say with love and understanding. We're a Bible-believing "Christian Community" as stated in our channel's description. Respectfully, we don't value what the world thinks...not even a little bit. We only value what God says and what His word says. Elohim is the Authority here. I want to be as tactful as possible when I communicate that all false doctrines, false prophets, false teachers, anti-Christ agendas, mockings, sacrilegious comments, blasphemy, trolls, socks, trolling-socks on a mission to persecute Christians, etc. will be treated with the contempt they deserve via sanctions, etc. as that behavior vexes a righteous man's spirit and our community does not support that (which is clearly stated in our Community Guidelines, the link to those guidelines are also located in our channel's description).

A BIT OF HISTORY
Our community was started as a safe space for Bible believing Christians, those seeking Jesus Christ (with their whole hearts) and those seeking Truth, to fellowship in peace. When I first started on Disqus, there was no safe space for believers. Christians were heavily sanctioned, mocked, abused, persecuted, trolled, etc. on EVERY channel I visited. E-V-E-R-Y one---please note that I hold no ought against anyone as all is forgiven AND I understand that channel owners have a right to establish their community's purpose and assure it's maintained. Respect. Out of that abuse Faith & Religion was born. Therefore, we will not be used as a platform for trolls and their socks to persecute Christians, blaspheme, mock or stop us believers from fellowshipping in peace nor promote anything that carries the spirit of the anti-Christ. I, personally, DO NOT visit alt-left sites, religious sites nor denominational sites to troll nor harass them and never will. Christophobia, heresies, promotion of denominations/lies/cults, strife, sowing discord, blaspheming, etc. will NOT be tolerated here.

There are those who will love our community, be edified and blessed, some will realize that our community isn't a good fit for them and move on, which is fine. Those who decide to troll and violate our community guidelines and/or purpose will not be suffered nor allowed to continue.

We may not agree on everything, but I agree ALL of God's word (in context and rightly divided) is true.

God bless.

Community Guidelines:
https://disqus.com/home/channel/faithreligion/discussion/channel-faithreligion/channel_rules/

image

Bobby #fundie iidb.org

I am not in a cult. I am a born again, bible-believing Christian! That is not a cult! To all of you, I can say on judgment day that I told you that GOD was real, but you just mocked me. You will see that GOD is real when you see HIM as your judge. It will be too late for you to accept HIM then, so I urge you to please accept HIM now!

Lady Checkmate #fundie disqus.com

Lady Checkmate's headline: "Purpose: Faith & Religion"

Peace to you:

I want to speak from my heart and I pray that others understand and receive what I have to say with love and understanding. We're a Bible-believing "Christian Community" as stated in our channel's description. Respectfully, we don't value what the world thinks...not even a little bit. We only value what God says and what His word says. Elohim is the Authority here. I want to be as tactful as possible when I communicate that all false doctrines, false prophets, anti-Christ agendas, mockings, sacrilegious comments, blasphemy, trolls, socks, trolling-socks on a mission to persecute Christians, etc. will be treated with the contempt they deserve via sanctions, etc. as that behavior vexes a righteous man's spirit and our community does not support that (which is clearly stated in our Community Guidelines, the link to those guidelines are also located in our channel's description).

Our community was started as a safe space for Bible believing Christians, those seeking Jesus Christ (with their whole hearts) and those seeking Truth, to fellowship in peace. When I first started on Disqus, there was no safe space for believers. Christians were heavily sanctioned, mocked, abused, persecuted, trolled, etc. on EVERY channel I visited. E-V-E-R-Y one---please note that I hold no ought against anyone as all is forgiven AND I understand that channel owners have a right to establish their community's purpose and assure it's maintained. Respect. Out of that abuse Faith & Religion was born. Therefore, we will not be used as a platform for trolls and their socks to persecute Christians, blaspheme, mock or stop us believers from fellowshipping in peace nor promote anything that carries the spirit of the anti-Christ. I, personally, DO NOT visit alt-left sites to troll nor harass them and never will. Christophobia will NOT be tolerated here.

There are those who will love our community, be edified and blessed, some will realize that our community isn't a good fit for them and move on, which is fine. Those who decide to troll and violate our community guidelines will not be suffered nor allowed to continue.

We may not agree on everything, but I agree ALL of God's word (in context and rightly divided) is true.

God bless.

Triweekly Antifeminist #fundie triweeklyantifeminist.wordpress.com

The esteemed commentator Chinzork wrote:

For one of the first posts on this blog, I think you should debunk all of the common talking points against abolishing the AOC. The talking points get repetitive after a while, so an article debunking all of them sounds good.

Alright then, you got it. Herein is a compilation of the 15 most popular Blue Knight arguments, each argument followed by a thorough dissection thereof.

#1: Teenagers only become sexually mature after completing puberty around 16.

This is a wholly metaphysical proposition; a statement of belief. The Blue Knight starts out from the premise that a “completion of puberty” is a prerequisite for this nebulous state known as “sexual maturity,” then makes the circular argument that, because a 13-year-old has not yet completed puberty, he or she are thus sexually immature. “Sexual maturity” is an altogether arbitrary concept, and there isn’t any way to measure it or test it.

The Blue Knight makes it seem like he or she has objectively examined the issue and reached the conclusion that the age of “sexual maturity” just so happens to start when puberty is over; but there has not actually been any such objective examination of the issue – it simply has been assumed (axiomatically) that this is the case, and the whole “argument” proceeds from this unproven, arbitrary, and essentially metaphysical assumption.

The Blue Knight argument posits that 1) without “sexual maturity” sex is harmful and as such should be illegal; 2) a full completion of puberty is a prerequisite for “sexual maturity.” You may well give the following counter-argument, accepting — for the sake of discussion — the former premise, while rejecting the latter, and say thus: “children become sexually mature after completing adrenarche around the age of 9.”

Fundamentally, however, I have seen no evidence whatsoever that a “sexually immature” person is necessarily harmed (or victimized) by sexual relations merely due to being, according to whatever arbitrary definitions one uses, a “sexually immature” person. I suspect that, as a matter of fact, “sexually immature” people often enjoy sex and benefit from it even more than the so-called “sexually mature” folks. And again, the very distinction between “mature” and “immature” is altogether metaphysical in this regard, like the distinction between “pure” and “impure” or “holy” and “unholy.” It is hocus pocus; theology not-so-cleverly disguised as biology.

According to Blue Knight “morality,” an extremely fertile 15-year-old female should be prevented from sex (because “sexually immature”), while a 55-year-old female who has no ovaries left should be free do get fucked however she likes. It is very clear that such a “morality” is really an anti-morality; it is against what is biologically natural, it is against human nature specifically, it is degenerate, and it is detrimental to the interests of civilization and the TFR.

#2: The Age of Consent protects young people from doing things (sex) which they don’t really want to do.

I have seen no evidence that young people “do not really want” to have sex. On the contrary, I have seen, and keep seeing, that young people greatly desire to engage in sexual activities. That is why they engage in them. If 11-year-old Lucy is a horny little slut who enjoys giving blowjobs to all the boys in the neighborhood (many such cases), the Age of Consent does not protect her from something which she is reluctant about doing; it prevents her — by deterring men from approaching her — from doing something which she does in fact desire to do.

The Age of Consent is simply not needed. Think for a moment about young people. Do you not realize that they are just as eccentric, and can be just as wild, as older people? Why is it that when a 19-year-old chick randomly decides to have an orgy with 3 classmates after school, that is okay; but when a 12-year-old chick likewise randomly decides to do just that, oh noes, she is a “victim” of a horrible crime? We accept that each person is unique, independently of age; and we realize that there are children –not to mention young adults — who are very much into X while others are very much into Y. Why, then, should it be so “shocking” when it turns out that some children, and plenty of young teenagers, are very much into sex? Being interested in sex is arguably one of the most natural things there are, on par with being interested in food; certainly it is more natural than being interested in physics and chemistry and mathematics, right? If we accept the existence of child prodigies, children who are naturally driven to pursue all kinds of weird and special callings, why can’t we accept that there are indeed lots of children who pursue the very natural thing which is called “sex”?

Young teenagers have extremely high sex-drives, and the idea that they “do not really want sex” is contradicted every single moment. This is all the more remarkable given that we are living in a puritanical, prudish, sex-hostile, joy-killing, pedo-hysterical, infantilizing society; yet teenagers manage to overcome this intense anti-natural social programming, and do what nature commands them to do. “Child innocence” is a self-perpetuating myth, which society shoves down the throats of everyone all the time since age 0, and then uses this self-perpetuating myth which has been forcefully injected into society’s bloodstream to argue that “oh gee, young people just don’t really want to have sex.”

The entire entertainment establishment is concomitantly brainwashing children to remain in a state of arrested development aka infantilization, while conditioning the consumers of this “entertainment” to only find old women attractive. That’s one reason why I believe that we must create Male Sexualist aesthetics – we must reverse the brainwashing done to us by the entertainment complex. The television box is deliberately hiding from you the beauty and the passion of young teenage women, and is actively engineering your mind to only find older women attractive. And yet, despite there being a conspiracy by the entire society to stifle young sexuality, young sexuality lives on and thrives. Well, not really “thrives” — young sex is in decline, which conservative total dipshits blame on pornography rather than pointing the finger at themselves for propagating a climate that is extremely hostile to young sexuality — but it still goes on, to the consternation of all Puritans and Feminists everywhere.

Blue Knights claim that young teenagers are “peer-pressured into sex.” This assumes that your average teenager is asexual or close to being asexual, and thus would only engage in sexual activities if manipulated into it by his or her environment. The reality, meanwhile, is that those 12-year-old sluts who have orgies after school time (or during school time) are often as horny as a 16-year-old male. They are not being pressured into sex – they are being sexually restrained by a society that is terrified of young sexuality.

#3: Young people who have sex grow up to regret it.

First of all, when the whole of society is determined to portray young sex as a horrid thing, it is no wonder that people — especially women, who possess a herd mentality — arrive at the conclusion that they’ve been harmed by it. If young sexuality were presented in a positive light by the media-entertainment-state bureaucracy-academia complex, people would be more inclined to remember it fondly than regretfully.

The second thing is that it doesn’t even matter. People feel regret about doing all kinds of things – so what? Does that mean that for each and every case of such “regret,” society needs to go on a witch-hunt for “victimizers” in order to inflict punishments upon them? It’s time to grow the fuck up and accept the fact that people sometimes do things which later on they regret doing, and that this is an integral part of life, and that the state has no business protecting the civilians from “bad feelings.” That’s literally what this Blue Knight argument boils down to – “the state should punish men because women experience negative feelings due to their own behavior.” No, women should learn to deal with their bad fee-fees without demanding the state to find “abusers” to penalize. We are living in a totalitarian emotocracy (rule by emotions) and I’m sick of it.

Also: what is the difference between feeling regret about fucking at 13 and feeling regret about fucking at 17? Women generally feel bad about promiscuous sex (hence the phenomenon of “regret rape” false accusations), and they feel it at the age of 21 as much as at the age of 11; actually, older women may be even more regretful than young ones about sexual activity, because they’v been longer exposed to Puritan-Feminist brainwashing, and because their biological clock ticks much faster. So, according to the victimization-based morality of Blue Knights, men who sleep with 23-year-olds should also be punished. Again, the Blue Knights want men imprisoned solely due to some vague negative fee-fees felt by some women. This is emotocracy in action. No wonder that testosterone and sperm counts are in sharp decline – society is ruled by catladies, and is structured according to catlady morality.

The state simply should not protect people from the consequences of their own behavior – and here “protect” means “punish men,” and “consequences” means “vague negative fee-fees.” Our society is severely infantilized by the victimization-based morality, and infantilization is degenerate.

#4: Young sexual activity is correlated with many bad things.

That may or may not be so, but what are the implications? Generally, people who are natural risk-takers will do all kinds of things, some of which may be positive, others negative, and still others just neutral. The conservadaddy making the “correlated with bad things” argument implies that punishing men (and women) for young sex would somehow reduce those negative things supposedly correlated with young sex. That, of course, is bullshit. If a risk-taking 12-year-old decides to have an orgy with her classmates, she will remain just as much of a risk-taker whether or not her classmates or other people are punished. Depriving her of the opportunity to take “sexual risks” won’t diminish whatever other risk-taking behaviors she is prone to.

The thing about Blue Knight arguments is that they aren’t arguments at all. There is no logic in stating “young sex is correlated with X, and X is bad” and then using that to support the criminalization of young sex. This is the same logic used by pedagogues to justify pedagoguery, only in reverse: the pedagogues argue that education is correlated with intelligence (as measured by IQ tests), then use that claim to imply that education makes people smarter, and therefore everyone should undergo education. This is a wholly fallacious argument. At the risk of sounding like a spergtastic redditor goon – correlation does not imply causation. The Blue Knight argument is not an argument at all. It’s plainly illogical.

By the way, I’d say that there are plenty of negative things correlated with young sexlessness – such as growing up to be a school shooter, for instance. You’ll never hear Blue Knights discussing that.

#5: Some Statutory Rape legislation allows teenagers to have sex among themselves, and only prohibits older people from predating upon them.

This argument typifies what I call the “victimization-based morality” aka “victimology.” The people making it assume — against all the available evidence — that within any relationship between a young person and an old person, the former is necessarily victimized by the latter.

The individuals making this argument (usually you’ll hear it from women) will often tell you that it is “creepy” for older men to be interested in young women. They will pretend that young women are exclusively attracted to young men, when in reality they are attracted to men of all ages – to men as old as their father as well as to their classmates. My own life experience confirms this, as I personally, in-real-life, know of women who fucked significantly older men when they were aged 14-15. It was all passionate and voluntary and enthusiastic, believe me. And the many accounts you can find on the internet leave no doubt that it’s common for young women, pubescent and even prepubescent, to be sexually attracted to significantly older men.

It is important to stress the point that the women themselves pursue and desire those sexual relationships, because the Blue Knights have created the false impression that the entire argument for abolishing the AOC rests on our attraction to young women, an attraction which according to the Blue Knights is completely unreciprocated; whereas in reality, it is incredibly common for young women to initiate sexual relationships with men as old as their father. It takes two to tango – and the tango is quite lively indeed. Given the sexual dynamics elucidated by Heartiste, wherein women are sexually attracted to “Alphas,” it makes perfect sense that young women would be sexually attracted to older men even more-so than they are sexually attracted to their peers, since older men possess a higher social status than young ones, relatively speaking. Again, life experience confirms this.

Thus, there is no sense in punishing old men who fuck young women, unless, that is, one embraces the whole “taken advantage of” argument, an argument which relies on a denial of the biological and empirical reality on the ground, and simply defines (as an axiom) all relationships in which there is a “power imbalance” as “exploitative.” That is, there is no evidence that any “exploitation” is taking place in such relationships, and Blue Knights assume its existence because they refuse to believe that young women can be horny for older men.

Also, the Blue Knights will bring up argument #1 to “substantiate” argument #5, and argue that due to the “sexual immaturity” of the younger party, the older party must be forbidden from being in a sexual relationship with it altogether – because otherwise there may be “exploitation.” Again, the moment you realize that a 12-year-old female can be as horny as a 16-year-old male (who are, needless to say, extremely horny), the idea that the slut is prone to be “sexually exploited” by a sexual relationship with a man who is statistically likely to be high-status (and thus naturally sexually attractive to her) become absurd. And as we’ve seen, the whole “sexually immature” line is ridiculous – it has never been shown that maturity, for whatever it’s even worth, is reached at 16. In saner, de-infantilized times, 12-year-olds were considered to be mature, were treated as such, and evidently were mature. Hence my saying: “child (and teen) innocence is a self-perpetuating myth.”

#6: You only support abolishing the AOC because you’re a pervert.

A common ad hominem. Now, it is expected that possession of a naturally high sex-drive would be correlated with sexual realism (i.e. being woke about the reality of sex), because a high sex-drive individual would be much likelier than a low sex-drive individual to spend hours upon hours thinking about the subject of sex in its various and manifold aspects. But that only goes to prove that it is us, the “perverts,” who were right all along about sex – and not the catladies and the asexuals who haven’t ever thought about sex in realistic terms because they never had any incentive to do so. Our “bias” is a strength, not a weakness.

There really isn’t anything else to add here. When they accuse you of being a pervert, just agree & amplify humorously: “oh yeah, I jerk off 8 times each and every morning before getting out of bed – problem, puritan?”

#7: You only support abolishing the AOC because you are unattractive and trying to broaden your options.

Also known as “projection.” Well, actually, there also are men who make this argument and not just dried-out wrinkly femihags, so let’s address it as if a man said it. Again, this is an ad hominem that presupposes that your motivation to engage in sexual politics of the Male Sexualist variety is merely your desire to improve your personal situation in life. Now, even if it were true, that 1) wouldn’t matter, because what matters is the arguments made and not the ostensible motivation behind them; 2) there is nothing essentially wrong with trying to improve one’s situation in life – and “there are no rules in war and love.”

By the way, abolishing the AOC, by itself, is not going to get all of the incels laid over-night. There are other measures that must and will be taken to ensure sexual contentment for all of society. Abolishing the AOC is a crucial part of the program, but it’s not the single purpose of Male Sexualism, in my view. What I personally would like to see in society is maximal sexual satisfaction for everyone. There are many ways to try reaching that point.

Anyway, the point is that “you are motivated by a desire to increase your options” is not even true regarding most of the prominent Male Sexualists. Presumably. I won’t speak for anyone else, but I’m married, and very satisfied with my great wife.

14376_7
Big Beautiful Women are not for everyone, but I’m cool with it. In this scene from the Israeli film “Tikkun,” my wife — who is an actress — plays a prostitute. Sorry, Nathan Larson, I’m not sending you her nudes; this one should suffice.
As a matter of fact, as I wrote in one of the last posts on DAF, my own kind of activism would not be mentally possible for me if I were not sexually satisfied. I’m not driven by a personal sexual frustration; on the contrary, as I keep saying, what drives me is essentially a spiritual impulse, which has awoken to the extent it has as a result of getting laid.

#8: If you support the abolition of the AOC, it’s because you’re a libertine who believes in “everything goes.”

Some Male Sexualists are, unmistakably, libertines – and proud if it. However, others are faithful Muslims. The notion that opposition to the AOC must necessarily be tied to libertinism is nonsense. Look at traditional European societies 350-300 years ago – almost none had an AOC at all, yet they were hardly “libertines.”

This Blue Knight line is somewhat related to the “LGBTP” meme – they think that we are Progressives trying to advocate for pedophilia as part of a Progressive worldview. I think that it’s safe to say that no one in Male Sexualism belongs to the Progressive camp, which is the camp where Feminists and SJWs reside. That said, some versions of libertinism (sexual libertarianism?) aren’t so bad, anyway. As TheAntifeminist said in a comment at Holocaust21:

[M]y utopia as a male sexualist would be somewhere like 1970’s Sweden or Holland.

This is a legitimate view within the movement.

#9: If young people are allowed to have sex, their innocence will be ruined; sex is exclusively for adults.

Here we see the Enlightenment-spawned Romantic idealization of “childhood” as a period that, due to whatever values one attaches to it, must be preserved against encroachment and incursion from the “fallen world of adults.” This is the Romantic basis of modern-day infantilism.

It used to be understood that the purpose of “childhood” is growing up into adulthood. The so-callef ‘child’ should be made into an adult, should be given adult tasks, adult responsibilities, and — all the sooner — adult rights. Today, society does just the opposite, and infantilizes people with a historically unparalleled intensity. That’s the result of elevating “childhood” into an ideal form. No wonder that now, it’s not just teenagers who are called “children,” but people in their 20s. That’s the process of infantilization which society goes through.

As usual, conservative dipshits, addicted to their own Romantic conceptions, claim that “actually, children are not nearly infantile enough these days.” They don’t see the pervasive “kid culture” that has completely zombified kids into being basically a bunch of drooling retards; no, what the prudish-types care about is “MOAR INNOCENCE,” as usual.

Fact is, kids today are not shown anything about the real world; a whole culture of idiocy, blindness, silliness, and clownishness has been erected like walls all around them. It is the culture of the TV channels for kids, the culture of Toy-Shops, the culture of child-oriented video games. Muh “birds and bees.”

Look, I get the temptation to indulge in infantilism. In fact, I’m probably a hypocrite, because I haven’t yet begun doing anything to de-infantilize my own 19-month-old son. He, like most toddlers, also watches the stupid TV shows and has all of these damn toys all over the place. It’s not easy resisting the ways of the system. But the real problem is that society is not structured in a way that allows children to be de-infantilized. When people only get a job at 18 or at 21 or they are NEETs, and there is an age-ist Prussian School System that is mandatory and which brainwashes its prisoners to believe that “school is good,” and Feminist careerism is pushed on all potential mothers by the media-entertainment-state bureaucracy-academia complex, it’s no wonder that people are very immature nowadays. That only goes to show how radically modern society must be transformed, in my opinion.

To get back on point: “childhood” and “adulthood” are both fictional concepts. These may be useful fictions, but they are still fictions. The telos of childhood is adulthood. It’s a transitional state, and if we must choose an arbitrary age when childhood should be officially and finally over, that age should be 9. That is, if we discover that 10-year-olds behave in an infantile manner nowadays, it’s because their parents — and, crucially, society at large — have not properly de-infantilized them. It’s a wholly artificial state of affairs, rooted in Romantic delusions.

Young people should have sex, because young people should experience real life in order to become functional adults; and an integral part of real life is — and should be — the sex life. Far from constituting a “problem” for young people, sexual intercourse is one effective way for getting young people to see the broader picture of reality. Deprived of sex, ‘kids’ grow up with warped and unrealistic notions about reality, and suffer dysfunction as adults. They don’t get to learn what’s important and what’s unimportant in life when they should learn it – young. Getting laid gives you a mentally clear vision of priorities in life, gives you a clarity of mind which allows you to deeply reflect on what’s actually going on in the world. Sex is necessary for young people, whose one and only task is to — repeat after me — become adults. Sex is a fundamental part of a fulfilled adult life.

#10: Young sex leaves young people traumatized.

No, it doesn’t. The ‘trauma’ stems entirely from being repeatedly and incessantly told by Blue Knights (Puritans, Feminists, Conservadaddies, Catladies, etc.) that a horrible crime has been committed against you by a wicked individual, that you have been “taken advantage of,” “deprived of innocence,” “ruined forever,” “sexually exploited,” “abused,” and the rest of the victimological jargon. The sex itself and the relationship itself feel good, and are indeed good biologically and psychologically; they bring fulfillment to one’s life and a satisfaction for one’s fresh and burning biological needs. The whole “trauma,” such as it is, is inflicted by society on the younger party, due to society’s strict adherence to a victimization-based morality.

That’s why I call for a Moral Revolution. This is not a troll. As long as people adhere to a victimization-based morality that sees “power imbalances” as inherently and fundamentally victimizing, people won’t be able to think logically about young sexuality. The current prevailing system of social morality must be replaced with a new one. Once that is achieved, all of this “trauma” — which is inflicted by the Blue Knights on horny young people — will dissipate and evaporate altogether

Young people greatly enjoy sex, and will go to great lengths to achieve it, overcoming the very many mechanisms of sexual oppression established by Blue Knights.

#11: Young people don’t know what’s good for them, and therefore need to be protected from risky situations.

If young people don’t know what’s good for them, it’s because society itself has successfully destroyed their ability to know what’s good for them. I mean, by the age of 10, a person should have a basic idea about what life is all about. If that’s not so for most or all people, something is deeply rotten in society.

And the reason for this indeed being the modern state of affairs is exactly because the protectiveness of parents, combined with wholesale cultural infantilization, has rendered young people incapable of independent thought. Thus, instead of “MOAR PROTECTION,” young people need infinitely less of it – so that they will learn to deal with reality.

And at any rate, sex is not as risky as the Blue Knights claim it is. They scare people about STDs, but then the solutions to that problem are well-known, and are completely independent of age – if instructed properly, and possessing a responsible personality, a 10-year-old can behave just as carefully — if not much more carefully — than many 40-year-olds.

Then there is the issue of pregnancy. First of all, what I wrote in the above paragraph about responsiblity applies here as well – the pregnancy-avoidance methods are well known. Secondly however, there’s a great differences in here: pregnancy is not a disease. It’s not a bad thing, but a good thing. I support young pregnancy and young parenthood. That is the primary “risk” which Blue Knight scare-mongers warn about, and I don’t see it as a risk at all. Instead of being protected from reproduction, people need to be instructed about how to reproduce. I once wrote, trollishly as usual, that if there should be any schools at all, then the “homework” of young females should be getting impregnated. The essence beneath the statement is on-point: pregnancy is good, because reproduction is good; fertility is good, while sterility is bad.

So, in my view, young people should not be protected from the “risk” of pregnancy. They should be instructed about it, made to comprehend the how’s and why’s of it, and then allowed to use their mind-faculties to figure-out what should or should not be done. That’s the gist of any de-infantilization program.

#12: Young people don’t desire to have sex.

Young people do, as a matter of actual fact, very much desire to have sex; much more-so, even, than many old people.

#13: If the AOC is abolished, parents will no longer be able to control their children.

What is the purpose — the very raison d’etre — of parental control over children? To turn children into functional adults, so as to allow them to form families and continue the bloodline. This cannot be achieved by hindering the ability of children (or “children”) to engage in the one thing that marks the arrival of maturity – sexual activity. Sexual activity is the thing that most unequivocally transforms an un-developed person into a developed person. Since the purpose of parenthood is the creation of adults, parenthood should serve to (at the very least) give-way in face of the natural maturation of children, rather than artificially prolonging “childhood” in order to extend the period of parental control. Parental control is only good insofar as it allows parents to facilitate the de-infantilization of their children; when, as in our deplorable times, parental control is used to exacerbate the infantilization of children, it is in the interest of society to tell parents to fuck off.

Since parents these days abuse their parental power and authority by artificially prolonging the infantilization of their own children, the abolition of the anti-natural AOC is exactly a thing that is needed in order to put parental control in check. The power of parents vis-a-vis their children must be drastically reduced when the child reaches the age of 8. That’s usually the age when sex, reproduction, and marriage all become relevant. If you want to argue that 8 is still too young, perhaps (maybe) we can compromise on 10. Point is, between 8 and 10, parental power should be dramatically restricted.

As a 23-year-old father, I can tell you that parents and family in general continue to significantly shape your life long after you cease being under “parental control.” An abolition of the AOC won’t result in all teenagers running away from home never to be seen again. But it will, God willing, result in the establishment of many new young households. That is something that we should strive for – getting teenagers to form families. That is the meaning of creating adults.

#14: Without an AOC, there will be grey-zone situations of child prostitution.

Child prostitution should be legal.

#15: Abolishing the AOC will increase pre-marital sex, which is a bad thing.

First of all, I couldn’t care less about whether or not sex is “pre-marital.” I had fucked my wife and impregnated her before we were married; so what? What matters is the bottom line: the creation of a patriarchal and stable household.

The second thing is, people today marry extremely late, and many forgo marriage altogether. This is related to the war against young sexuality: not reproducing when young, people struggle to reproduce when old; and living in sexlessness until the late teens or early twenies (or until later than that), a total sexual dysfunction takes over society, and people find it difficult to form long-lasting relationships at all. Young love shines the brightest, the younger the love, the brighter it shines; couples who start young last longer than those who start old.

Puritanical Blue Knights have brought about the plummeting of the TFR in Western Society. In my view, pre-marital sex should be accepted, as long as everyone involved understands that the purpose of any “romance” is the formation of a household. Early teenage marriage should be encouraged, and if early teenage sexual intercourse facilitates that, so be it – it’s all the better. It is not sex that is harmful to young people; sex is good for them. It is sexlessness that is the central and overarching problem of our times.

In conclusion
Man, that was exhausting, I gotta say. But hopefully, this post will serve as a guide to answering Blue Knight talking points. All of you must remember this: before you can annihilate Blue Knightism, you must mentally internalize what it is that we Male Sexualists believe in. In moments of uncertainty and doubt, consult this post, and you may find the core idea needed for you in order to formulate your own Male Sexualist position about any given issue.

There is a new revolution on the horizon. I don’t know how long I personally have left in this world. Perhaps the intelligence operatives threatening me will decide against killing me, or maybe they’ll slay me this very night. Who knows. What I want you to do is to take the ideas provided on DAF and now on TAF, understand them, and spread them. This is not a cult of personality or a money-making scheme. This is a political movement that has its own ideas, ideas that may initially appear groundbreaking but which in reality may also be primordial, ideas which we hope will be implemented in reality – be it 30, 80, or 360 years from now. At some point in the future, somewhere on the face of our planet, there will be a Male Sexualist country.

If during the next half-decade we manage to bring into the fold both edgy 4channers and 8channers (“meme lords”), and serious, intelligent, competent, affluent, deep-thinking, and strategizing supporters, we will be able within several decades to achieve our political objective.

Craig Read #conspiracy craigread.com

Earth day is just another propaganda day in the war by the eco-cult on modernity and civilization. Supposedly on Earth day you are mandated to partake in a task which will help clean up or ‘repair’ our sorrowful mother earth, while contemplating in a heroic pose no doubt, the vast destruction inflicted by the hairless monkey upon the soft, defenseless outer tissue of goddess Gaia. These contemplations must include the destruction of civilization, modern methods of energy usage, or even perhaps the utter annihilation of mankind [or woman-kind, hybrid-kind, and hermaphro-kind].

This is the true purpose of Earth day and the associated rituals of mourning for mother earth. Guilt. Self loathing. Disgust with all things modern. Pagan cultism. A yearning for pre-modern and anti-Christian feelings and reverence for all things non-human. A desire to return to Rousseau’s romantic illusion of an old world order without society, civilization, constraints or human created paradigms. Earth day is a pagan day and paganism for all its historic importance and curiosity is incompatible with modernity.

The modern world was not created by earth-loving fanatics. Civilisation and its vibrant complexity became quite incompatible with pagan cults and superstition. Christian and scientific rational thought place man somewhere between the beasts and gods – imperfect but not a animal. Pagan earth cults submit man to nature. Christian rationality submits nature to man in a complex and evolving relationship.

Erick Erickson #fundie redstate.com

In his speech to the United Nations General Assembly today the President of the United States declared that the future does not belong to practicing Christians. Already, the media and the left are in full denial, probably based on their general lack of understanding of theology. This would have been a gaffe had Mitt Romney said it. But with Barack Obama, he’s just speaking bold truths. His bold truth declares that the future does not belong to practicing Christians.

Pay careful attention to what he says.

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied. Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims, and Shiite pilgrims. It is time to heed the words of Gandhi: “Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.” Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies, and that is the vision we will support.

Now, that’s the full paragraph so no one can claim I took him out of context.

But consider this.

It is an orthodox Christian belief that Mohammed is not a prophet. Actual Christians, as opposed to many of the supposed Christians put up by the mainstream media, believe that Christ is the only way to salvation. Believing that is slandering Mohammed. That’s just a fact. If you don’t believe me, you go into the MIddle East and proclaim Christ is the way, the truth, and the life and see what happens to your life.

Then Barack Obama went on to say “Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied.” Note he says we cannot “slander the prophet of Islam” but it’s only the image of Christ in the next sentence — not actually Christ himself desecrated. If this is so, why does Barack Obama’s government continue funding the National Endowment for the Arts, which funded Christ in piss, the Virgin Mary painted in dung, etc.?

Lady Checkmate #fundie disqus.com

Lady Checkmate's headline: "We may not be alone, former Pentagon UFO investigator says"

We were never alone. The Ancient of Days created us for Himself. There is NO such thing as aliens, but there are angels and demons(fallen angels). I implore you, do NOT entertain demons nor anything not of God. Seek God, watch and pray.

(Fox News story: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2017/12/21/may-not-be-alone-former-pentagon-ufo-investigator-says.html)

Mick Williams:
I found some interesting data about UFOs.
Religion
Belief in the paranormal exceeds belief in God, but with increasing faith comes decreasing belief in the paranormal.
Year
UFO sightings are trending way up, from 1500 in 1995 to 8500 in 2015.
Media
Film and TV fare are increasingly apocalyptic. The upcoming generation is extremely gullible; the thought of UFOs coming to solve their problems has high appeal.
Satan
From his standpoint, it makes sense to foster a belief in space aliens as saviors. People with bizarre leftist beliefs like global warming are easy prey for their sudden appearance--at a time when Christians have just vacated. These 'aliens' will probably promote the rise of Antichrist, but exact events aren't spelled out for us.

Robin Egg:
I have never understood some people's obsession with UFO'S. There are radio programs that devote their air time to sightings and conspiracy theories that the government is aware of their existence and is covering it up. Are there not enough real problems in existence without creating new ones? I, too, believe that these things are occultic in origin. It is disturbing that most of the sightings over the years are in the United States. Excellent scripture references, Lady Checkmate. I agree one hundred percent.

Lady Checkmate:
Do NOT be deceived.
2 Corinthians 11:13-15 (KJV)
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
Matthew 24:24 (KJV)
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Never Forget:
Never Forget that the Pentagon lost TRILLIONS of YOUR dollars and is unable to account for it. They were not held accountable and got away with it. I don't trust any of these people who work for the government. What if you were unable to account for $100 to the IRS? How would that go over?

Lady Checkmate:
Hi NeverForget. You've been commenting here for about four months. While we appreciate the support, I must reiterate (because it's stated in our channel's description above), that we're a Bible-believing "Christian Community". Respectfully, we don't care what the world thinks...not even a little bit. We only value what God says and what His word says. Elohim is the Authority here. I want to be as tactful as possible when I communicate that all false doctrines, false prophets, anti-Christ agendas will be treated with the contempt they deserve via sanctions, etc. as our community does not support that (which is clearly stated in our community guidelines, the link to those guidelines are located in our channel's description). Our community was started for Bible believing Christians, those seeking Jesus Christ (with their whole hearts) and those seeking Truth, not as a platform for trolls and their socks to persecute Christians, blaspheme, mock or stop us believers from fellowshipping in peace nor anything that carries the spirit of the anti-Christ.
There are those who will love our community, be edified and blessed, some will realize that our community isn't a good fit for them and move on, which is fine. Those who decide to troll and violate our community guidelines will not be suffered nor allowed to continue.
We may not agree on everything, but I agree on ALL of God's word in context, rightly divided.
God bless.

Garvan Ellison #fundie garvanellison.blogspot.com

Twelve Myths of Modern Science
As a biochemist, I have concluded that the greatest hoaxes perpetrated by the contemporary scientific establishment are:

1. Evolution.
Never observed, and therefore not capable of being classed as proper science.

2. Old Earth theory.
In spite of the Word of God, and all the geological evidence, the Establishment tries to convince us the earth is billions of years old in order to justify their theory of evolution.

3. Heliocentrism.
Watch the sun. Observe it with your eyes, and trust your instincts. And now tell me the earth is hurtling past the sun at close to the speed of light.

4. Solid Earth theory.
Disproved by geologists in Siberia in 2002. Findings covered up by the Establishment.

5. Existence of the Higgs Particle.
Entirely speculative. Based on theory, not proper science. Disgraceful, self-serving excuse for money-draining experiment in Geneva which jeopardises the future of mankind.

6. Vaccination.
So let's get this straight... to stop someone getting a disease you inject it straight into their bloodstream??? Yeah, WHATEVER!

7. Moon Landings.
Yip - look at the photos and see 'astronauts' leap out of their own shadows!!! In other photos, apparently flags can cast shadows but 'astronauts' can't!!!!!

8. Moon determines tides.
This particular myth was spread to science to boost the pagan cult of the moon god, which stems from the ancient belief that the moon had some sort of magical power. It is a light in the sky given by God as a gift to mankind - nothing more, nothing less.

9. Smoking causes cancer .
How the drug corporations love this one!!! An opportunity to make megabucks through the marketing of anti-addiction drugs!!! Odd that for centuries the Red Indians used tobacco to fight colds and flus... ie. it was a HEALTH BENEFIT not a HEALTH RISK. But apparently western 'science' knows best.

10. Satellites
Atheists mock Christians for believing in young earth creationism - yet these very same people believe there are thousands of little metal boxes buzzing over the earth communicating signals to computers everywhere!!!! Think about this rationally, folks. If something is put into outer space, it will float away. It will not simply hover above the earth. What a stupid and nonsensical idea!!

11. Psychiatry
A money-earning fad for the pharmaceutical industry and for failed 'doctors'. Psychiatry kills, simple as that. ALL PSYCHIATRISTS ARE BREAKING THE HYPOCRATIC OATH.

12. Global Warming
How could we forget this one? This is pure junk science. Thirty years ago scientists were telling us we were about to enter a new ice age, and now apparently the earth's temperature is rocketing!!!! What utter nonsense. Almighty God determines the temperature of this planet, and the only 'global warming' it will experience will come when he decides to burn it all in an almighty fireball, just like He says He will in the Bible.

OUR GOD IS AN AWESOME GOD. PRAISE!!!!!!!!!

WARHEAD #fundie spikedhumor.com

This was so stupid, that I had to register and comment on it. This little comic is the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. To be an atheist is fuckin' stupid. "Hey, we were created from some big bang and then we evolved!" Ummm that's pretty fuckin stupid. Or "I came from fucking monkeys!" God or not, I'm not an ancestor of a monkey. There are some pretty bullshit religions out there but Christianity has a lot of fact to it. Hell, even some scientists are leaning toward Christianity rather than science because some science is bullshit. That comic took almost everything said out of context. Christians are not like that. If they are, then they're fuckin stupid but I know I'm not. I don't force my religion on other people. Christians also don't treat their wives like that. That was stupid to put in there. The "Under God" thing, if you don't like it, leave America you fucking idiot. No one's stopping you. All you fucking people who hate our president for giving you freedom, go to some other country and get killed for not worshiping their god or something. You all love it here and don't want to leave, but insist on saying that our president is stupid. You're a damn idiot. Get the fuck out of America. On another note, God gave humans the choice of believing or not. He knows what will happen but wants us to see for ourselves. And Jesus dying was meant to fogive our sins, it was what he did that for, not the fact that he did it. I don't know where you get it saying the Earth was flat, but whatever. Just remember humans thought the Earth was flat for a LONG time. In conclusion, all you atheists are retarded. Geez. At least HAVE a god.

Brother Of Yeshua #fundie brotherofyeshua.blogspot.co.uk

When the question is asked: What Would Jesus Do? One of the primary answers should be that Jesus would neither lie about God, and neither would he put lying words in the mouth of God. Why? When you embrace or promote lying words which you attribute to God, then you make yourself an apostate to the Truth and TheWay. Yet today modern Christians not only promote lying words which they decisively attribute to the words spoken by God -- a sin that alienates them from the Truth and TheWay that the historical man Jesus taught -- but many of them accept the lies of Islam and the Muslim lies of abomination.

In the article An Inconvenient Truth which is written by an author of the original Gospels, it is demonstrated that all the religions of man have been corrupted -- that Christianity came into being because of the corruptions of Judaism -- that Islam came into being because of the corruptions of Christianity -- and that while mankind possesses the innate ability to Know and Embody the Truth of all Truths, he perpetually embraces and adheres to the lying dogma of men. Therefore the question is posed: What Would Jesus do? Or Say? And on the issue of embracing Muslims, the question must be asked: Has Donald Trump represented the answers to these important questions?

(...)

The sin that has caused the Christian world to be cast into a spiritual diaspora of abject ignorance, as well as the lies of abomination found in the Qur'an which has been embraced and promoted by many who portray themselves as Muslims, is with a little effort on the part of the believers easily proven to be false. In witness to the Truth of all Truths set forth by the author of An Inconvenient Truth, all of mankind has the innate ability to enter the Presence of God, and confirm the Ultimate Truth of all Truths.

But to accomplish this, the seeker must totally Turn to the Light and seek the Truth and the Kingdom. Which means that they must reject the lies of their religious leaders and authorities. Which means that those who are portrayed as radical Muslims must repent of their evil ways of rape, torture and murder -- while those portrayed as "moderate Muslims" must stand in opposition to both the radical Muslims, as well as the lies of abomination inserted into the Qur'an by past religious leaders and authorities.

Which means that it isn't enough for those portrayed as "moderate Muslims" not to slay the unbelievers as commanded in the Qur'an -- because as Muslims, they must denounce and vehemently oppose those who embrace and promote the lies of Islam which have been inserted into the Qur'an by counterfeit religious leaders in the past. The silence of the "moderate Muslims" envelops all of Islam in a cloud or Spiritual Ignorance and Separation from the very God they call upon and worship.

The ONLY solution to what is portrayed as Radical Islam, is a Spiritual Solution. And this Spiritual Solution is Universal to all of mankind. It is True from a religious perspective -- it is True from a philosophical perspective -- it is True from a secular perspective -- from an academia-educational perspective -- and, what can rightly be portrayed, a human perspective. And it will remain impossible to resolve the conflict and human suffering, until this Universal Spiritual Solution is Resolved.

The suffering imposed upon innocent people by what has been portrayed as radical Islam, cannot be resolved through ideology, philosophy, diplomacy, military conflict or the empowerment of what has been termed "moderate Muslims". Why? So long as Islam maintains that the Qur'an is the verbatim word of Allah dictated through Mohammad directly to mankind -- and that as stated in the Qur'an, Allah requires all True Muslims to perpetuate violence upon unbelievers and infidel -- then those who fail to fulfill the commandments of Allah in the Qur'an, must be seen as the unbelievers and infidel who fail to fulfill the required commandments and will of Allah. And from this Quaranic perspective, what is often portrayed as moderate Muslims, are merely part of the body of infidels who oppose the will of Allah. Why would those portrayed as moderate Muslims be seen as spiritual infidels?

Because it is the objective of the original teachings of Islam to seek and know the Truth of all Truths -- and to remain silent when others who portray themselves as Muslims are murdering innocent people in the name of Allah, is apostasy against the God they claim to worship. And the fact that it is within the innate ability for all of mankind to acquire and prove the Truth of all Truths as set forth and witnessed to in An Inconvenient Truth, then all of mankind are responsible for seeking that Truth -- i.e., "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have been guilty of sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin" (John 15:22). With this declaration of Truth, all are responsible.

As the divine offspring of Creator-God who was formed in His Image, mankind has the potential to Know the Truth of all Truths -- receiving this Great Body of Truth Directly from the Source of all Truth. Therefore, the only obstacle that inhibits mankind from the knowledge of the Truth, is the limits he imposes upon himself. Man possesses the undeveloped resources of mind to know all truths -- and he is not in need of other men to teach him. And from the perspective of the core teachings of both Christianity and Islam, it is a sin to seek out any teacher other than the True Prophet. And with respect to man's search for Truth, one of the greatest obstacles to acquiring the Truth of all Truths, is the baggage of man-made dogma instituted by pseudo-teachers that inhibits man in his journey, and obstructs the path of the prodigal son's return to the Kingdom from which he originally emerged.

The Rule of Divine Law is this: In order to Possess the Truth, you must yourself be Possessed by the Truth, and the Truth alone. Therefore, anyone willing to permit themselves to surrender to the Light and become an expression of Higher Truth, will Know the Truth of all Truths that breaks the shackles of spiritual bondage, and sets them free to enter the Edenic Kingdom of Origination. From a Jewish perspective, this Return to Eden can be portrayed as the Promised Land/Spiritual Jerusalem -- from a Christian perspective, the Kingdom -- and from a Muslim perspective, the journey to the Distant Mosque in Spiritual Mecca.

Throughout the history of mankind, what can be called religion has always been the tool of charlatan priests/clergy and despotic rulers to exert and maintain control over the thinking and lives of the masses of people. By provoking fear in the people and the threat of death and eternal damnation in hell, the priests/clergy and despotic rulers were able to maintain almost absolute control over the people. This was true when the scriptures were originally written. Just as it remains true even today.

From a Christian perspective, it is easily demonstrated that the scriptures contained in the Bible were corrupted. Why were the scriptures corrupted? In order to make them support the carnal and political agenda of the ruling classes. This fact was true of Judaism, it was true of Christianity, and in like manner it is also true of Islam. And while on the surface these three religions may appear different, at their core they are not only one and the same, but they have been imbued with the same spiritual purpose and objective. And if a Jew, a Christian, or a Muslim can remove the man-made dogma within which their respective religions are immersed, each can equally find the Truth of all Truths that will set them free and permit them to enter into Life.

(..)

The Source of Islamic beliefs across the spectrum of all sects and groups who portray themselves as Muslim, is the Qur'an -- and if the Qur'an has been so corrupted that some Muslims are compelled to inflict suffering, harm and even death upon others in accord with what they believe is the words and commandments of God, then the Qur'an itself is a lying abomination to the Truth. And unless those who are portrayed as "moderate Muslims" actively oppose the killing in the Name of God, then they are as guilty as those who interpret and promote the Qur'an in this manner.

Further, when Christians embrace Muslims without actively objecting to the lies of abomination that were written into the Qur'an my men as originating with God, then these Christians are as guilty for the blood of slain innocents as all Muslims are. Jesus would never have embraced a people who promoted lies attributed to God that commands believers to "Slay them [unbelievers] wherever you find them.." Not only would Jesus vehemently oppose such an abomination, but he would have opposed and condemned those who called themselves his followers, who did not themselves vehemently denounce such lying statements being attributed to the words of God.

There are sufficient biblical texts and pre-Nicene Church writings to easily prove that the Gospels were corrupted in the fourth century in order to promote Roman Paganism. Which means that any sincere seeker of Truth can prove the truth and the fact that the Emperor Constantine who was not even a Christian, ordered the words spoken by God to mankind to be altered from their original context, and can work around the corruptions of the Gospel text by the counterfeit authorities of the Church. Which means that so long as these Christians denounce the corruptions, that they can continue to use the Gospels as the intended Key of Knowledge that unlocks the "narrow gate" within them to provide entrance into the Inner Kingdom. Thus, the question: Do the more ancient uncorrupted copies of the Qur'an exist?

And this is important because it is not enough to ignore the lies written into the text of the Qur'an -- because the lies themselves are an abomination against God. The proof of this is seen in the fact that the children of so called "moderate Muslims" have embraced the lies in the Qur'an, and have embraced jihad against the innocent victims of Islam -- enslaving women, blowing up innocent people, and cutting the heads off those who reject the abominable words that past Muslim religious authorities placed in the mouth of God.

If those portrayed as "moderate Muslims" wish to continue to use the Qur'an as the word of God, then they must vehemently denounce the corruptions of past Muslim religious leaders. Moreover, these "moderate Muslims" must be the leading voice of opposition against the Islamic abomination that has been carried out in the name of their God. If they fail to do this, then they are acting in concert, and make themselves part of the abomination and grave sin against God. In the same way, when Christians extend to Muslims an open hand of welcome -- wherein, Jesus would never have remained silent to the sin of man promoting the abominations inserted into the Qur'an as being the spoken words of God -- then these Christians make themselves an integral part of the abdominal sin against God. And the fact that each and every Christian and Muslim has the innate ability to prove the Truth of all Truths by sincerely embracing their own religious teachings -- using their scriptures as the intended Key of Knowledge -- then the abomination of Christian and Muslim alike is unforgivable.

(..)

While the American Constitution promotes and even ensures freedom of choice, it does not in any measure protect any American from the consequences of their choices. In much the same way, where the Gospels promote toleration and brotherhood, Jesus would never have embraced religious teachings that promote lies set forth as being the words spoken by God.

Original Knight Riders of the Ku Klux Klan #fundie originalknightriders.net

What most do not fully understand is that the homosexual lifestyle is an assault on our Christian freedoms and liberties. Everyone needs to wake Up and realize that we are in a spiritual war. “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places”. (Ephesians 6:12.)


Whether you believe it or not, Satan is at work all around us building his earthly kingdom. Satan wants to remove God and any reference to God and Jesus Christ from our schools, institutions, government offices, churches, and even penalize those that believe in the Holy Bible. Today if you are a Christian you are labeled by the federal government as being a “domestic terrorist”.


If you are a Christian and stand firm in Christ's teachings and what the Bible says about homosexuality, if you honor God and stand firm in your religious beliefs, then you will be persecuted by gay activists and the federal government. You may be fined or even put into jail simply because of your religious convictions.

As of today, the Federal government continues to promote the homosexual lifestyle far more than it recognizes a Christian's right to his/her religious freedoms.

[...]

THE HOMOSEXUAL LIFESTYLE SEEMS TO BE EXTREMLY DANGEROUS:

20% of homosexuals report of participating in sadomasochism where their partner is hurt, scratched, bruised and/or bloodied. 41% of male homosexuals and 8% of lesbians report "fisting"; where the arm is inserted up the rectum of one's partner. Over 90% of male homosexuals participate in the insertion of the penis into the rectum of their sexual partner.

This practice carries great risk for both participants. Fecal matter can enter through the urethra, and sperm breaks through the single layer of the columnar epithelium of the rectum, causing massive immunological disruptions in the blood system, making the person at much greater risk for infection. Homosexuals are 245% more apt to report 2 or more sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) at a time, than heterosexuals.

We find, and believe, that the homosexual agenda is an assault on our religious freedoms as well as a perversion of the original intentions and meanings of the United States Constitution. These are the things that we, as members, leaders, and officers of the Invisible Empire, Original Knight Riders, Knights of the Ku Klux Klan vow to fight against and oppose not only for the safety of our children and future generations, but because it is our responsibility to fight all things that are contrary to God's Word.

Brian Niemeier #wingnut #fundie brianniemeier.com

[On YouTube pulling far right content]

We really are ruled over by devotees of a heretical cult that's warped the Christian concept of original sin into a form of blood libel.

What Adpocalypse II really represents is our rulers openly imposing a perpetual state of ritual impurity on straight, white, Christian men.

If you fall into any combination of those categories, our technopriest overlords have given notice that you are now a second-class citizen. Your sole purpose is to serve as a scapegoat for protected groups' insecurities; then die.

To this end, the people in the ivory towers are locking down the internet. The digital frontier is closed. From now on, the web will be a carefully managed stream of propaganda and products our rulers want you to consume.

The natural first reaction to this news--especially from those who grew up with the internet--is desolation.

But we must consider: Recreating the America of the 50s or the 80s was never a viable option. Even if it could be done, the rot had already set in long before then. It would just grow back to smother us again.

The rot started when we compromised our Christian faith for worldly ends. Yes, the concessions enacted to end the internecine wars of the 18th century made sense between Christians. But when the door was opened to let other, incompatible parties into the arrangement, the seeds of destruction took root. The Enlightenment experiment was doomed.

One of the hardest realities for people older than Gen X to wrap their heads around is that whatever rises from the ashes of the civilization that the Death Cult has destroyed, it won't look like the post-Enlightenment sociopolitical landscape.

Quaint notions like equality, individualism, and religious pluralism will have gone the way of the dinosaur. Our Death Cult overlords never believed in these ideas. They just used them as cover while they worked tirelessly to undermine society. Now the masks are off.

The internet might be one of those formerly cherished but ultimately detrimental innovations of the West's terminal stage. If it will be gone soon anyway, maybe it's best to just let it go.

CÉCILIA LÉPINE #sexist feministcurrent.com

Cultures that have ‘third genders’ don’t prove transgenderism is either ubiquitous or progressive

When homophobic cultures are embracing transgenderism, we need to question its so-called “progressiveness.”

Last year, Pakistan started issuing passports with a third gender category marked by an “X”. In March, the country took things a step further and passed legislation allowing people to change their sex on legal documents, based on self-identification. Now, people can officially self-identify as male, female, or neither on government-issued ID documents, meaning an individual born male can now be issued a female passport. Al Jazeera reports:

“The law guarantees citizens the right to express their gender as they wish, and to a gender identity that is defined as ‘a person’s innermost and individual sense of self as male, female or a blend of both, or neither; that can correspond or not to the sex assigned at birth.'”

The law has been celebrated by many as a progressive victory. Amnesty International’s Pakistan researcher Rabia Mehmood told Al Jazeera that the implementation of the bill “is crucial to ensure [trans-identified people] can live their lives with dignity and respect.” While this might indeed seem like a step forward to some, an important detail brings up questions: despite Pakistan’s apparent embrace of trans-identified people, homosexuality remains criminalized in the country. What liberals and progressives who support this kind of legislation have failed to ask themselves is why transgender politics are being embraced by conservative and regressive regimes like those in Pakistan and Iran.

Trans activists claim that transgenderism has existed throughout history. To prove that “gender identity” is not a modern invention, they point to non-Western societies where, historically, more than two genders have been culturally accepted. This claim is rarely subjected to critical analysis. A feminist analysis is ignored in favour of a superficial analysis of race and colonialism that goes as follows: if a third gender exists in non-Western, non-white societies, the “sex binary” must be a colonialist Western concept that has been imposed on all of us.

But while a third gender really does exist in some societies, that doesn’t necessarily mean that these non-Western views of sex and gender roles are anti-sexist, nor does it mean the application of this idea to Western societies is automatically progressive.

If you compare India’s transgender population to Pakistan’s, you’ll notice an interesting similarity: an overwhelming majority are males. Hijra, as they are called in India, are men or boys pressured to become women on misogynistic grounds: these males love hanging out with women, help women with domestic work, have features that are considered “feminine,” or are suspected of being homosexual. They are often castrated and aren’t allowed to marry or own property. While they may be called upon to bless newborns and celebrate marriages, society generally shuns them and they are rejected by their ashamed families. Seen as accursed, they are given a ritual, religious purpose to counterbalance their ungodly condition. They often become dancers and prostitutes and, like in Pakistan, have to seek the guardianship of a guru (who essentially functions as their pimp) in order to avoid homelessness.

One Pakistani man named Zara tells The Guardian:

“I was born with a very small male organ. Inside, my feelings are female… I want to live like a woman, cook and do domestic work.”

The implication is that a small penis and a preference for “woman’s work” mean that Zara is not sufficiently masculine, and therefore not male.

A homosexual male born as Iman but calling himself Marie featured in a BBC documentary, Iran’s sex change solution, consulted several psychotherapists, some of whom “worked underground.” One suggested pills (of an unspecified nature), another electric shock treatment. Eventually, one doctor told Iman that he could “change [his] gender” and said he needed to start hormone therapy. After a while, another doctor encouraged him to take a step further and undergo surgery. “The doctor told me that with the surgery he could change the two per cent male features but he said he could not change the 98 per cent female features to be male,” Iman says. It is very probable that the surgery included removal of his genitals. As a boy, Iman was bullied for having soft features and was frequently told he looked “like a girl.” After being pressured to start hormones to emphasize his “feminine” features, Iman noticed that he started to grow breasts and that his body hair was thinning. There is little doubt as to what the doctor referred to when he mentioned his remaining “two per cent male features”… Iman says he felt “damaged,” physically. “What I saw was frightening and abnormal,” he adds.

Iran doesn’t traditionally have any concept of a third gender, but the arguments towards the acceptance of transgenderism are the same as in India or Pakistan: when men don’t conform to gender roles related to masculinity and heterosexuality, they are told they are not men at all. In countries like India or Pakistan, religious beliefs about the “balance” between male and female play a role in how women and men are treated. There are many stories about “hermaphrodites” or tales about eunuchs. Men who fail to conform are told they have a female soul and hold a special spiritual position. But in Iran, the religious explanation is non-existent: instead, men like Iman are told that they need medical treatment.

Those who claim transgenderism is universal will also bring up Indigenous societies to show that “male” and “female” are simply rigid inventions of Western, colonial culture, offering “third genders” and “two spirit” people as proof of this. “Native cultures” are glamourized as gender-fluid utopias that European, Christian, colonial conquest destroyed, imposing a rigid two-gender system instead. It is true that as part of the Christianization and colonization process, missionaries profoundly changed the social dynamics between men and women. Children were uprooted from their cultural and social spheres and sent to residential schools, where they were taught Victorian values and morality regarding men and women’s place in North American societies. Indigenous people were subjected to different social codes than those they’d grown up with. Their appearance, for instance, was refashioned: boys couldn’t have long hair because it was considered feminine — they had to wear suits, while girls needed to keep their hair tied at all times and wear dresses. But it would be false to presume that Indigenous societies — which are not at all homogenous — regarded gender (in its contemporary definition) as an instrument for self-expression. This assumes all of these cultures accepted the liberal notion of individual choice and freedom popularized in the aftermath of the American Revolution. But modern notions of individualism, self-expression, and self-realization were were not likely present in pre-colonial Indigenous societies.

The Navajo, for example, have a traditional third gender class called “nadleeh.” While, today, the term is applied to both trans-identified males and females, it originally referred exclusively to males. According to an essay by Wesley Thomas in the book, Two-Spirit People, “Navajo Cultural Constructions of Gender and Sexuality,” men who showed proclivities for traditionally female activities such as weaving, cooking, and raising children, became nadleeh.

Thomas writes, “From the Navajo view, until the turn of the century, males who demonstrated characteristics of the opposite gender were known to fulfill their roles as nadleeh.” He argues that the Navajo recognized “gender diversity” pre-colonization:

“Multiple genders were part of the norm in the Navajo culture before the 1890s. From the 1890s until the 1930s dramatic changes took place in the lives of Navajos because of exposure to, and constant pressures from, Western culture — not the least of which was the imposition of Christianity…

… Due to the influence of Western culture and Christianity, which attempt to eradicate gender diversity, the pressure still exists.”

However, he also points out that gender roles still existed in Navajo society:

“The traditional social gender system, although based initially on biological sex, divides people into categories based on several criteria: sex-linked occupation, behaviors, and roles. ‘Sex-linked occupation’ refers to expected work specializations associated with being female or male. ‘Sex-linked behaviors’ include body language, speech style and voice pitch, clothing and other adornment, and those aspects of ceremonial activities that are sex-linked (e.g., women wear shawls in dancing and men do not; men use gourd rattles during dances and women do not). Women’s sex-linked activities include those associated with childrearing, cooking and serving meals, making pottery and baskets, and doing or overseeing other work associated with everyday aspects of the domestic sphere. For men, getting wood, preparing cooking fires, building homes, hunting, planting and harvesting various vegetables, and doing or overseeing work associated with the ceremonial aspects of everyday life are appropriate. A nadleeh mixes various aspects of the behaviors, activities, and occupations of both females and males.”

Traditionally, the Navajo believed that the power of creation belonged to women. It is safe to say that they never believed that nadleeh — “feminine males” — were actually women, because they didn’t have the ability to bear children. They were regarded as feminine on the basis of social occupations but were not called women — azdaa — in the Navajo language. Society was organized on the principle of collective work divided by men and women on account of their physiological differences — women’s activities, for example, were based on their reproductive capacity and status as life-givers.

In this case, the concept of nadleeh cannot be understood as “gender identity” or gender/sex dysphoria, as it was related to social occupations and behaviors connected to sex. While the Navajo are one of the most documented Indigenous cultures, many others are not so well-documented and it therefore seems inappropriate to impose modern notions of “gender diversity,” “gender identity,” or, generally, our own concepts of gender, as we understand it today, in Western cultures.

It also is misguided to assume that non-Western, non-white “third genders” necessarily shatter the gender binary. The existence of other “gender” castes shouldn’t be assumed to challenge the “sex/gender binary” — they need to be examined within their own cultural and political contexts, from a feminist perspective.

The fact that those placed in this “third” gender category are usually males raises another red flag. It suggests that, while men can be downgraded to the status of females, women cannot rise up to the status of men. Being associated with femininity is such a disgrace that men are socially emasculated and physically mutilated. This is pure misogyny. The media remain blind to the evidence, claiming to be puzzled that these supposedly “progressive” gender identity politics are being adopted by otherwise conservative societies that are hostile and violent to women and gay people.

In The Guardian, Memphis Barker writes:

“One reason for the growing acceptance of the trans community springs from an unlikely source — Pakistan’s mullahs. The Council of Islamic Ideology, a government body that has deemed nine-year-old girls old enough to marry and approves the right of men to ‘lightly’ beat their wives, has offered some support to trans rights.”

Of course, in reality, this “support” is only for misogyny.

So blinded by our own Western views on transgender politics — certain we are on “the right side of history” — we can’t see how these ideas could be harmful. Our critical minds have been paralyzed, and fear of backlash has caused us to avoid asking questions. Despite what so many would like to believe, transgender ideology, no matter how and where it is promoted, has put women and gay people in danger all around the world.

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.

Martin Baker and Jim Solouki #fundie creationsciencestudy.wordpress.com

Michael Jackson in Hell!

Dear friends,

Did you know that Michael Jackson is burning in Hell right now and that he is Satan’s favorite plaything? That’s right, the “King of Pop” or “King of Rock n’ Roll”, is now the King of HELL. He used his music to corrupt the young generation into sin, and he is now paying for it.

Michael Jackson used to be a follower of the Mormon Church, and he believed in the cult idea of going from black to white to be cleansed of sin. Besides following the cult’s abominable ideas, he also worshiped Darwinism. As you can see, he continuously bleached his skin to make himself appear white. He believed that he was evolving into a white male as he bleached his skin and continued to follow the Mormon Church and Darwinism.

What else did Michale Jackson do to glorify Darwin? He transformed his God-given looks by using plastic surgery and removed part of his nose to make himself look like a monkey. Charles Darwin would have used Jackson’s transformation as evidence of the “Missing Link”!

Besides worshiping Darwin, Michael Jackson also hosted pajama sleepover parties with nine year old boys in his mansion. That’s right, just like the very best of the Catholic Church, he traumatized them for his own homosexual acts. Michael Jackson was also good at luring the boys with his own theme-park called “Neverland”. Instead of being promised all the riches and candy from the park, the boys were all Jackson’s playthings to satisfy his sexual favors.

While being a billionaire, Jackson was clever to use all his money to save himself from being incarcerated by the Justice System. It is well known that he was raping the children, but he had very crooked lawyers and corrupt judges to cheat the Justice System. Michael Jackson could walk in the courtroom, dressed in pajamas, and enjoy cheating the system.

As the “King of Pop”, Jackson corrupted the youth with songs of vulgar content that easily offend God. His song titled “Beat it” supported ungodly masturbation, “I’m Bad” is about being a sinner, and his song “Thriller” supported paganistic rituals. Heck, he even glorified the ungodly rituals in a music video.

Being lead astray from God and worshipping all the money, darwinism, homosexual acts, and fame as his own god, Michael Jackson knew his time was coming up and that Hell was unavoidable. He knew everyday that the time was getting closer and closer and that he could have been saved, but he pretended that he could still get away with this and that Satan was his true god. On the day that he used his recreational drugs as a mockery to God, he passed away and was dragged to the depths of Hell. Being rich could not have saved his life as Jesus made it clear that a rich man can never enter the gates of Heaven. Instead of doing the Christian thing by feeding the needy, he fed the greedy and is burning in Hell for it!

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

Churches are filled today with imposters, who profess to be Christian; but they are only playing a game of church. They have never been saved.

I met a man in Hawaii, a Hawaiian, who talked about God and love. He appeared to be a Christian from the way he was talking and smiling; but when I gave him a Gospel tract which read... "You Need HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS," he became offended by the contents. Whereas the Bible states that God created mankind in His own image; many people today have recreated god in their own sinful human image. The man whom I had spoken with in Hawaii had "a form of godliness" as 2nd Timothy 3:5 mentions; but He was offended by the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Tragically, Christianity is nothing more than a cult to many people, because the preaching of the Gospel to them is nothing more than a religious philosophy. I am not saying that Christianity is a cult. Not at all. I am saying that many people make Christianity a cult in their own mind. This is why we hear people saying, "I used to be a Christian." That is impossible. The second birth (i.e., the spiritual birth) is as irreversible as is the first birth (i.e., the physical birth). Many people join a church and adhere superficially to a few Biblical principles; but they never actually become a born-again Christian.

No one refers to the Bible more than the unsaved heathens. In nearly every debate with lost sinners they say, "But didn't Jesus say..." It is ironic that unsaved people, who are hellbound, seem to know so much about the Bible. The truth is that they are only vaguely familiar with the Bible, and cannot understand it's Truths because they have not the Holy Spirit of God (1st Corinthians 2:14-17).

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.

vexic929 #fundie vexic929.deviantart.com

Disclaimer: These are all my own, personal thoughts. I do believe that they were given to me by God but I acknowledge that I may be wrong in some areas and will gracefully accept that IF IT IS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION IN A RESPECTFUL WAY. I do not claim to be a prophet or a preacher or some fancy, famous, decorated scholar—I’m just a 21-year-old Christian with a passing interest in sociology, psychology, and apologetics. I do not think I am holier-than-thou and I do not think any sin is greater than another. All sin is equal; I do not think I am better than you. I don’t know how else I can put that so, please, you have already begun seeing my side; if you find it offensive there is a back button, most likely in the top left corner of your screen—please use it because I will not be changing my opinion no matter how many curse words and insults you throw at me. I acknowledge that I stink at arguing my points so, if you find anything unclear, please feel free to ask for clarification as long as you do so respectfully.

WHY HOMOSEXUALITY BOTH IS AND IS NOT A SIN

“Attraction is not a sin!”
You’re absolutely right. Attraction, in and of itself, is not a sin. Wait—what? Yep, you’re right. Why? Because we, as humans, have the ability to be attracted to either gender to some degree. Think about it; you have friends, right? People you talk to, people you get along with—you find them attractive in some way; perhaps not physically but mentally/emotionally/etcetera, if you didn’t, you wouldn’t be friends. Chances are you have at least one friend—or someone you just get along with—from both genders. We are designed to be attracted to people; we are very social creatures but if we weren’t attracted, we probably wouldn’t give them the time of day (just think of that resident annoyance in your life). Attraction is not just physical—but, of course, you know this I’m sure. Now, we’ve established attraction is not a sin. It is what you do about that attraction that determines whether or not it is a sin.

“What you do? What does that mean?”
Let’s look at that a little further, shall we? “It is what you do about that attraction that determines whether or not it is a sin.” This means that it does not become a sin until you decide to act on it. The moment you decide to pursue that relationship that becomes a sin. Why? Because typically that relationship is pursued with the intent of becoming physical at some point. In cases of heterosexuality, it only becomes a sin if the intent to become physical comes before marriage (yes, this includes during the engagement but that is a whole other animal we are not going to get into today). In the case of homosexuality, it does not matter whether or not this intent is before or after marriage, it is still a sin.

“That’s not fair! Why is it still a sin even if I’m doing it ‘right’?!”
This is a question that comes up a lot and Christians need to be able to answer if they’re going to argue it. I could say “because the Bible says so” and give a list of verses; I could say “because God says so” and leave it at that, but do these explain why? No, not really. So, why? Because it is outside of God’s intent. God has a plan for each of us, most of whom he has included and set apart a specific person for the intent of us to be in a strong, loving, Godly relationship with. Anything outside of that plan is sinful because it is not of God, no matter how good it seems.

“Well, why should I care about God’s intent?”
You may or may not be a Christian, I don’t know, that’s between you and God. There is one thing I do know for sure; anything God has planned for us is 100 times better than we could ever even imagine. Being a Christian is not about blindly agreeing with everything God says and following like good little sheep. We can say “alright, God, I don’t get this, I don’t like this,” as long as we add after, “but I’m going to trust You because I know that what You have for me is better.” That’s what faith is, that’s what being a Christian is. So before you yell and scream at us Christians for being stupid, blindly following, being bigoted, being intolerant; remember that not all of us totally agree with everything God says. I, personally, would be perfectly fine with homosexual relationships if I were not a Christian and didn’t know that God has something better planned for everyone. I just want everyone to live their life to the fullest extent in the happiest way possible; that’s why I want people to find God and turn from their sinful ways—whatever they may be—and follow the better path God has in store for them, because I know it will be so amazing. So, no, I don’t see a reason for it to be a sin; but, yes, it is a sin, and there’s nothing I can do about that but say, “I’m going to trust You, God, because I know You have something so much better and it’s just going to be totally awesome.”

But it's also true that you cannot control attraction, Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because the people were participating in homosexual activities. Note that the verse you quoted states "men who practice homosexuality". Lust is wrong no matter who you are lusting after so that is irrelevant. I don't think you understood what I said, I know that homosexual activities are wrong and fantasizing about performing said activities is also wrong just as it would be wrong to kill someone or fantasize about killing someone. There are two definitions of homosexuality--simply being attracted to the same gender which you cannot do anything about and participating in homosexual activities which you can do something about. One is entirely subconscious and the other is a conscious action. You cannot stop yourself from being attracted to someone, it is not possible. I'm really not sure how I can make this any clearer but if you're still confused, please let me know.

Yeah, the thing that hacks me off the most is the radical "you must agree or you're a terrible person" mentality they seem to have nowadays. It's so frustrating because it goes exactly against the freedom of beliefs/religion and speech we have in America--even more so because we're basically letting them act that way. It's pretty dang ridiculous, if you ask me. People are so touchy and easily offended.

In conclusion
Homosexuality—the act of being attracted to someone of the same gender—is not, in and of itself, a sin. Homosexuality—the act of having relations with someone of the same gender—is a sin.

[ ai! ^.^ I have no idea how I found this, but I've read it and the first comments page; frankly, I couldn't help posting my opinions on this. :3 Please don't take it offensively - I just want to make sure it's out there.

Firstly, I totally agree with your first point - homosexuality isn't a sin. However, I serious disagree of your second point.

I understand that you believe practicing Homosexuality is a sin because God said so, but
WHY does he say so?

I cannot actually think of any decent anti-homosexuality reasons myself. In any case, I am a firm believer in freedom of sexuality, within reason. If you're female and fall in love with another female, then what's wrong with that? Is the world going to end? Probably not. Are you going to drop dead? It's unlikely. Will a random person develop, say, cancer simply because you're dating someone of the same sex? I highly doubt it. Besides, the planet's population is rising rapidly and whilst we have no serious problem right now, we will when it doubles. With deforestation, loss of farmland to housing estates and desertification, among other things, then frankly we will run out of resources at some point. Soon. If, say, 5% of the population is gay/lesbian, then that's 5% less kids every year. That's a few years left on the timer. More time to solve the dilemma. Oh, and it means that more of the poor kids in foster homes can have a family. I know how that feels, I was there once.
Besides, if the government was to make homosexuality illegal, then that is a direct breach of the Human Rights.

UN Human Rights;
Article 2 -- Freedom From Discrimination
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex or sexuality, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Putting someone in prison because they love and want to be with someone of the sex? That's just sick. And we're supposed to do this becuase of what it says in a book? There are many opinions from Christians that certain aspects of the bible are outdated. Aren't women supposed to be evil or something? Nowadays, if ANYONE said that in a commonwealth country they'd be called sexist.

Anyway - 'God is omnipotent' to quote practically every Christians I've ever brought this subject up with (I grew up in a religious family/area/school, so there's quite a few). Therefore, if he has an intent for us, then maybe it's for us to be gay?
I am actually an atheist, so the 'God's intent' thing, for me, isn't a valid reason. A good number of my friends are lesbian/gay and are currently dating a person of the same sex. What harm has it done to me? None. What harm is it doing you? None.

(Looking back at this, it looks like a full-out attack. Lol. Sorry about that. >.<)
]

You make some very interesting points and bring up some good questions but I believe I touched on most of them either in the comments or in the actual article (it's not really an article I guess but you know what I mean) but I will respond to a few of them.

Why does He say so? The truth is I don't know, no one does--if they claim to they're probably lying. I just know that He does and that's enough for me and should be enough for any Christian.

Putting someone in prison for homosexuality is ridiculous, the government should not interfere in religious matters and vice-versa. As far as the Bible being outdated, anyone who has told you that is not a Christian even if they claim to be. You cannot be a Christian and not believe the Bible is the Truth, it doesn't work that way. There is no passage that says women are evil or anything like that, I suggest reading the book for yourself even if you have no intention of becoming a Christian. It's quite interesting to see the parallels from the Old and New Testaments and the perfect preservation and lack of contradictions without taking anything out of context, even from a purely historical and analytical standpoint.

His intent would not be for anyone to be gay considering He says homosexual relations are a sin although he may use someone identifying as gay as a challenge or a way for them to have a better witness to other people.

I don't expect anyone who is not a Christian to agree with or follow my beliefs but that doesn't mean that I won't call someone out on something I know is wrong because I don't want them to make a mistake. It's purely about caring about people. I am currently dealing with my younger sister's recent coming out as pansexual and she knows I am on her side even though she also knows I believe she is doing the wrong thing. We have had many discussions on the issue but I still love her and would not wish anything bad on her.

Jay Younts #fundie shepherdpress.com

Kirk’s words, often the same words that you and I might think, are reported as hate speech. He is openly mocked, ridiculed and even hated for believing what committed Christians should believe. His words are frequently taken out of context so that often what is reported is not accurate. Kirk is not the only one to endure this treatment. There are other Christians, other public figures that are treated this way. But I am blessed to know Kirk, so for me it is personal. And I want to take this opportunity to encourage you to do two things.

First, pray for Kirk and those like him who remain faithful even in the middle of the media blitz and misinformation. Be thankful for their sacrifice and willingness to speak the truth when it is not pleasant to do so.

Second, follow his example, and speak clearly to those you come in contact with about who God is and what the Bible teaches. In many ways folks like Kirk are doing the job that our churches should be doing, the job you and I should be doing. We don’t need to be on TV to make an impact for Christ. Pray that God would give us the courage to make the most of the opportunities given to us to speak God’s truth in love.

I encourage you to be thankful for those like Kirk who are in the public eye. Pray for them. Join me in thanking Kirk for standing for the things we hold dear. Let him know he is not alone.

Rayburne F. Winsor #fundie postmillennialworldview.com

I once posted a long comment on a similar article by Randy Alcorn entitled: Do you believe God created the universe in six literal (24 hour) days? I certainly do. I really am not concerned with how many (is it 38%) “evangelical Christians are compromising the truth of God’s Word regarding the sex literal (24-hour) days of creation in Genesis by bowing down to scientific opinion (“from the goo, through the zoo, to you” evolution) that accommodates millions of years to the days of Genesis rather than the clear,straightforward , literal meaning of six literal (24-hour) days in Genesis. There is no warrant biblically, scientifically or linguistically for doing so (from the perspective of the ancient Hebrew language). I have posted many long comments why I oppose theistic evolution (accommodating long ages to the literal days of Genesis) as not biblical. Jesus Christ himself accepted the Genesis account of creation (Matthew 19:4), including the supernatural creation of Adam and Eve, as well as the biblical account of Noah’s Flood (which would radically alter everything modern uniformitarian geologists have learned in Geology) as historical fact (Matthew 19:: 4, Matthew 24:37-39). We should not be surprised by this when we remember that, though many leading scientists (i.e. “scriptural geologists”) resisted the “old earth” ideas of James Hutton and Charles Lyell (Uniformitarianism) and defended scripture as both true and scientific, Regrettably, it was Christians, not evolutionary scientists, who first lead the charge against scripture, beginning in the 1800s when theologians (theistic evolutionists) readily adopted the “old earth” ideas, of Lyell (uniformitarianism) instead of Noah’s Flood. The Bible believing scientists of the day were in a difficult position of trying to defend scripture when even theologians (who compromised the literal history of Genesis) were against them. The situation remains even worse today, despite recent scientific discoveries about the universe, atom, the internal structure and incredible complexity of cells, DNA, the natural world, etc. Believing scientists, though understandably still in a minority, are leaving Darwinian Evolution, recognizing that strictly natural processes, operating at random on inorganic chemicals, could never have produced complex living cells. Unfortunately, though they have grown weary of arguing how random mutations (essentially harmful to a living organism) in a highly complex genetic code provide improvements to it (no functional genetic information-increasing changes on which “goo to you” evolution depends). So, what do they do? They re-adopt Creation, but still hold on to the old earth and formulate a local Flood account to fit modern uniformitarian geology. How much better it would (and I believe employ better science) to come all the way back to a biblical worldview (instead of just a halfway or middle position between biblical creation and natural evolution (Theistic evolution).. See other comment below:

One could write a book on why it is imperative that Bible-believing Christians not compromise the historical truth of Genesis 1 ( i.e. Day-Age theory, Gap theory, Framework Hypothesis theory) by adding or accommodating evolution to the Genesis account. First, theistic evolution, which is just evolutionary development with God added on, is diametrically opposed to supernatural, ex nihilo (out of nothing), , fiat, (divinely spoken Word\) creation, which even Darwin, who was also a divinity student, rejected: In a letter he wrote to Charles Lyell in 1861, he stated: “The view that each variation has been providentially arranged seems to me to make Natural Selection entirely superfluous, and indeed takes the whole case of the new species out of the range of science” . Not only was theistic evolution rejected by Darwin, but also was never seriously considered by the other founding fathers of evolution. The evolutionary claim of an old earth (4.5 billion years old) denies the veracity of the first 11 chapters of Genesis regarding the order of creation (contrary to evolution, the Bible says birds were created on Day 5 at the same time as the sea creatures –before dinosaurs and other land animals; the Bible says the work of shaping the earth was finished on Day 3 before the moon was made on the 4th day into earth’s creation, not smashed from the earth in a cataclysmic collision; etc.), the distinctness of created kinds (10 times in Genesis 1), the absence of death and bloodshed before the Fall (see Genesis 3; Romans 5:12), the instantaneous creation of Adam and Eve and all of creation functionally mature (which explains the appearance of age), the “very good” status of the creation at the end of the creation week (Genesis 1:31), the great longevities of the patriarchs, and the global nature of the Flood, as attested by over 200 Flood traditions by peoples all around the world, over 30 scriptural references (indicating universality of Great Flood), and layers of water-deposited sedimentary rocks containing separate and distinct and intact kinds of fossilized plants, birds, animals, etc. (not transitional or intermediate fossil) all over the earth.

Every major doctrine of Christianity stands or falls upon the historical foundation laid in the first 11 chapters of Genesis. Obviously, if death were here eons before Adam sinned (Genesis 3), as evolution requires, then creation had already been spoiled and death is not the penalty for sin, as scripture plainly teaches (Genesis 2:16; Romans 5:12). This, in turn, means that Christ’s death and resurrection were ineffective and meaningless, and the biblical teaching (Romans 8:18-23; Rev. 21) of the final restoration (Paradise Regained) of this fallen world to its original state before the Fall (only much more magnificent and glorious)–no sin, no death. no curse–is sheer nonsense. Dr. James Barr, formerly Oriel Professor of the Interpretation of Holy Scripture at Oxford University and renown as one of the world’s leading Old Testament Hebrew scholars , wrote, “So far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world class university who does not believe that that the writer (s) of Genesis 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience.” The word “day” (Hebrew yom) associated with a numeral (i.e. “first day” “second day,” “third day” in Genesis 1 (and that used 359 times in the Old Testament outside of Genesis 1 ) always means a literal 24-hour day. 

To make sure that no one missed the obvious meaning of a literal 24-hour day, the writer (s) of Genesis 1 under inspiration of the Holy Spirit further qualifies “first day, ” “second day” etc. with “evening and morning”–“and the evening (that part of the day associated with darkness) and morning (that part of the day associated with light) were the first day” (“second day, “third day” etc.). But many who are easily embarrassed (yes, that includes genuine Christians and theistic evolutionists like Dr. John Lennox, astronomers like Hugh Ross and others) by the opinions of secular scientists concerning the unproven assumptions of radiometric dating (which has been off by hundreds of thousands/millions of years, even on rocks of known age) will claim that Genesis 1 and other creation passages are myths, parables, poetry, dramas, allegories or analogies–the only exceptions to the perspicuity of scripture and cardinal rule that “context defines the meaning of a word”—anything, in order to escape the obvious fact that they are written, and read as, a straightforward historical narrative.
 
Even such astounding scholars as Dr. E. J. Young of Westminister Seminary in Philadelphia, an authority of massive erudition in Hebrew and cognate languages holds that “Genesis is not poetry. There are poetical accounts of creation in the Bible–Psalm 104, and certain chapters in Job, and they differ completely from the first chapter of Genesis. Hebrew poetry had certain characteristics, and they are not found in the first chapter of Genesis.” He further states: “The man who says I believe that Genesis purports to be an historical account, but I don’t believe that account” is a far better interpreter of the Bible than the man who says, “I believe that Genesis is profoundly true, but it is poetry”. The inspired, infallible Word of God trumps the opinion (actually “faith”) of fallible scientists, my friend. Don’t undermine or sell out the firm foundation (Genesis 1-11) on which your Christian faith is based, my friend, for the favor and praise of men. God will reward you in due time for your faithfulness to His inspired, infallible Word. God bless.

The Rev. William H. Grimes #fundie conservatism.referata.com

Sermon 18: Romanism/Paganism Debunked
By The Rev. William H. Grimes
Colossians 2:16 says “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:” and 1 Timothy 2:5 says “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”
So, the Roman Catholic “Church” is a wicked and pagan institution that allows its adherents to hate the will of the Lord Jesus Christ. Let’s remember that this pagan cult was founded by Constantine in order to promote pagan rituals under the guise of Christianity. They believe in praying to saints instead of Jesus Christ per 1 Timothy 2:5, and they believe in selling “indulgences” as well as saying works get you into heaven. Pedo homo priests allegedly have the authority of God to absolve you of your sins, and the “church” accepts sodomites and trannies into its ranks just like the Episcopal “Church.”
They also celebrate holidays! Around this time of year, they celebrate the winter solstice and the return of the sun god, or as it’s been rebranded, “Christmas!” JESUS CHRIST WAS NOT BORN IN DECEMBER AND YOU MOCK GOD IF YOU CELEBRATE SO-CALLED “CHRISTMAS” WITH YOUR PAGAN SATAN SANTA AND YOUR TREE AND YOUR IDOLATRY AND YOUR MARY AND BABY JESUS STATUES WHENEVER THE BIBLE SAYS NOT TO MAKE SUCH A GRAVEN IMAGE! NO PRESENTS, NO CANDY, NO PEDO CLAUS, NONE OF THAT SINFUL GARBAGE AS YOU MOCK THE LORD! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!
Paganism has no fruits, and holidays have no purpose other than to allow people to partake in gluttony and other sins! Romanism has no fruits because it’s a dead, unbiblical religion! JESUS SAYS TO CALL NO AND I MEAN NO MAN FATHER BUT YOUR FATHER IN HEAVEN! SAY AMEN IN THE HOUSE OF GOD! OWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!’
ROMANISM AND THOSE PAGAN OCCULTISH WAYS WILL NOT GET YOU ETERNAL LIFE! NO CRACKER OR INDULGENCE OR ABSOLUTION OR ANYTHING OF THE SORT WILL GET YOU INTO HEAVEN! THE POPE IS A PEDO LOVING HOMO WORSHIPPING HERETIC WHO ALLOWS DIVORCE!!!!! THE VATICAN IS A CORRUPT CRIME SYNDICATE THAT HAS TIES TO THE MOB AND HAS A MCDONALD’S! JESUS SAID THAT THE MONEY CHANGERS IN THE TEMPLE SHALL NOT STAND!!!!!!! YEEEEEOOOOOOOWWWWW!!!!!!!
IF YOU HAVE PAPISTS OR UNIVERSALISTS OR PAGANS OR MEMBERS OF THE “LGBT” PAGAN CULT IN YOUR FAMILY, MINISTER THE WORD OF GOD TO THEM! LET THEM BE EXPOSED TO THE TRUTH IN THE PAGES OF NTBC!!!!! WE NEED TO SAVE SOULS FROM PAGANISM AND POPERY AND HOLIDAYS AND ANY OTHER WICKEDNESS!!!! THE BIBLE SAYS TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO EVERY CREATURE!!!!
Next time, look forward to Feminism Debunked, and then Anglicanism Debunked. God’s people said AMEN!

Julian4jc #fundie rr-bb.com

Quote:
People can find just about anything offensive - it doesn't mean that there's even the slightest logical reason for them to do so
I agree!


In their mind it's logical enough to cause them to be offended, and thats what matters. If the producers would avoid mocking any religion none would be offended. I am sure there are many other ways they can introduce humor into the show, as i noticed they are doing that but they are mixing it up with religion humor, including taking passages out of the bible out of context who some believe including myself, it's The Word of God. Why so personal?


Religion is very personal with some people, as we both know some kill in her name. Hollywood needs to avoid attacking christianity and all other religions by all means. The producers have left me the imprssion they are purposely using these types of shows to entertain the secular "non-Christian" masses despite knowing it will offend the Christian minority.

Us Christians are thought to "turn the other chick" and Hollywood knows our lack of response to criticism (unlike the Muslims who behead anyone who mocks their religion) Therefore they allow it because it makes most people laugh, such as yourself who might not find mocking any type of religion offensive as some of us Christians do.

Walid & Theodore Shoebat #fundie rightwingwatch.org

Walid Shoebat: Glenn Beck isn't really calling for Christianity. He lies when he says 'I'm a Christian, I believe in salvation through Jesus Christ' because he, number one, denies the Trinity; number two, he's a deist. In other words, he believes Muslims and Mormons and all the cults together, Buddhists, believe in God and everybody should conform to this deistic view in belief in God. Why? Because we have a more important thing to deal with and that is the salvation of the country as a nation.

Theodore Shoebat: Why is Glenn Beck so fascinated with universalism? Why does he keep pushing universalism? Because it is part of his religion. People need to understand this about Mormonism. Mormonism is an extreme version of Chrislam. Joseph Smith observed the most extreme form of Islam you could ever imagine. In 1855, the earliest leaders of Mormonism, of the Latter-Day Saints, got together specifically to exalt the Prophet Muhammad. Joseph Smith stated that Muhammad was a prophet of god and that Muhammad suffered just as I have suffered; he paralleled himself to Muhammad. And in a very famous speech he made, the speech called 'Al-Koran or The Sword,' Joseph Smith stated 'in this generation, I will be the second Muhammad. Where it was in his generation the Koran or the sword, it will be in this generation Joseph Smith or the sword.'

Walid Shoebat: The Latter-Day Saints church has sought to respect Islamic laws, that is sharia - that's the thing that Glenn Beck claims to be fighting - and traditions that prohibit conversions of Muslims to other faiths by adopting a policy of non-proselytizing in Islamic countries in the Middle East. In other words, Mormons are not allowed to proselytize to Muslims in the Middle East. Why? Because basically they have the same faith.

Gene Moody #fundie demonbuster.com

There are various types of demons. They have structure, ranks, functions and orders. There are powers, principalities, evil forces in this world and spiritual wickedness in high places. Some categories are spirit guides, fallen angels, wizards, ghosts, phantoms, vampires, spooks, genii, monsters, sylphs, aliens, gnomes, imps, demons, devils, nature spirits and evil spirits (male and female). Gnomes would include dwarfs, elves and minihunes which are one of the four divisions of earth spirits. Nature spirits have to do with fire, water, wind and earth. Evil spirits work in different areas such as magic.

[...]

I break these curses and those that follow in The Name Of THE LORD JESUS CHRIST.

Mistreating God's Chosen People, Willing Deceivers; Adultery, Harlotry and Prostitution; Disobedience to Bible, Idolatry, Keeping Cursed Objects, Refusing To Fight For God, House of Wicked, Not Giving To Poor, Stealing, Swearing Falsely By God, Failing To Give Glory to God, Robbing God of Tithes, Dishonoring Parents, Hearkening to Wives Rather Than God, Making Graven Images, Cheating People Out of Property, Taking Advantage of Blind; Oppressing Strangers, Widows and Orphans; Bestiality, Incest With Sister or Mother, Murder Secretly and For Hire, Pride, Putting Trust In Man, Doing The Work of God Deceitfully, Rewarding Evil For Good, Abortion and Causing Unborn To Die,

Having Bastards, Murdering Indirectly, Striking Parents, Kidnapping, Cursing Parents, Not Preventing Death, Sacrificing to Gods, Witchcraft, Turning Someone Away From God, Following Horoscopes, Rebelling Against Pastors, Losing Virginity Before Marriage, False Prophets, Rape, Not Disciplining Children, Teaching Rebellion Against God, Cursing Rulers, Refusing To Warn Sinners, Defiling The Sabbath, Sacrificing Humans, Seances and Fortune Telling, Intercourse During Menstruation, Homosexuals and Lesbians, Necromancers,

Blaspheming Lord's Name, Being Carnally Minded, Oral and Anal Sex, Children Rebelling, Nonproductivity, Fugitive and Vagabond, Improper Family Structure, Destruction of Family Priesthood, Refusing To Do The Word of God, Family Disorder, Failure and Poverty, Sins Worthy of Death, Touching God's Anointed, Perversion of Gospel, Loving Cursing, Choosing That Which God Delights Not In, Looking To World For Help, Stubbornness and Rebellion, Offending Children Believing CHRIST, Adding To and Taking Away From Bible, and Biblical Curses not listed Above.

[...]

ALMIGHTY GOD, I ask that you forgive me for having cursed objects in my home. Show me by THE HOLY SPIRIT what to destroy:

1. Books and objects associated with witchcraft and Satan's Kingdom.
2. Sinful activities of former residents left curses.
3. Knocking and noisy ghosts and apparitions (poltergeist phenomenon).
4. Owl and frog images.
5. Witch's masks and fetishes used by witch and fetish doctors.
6. Objects and literature that pertain to false religions, cult religions (Christian Science, Jehovah's Witnesses, metaphysics, etc.), the occult and spiritism.
7. Graven images of gods (represent demons).
8. Idols and artifacts dedicated to demons.
9. Ouija boards and other occult paraphernalia.
10. Prayers to and worship of demons bring curses.
11.Rings, bracelets, necklaces, charms and other jewelry given to a person by someone in witchcraft.
12.Hex signs, and ancient geometric and mystical motifs being incorporated into designs for clothing, jewelry, decorative objects and china.
13.Rings, pendants, pins and various kinds of jewelry originally designed to bring good luck and to act as a talisman to chase evil.
14.Egyptian ankh (cross with a loop at the top which was an ancient fertility symbol); ancient witchcraft sign of the broken cross (called peace symbol); chais (consists of Hebrew characters spelling life); polynesian tikkis carved to represent various gods; African jujus shaped like snakes, hands, figures and other things; wiggley tail which is called Italian horn; protectors from evil eye; hand with the index and little fingers pointing up (satanic witchcraft sign); rock and roll records and tapes; and a great variety of crosses, clovers, stars, wishbones, lucky coins, mystic medals, horseshoes and other items.
15.Religious fetishes and statues may have dangerous resident demon power.
16.Mexican sun gods, idols, incense, Buddhas, and hand carved objects from Africa and the Orient.
17. Astrological symbols, horoscopes and fortune telling.
18. Products with cryptic, hidden, secret, occult curses.
19. Puppets, cult objects and representations. Dolls used for witchcraft and magic.
20. There is no way to list every demonic object. The list seems to go on and on.

Gene and Earline Moody #fundie moodymanual.demonbuster.com

Lord Jesus Christ, I ask that you forgive me for having cursed objects in my home. Show me by The Holy Spirit what to destroy:

1. Books and objects identified with Satan's Kingdom.
2. Sinful activities of former residents that left curses.
3. Knocking and noisy ghosts and apparitions (poltergeist).
4. Owl and frog images.
5. Witch's mask and fetishes used by witch doctors.
6. Objects and literature that pertain to false religions, cults, the occult and spiritism.
7. Graven images of gods (demons).
8. Idols and artifacts dedicated to demons.
9. Ouija boards and other occult paraphernalia.
10. Prayers and worship to demons bring curses on home.
11. Mexican sun gods; idols, incense; Buddhas; hand carved objects from Africa and the Orient; astrology, horoscopes, fortune telling; books and objects associated with witchcraft, good luck charms and cult religions (Christian Science, Jehovah's Witnesses, metaphysics); rock and roll records and tapes and other demonic objects.
12.Jewelry given to a person by someone in witchcraft, hex signs, ancient geometric and mystical motifs, jewelry designed to bring good luck and act as talisman to chase evil.
13. Egyptian ankh, Polynesian tikkis of gods, broken cross (peace symbol), chais, African jujus, Italian horn, protectors from the evil eye, hand with index and little fingers pointing up, crosses, clovers, stars, wishbones, lucky coins, mystic medals, horseshoes, religious fetishes and statues.
14. Products with hidden, secret, occult curses.
15.Puppets, cult objects and representations. Dolls used for witchcraft and magic.

Master Ryuho Okawa/Happy Science #quack #crackpot #conspiracy #god-complex #magick happyscience-na.org

<the reincarnated spirit behind the guy running Japan's Happy Science cult>
Revealing the Existence of Lord El Cantare

El Cantare is the Lord, Buddha and Savior. He is the supreme God of the terrestrial spirit group who has the highest authority over the planet Earth and is directly connected to the Primordial Buddha or Primordial God – the Creator of the whole universe. Lord El Cantare has supreme authority both in Heaven and on this Earth and is the great spiritual being in whom God and Buddha are united. Lord El Cantare resides in the ninth dimension (Cosmic realm) of the Spirit World and is a leader among other highly evolved spirits, such as Jesus Christ, Moses, Confucius and others, who are known as Angels, Archangels, Tathagatas, and Bodhisattvas. Lord El Cantare is Lord of all people, transcending all races, borders and even this planet.

El Cantare is the origin of life

Lord El Cantare is the origin of life on Earth and has been guiding humanity since the very beginning. He has sent down to Earth such great teachers (saviors and messiahs) as Jesus Christ, Moses, Mohammed, Confucius, Socrates and guided them from the heavenly world. Lord El Cantare is the being whom Jesus called “Father” and Mohammed referred to as “Allah.” In the Old Testament El Cantare is known as Elohim, and he also represents the Tree of Life in the ancient legend of “The Tree of Life.”

Reincarnations of the El Cantare consciousness
Lord El Cantare has also sent down parts of his own consciousness – brother souls – to guide humanity in the right direction at the most important times in history. El Cantare’s brother souls who have been born to Earth in the last twenty thousand years are:

Ra Mu – 17,000 years ago on the Mu continent
Thoth – 12,000 years ago in Atlantis
Rient Arl Croud – 7,000 years ago in the Incan Empire
Ophealis – 6,500 years ago in Greece
Hermes – 4,300 years ago in Greece, Crete Island
Gautama Siddhartha (Shakyamuni Buddha) – 2,500 years ago in India.
Ryuho Okawa – present reincarnation of El Cantare

El Cantare’s name revealed to humanity for the first time

The existence of El Cantare has been revealed for the first time. This has long been the secret of heaven… untill today, when communication and advancements in information and trasnportation technology continues to bring the world closer. As the world population swells towards ten billion, the time has noce come to reveal the Truth about the supreme God of this Earth, how he has led humankind from the very beginning and how he intends to guide people now and into the future. It is the time to unify the world under the name of one God – Lord El Cantare.

The mission of Lord El Cantare

The mission of Lord El Cantare is to bring salvation to all living creatures through the worldwide revelation of the Truth. El Cantare’s role is twofold: one side is represented by the Nyorai Amida (The Savior), which consists of love, compassion, and faith; the other side is represented by the Nyorai Mahavairocana (The Essence of Buddha), which is enlightenment, spiritual learning, and the secret knowledge of the spiritual domain. Lord El Cantare has a mission to reorganize the high spirits in heaven, while also integrating all the various religions on Earth to create a new world religion. He has a mission to gather all the people of the world into this new faith, to see the development of a new civilization, and so herald the advent of a new age for the world.

Lord El Cantare is the greatest being responsible for the planet Earth and everyone who lives in this age is witnessing a miracle, which happens only once in hundreds of thousands of years.

Chris #fundie answers.yahoo.com

Catholicism is not Christianity. Catholicism is a cult that teaches a false gospel of works ("sacraments") that leads to eternal hell (Galatians 1:6-9).

Catholicism cannot save. Only Jesus saves.

The only way to go to heaven and not to eternal hell is by believing in this life that Jesus, who is God, died for our sins on the cross and rose again (1 Corinthians 15:1-4). Believe this and you are saved!

Please pray now: "Jesus, please forgive me of my sins. I believe that You died on the cross for my sins and You rose again. Thank You for eternal life!" You will be in heaven with Him forever when you die :)