D. James Kennedy Ministries Sues SPLC over Hate Map
- Thread starter redleghunter
- Start date
compassion 4 humanity
Active Member
It's about time someone stood up to these liberal Jewish bullies. The SPLC used to be about keeping an eye on Nazis and Klansmen, but now they're grouping Christians with racist extremists.
Upvote
0
jennimatts
Blessed by God!
- May 29, 2011
- 2,573
- 216
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
compassion 4 humanity
Active Member
Why is pointing out that the majority of the SPLC is Jewish? Sounds to me like you're a bit paranoid. By the way, there is nothing extremist about loving God.
Upvote
0
SolomonVII
Well-Known Member
- Sep 4, 2003
- 23,138
- 4,918
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Greens
I suppose that in order to follow the flaming laws, we cannot say that racist extremists, like abortion advocates, are not Christian. Not here anyway.
Suffice it to say that racist extremists are an anathema to anything that I believe about Christ, as much as someone who would kill their unborn child would be too.
Upvote
0
Amen. And that would go for racist anything. For there is no such thing as a racist moderate.. Racism in any form is against Biblical Christianity.
For example, regarding interracial marriage, there is nothing wrong with it, and watch out about speaking against it. For God accepted Moses marrying an Ethiopian woman, whereas Miriam was turned leprous white for looking down on Moses for doing that (Numbers 12). It was as if God were saying: "Don't exalt white skin". For the natural color of one's skin matters no more to God than the natural color of one's eyes. For He has made all humans of one blood (Acts 17:26-28).
-
Also, it is sometimes asked: "Since it is wrong for Christians to be against miscegenation, isn't it also wrong for them to be against same-sex marriage?"
The answer is No. For while the Bible is not against miscegenation (Numbers 12), it is against homosexuality (Romans 1:26-27). So when the U.S. government struck down anti-miscegenation state laws in the southern U.S., it was not going against Biblical Christianity. But if the government ever forces Christians to support same-sex marriages, it will be going against the Bible. And so it will become anti-Christian, helping to prepare the way for the future Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of Revelation's "beast"), and his Satanic, one-world religion (Revelation 13:4-18).
One part of the future Antichrist's (Gnostic) religion will be to forbid marriages outright (1 Timothy 4:3). And legalizing same-sex marriage is just the first step toward this goal. For the next step will be to legalize polygamy, that is, to allow whatever number of people, whether male or female, in any combination, to enter "group marriages" (for example, consisting of three women, or three men, or six women and four men, etc.). Then the next step will be to declare the whole idea of marriage as "obsolete". Indeed, it will even be declared to be "evil" from the Gnostic (that is, the Antichrist) point of view (cf. 1 John 4:3; 2 John 1:7), which sees the whole idea of a physical existence, especially one which forms new people into physical bodies (that is, which forms offspring through marriages) as an abomination.
This is not to say that all people who support same-sex marriages are Satanic Gnostics. Instead, some people could simply (yet still mistakenly) think that God supports homosexuality, just as many U.S. Southerners of old simply (yet still mistakenly) thought that God supports racism.
Upvote
0
SolomonVII
Well-Known Member
- Sep 4, 2003
- 23,138
- 4,918
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Greens
I was noticing in the local paper on Valentines Day, lots of articles about polyamory.
I don't know if there is any shock value left to whatever the next step is going to be. Media like to use titillation to increase their advertising base, but the only thing that is out of the ordinary any more is belief in marriage, that is to say marriage as it had universally existed before this generation.
I read the rest of your post, btw, and agree with it in the main. There is indeed something Satanic about the deligitimatization of procreative marriage that is at the heart of this movement. The war against "biology is destiny" that seeks to free women from the 'tyranny of their wombs' is a war against life itself. It is a war against being human.
And now, science is opening us up to a transformation of our genetics and our biology where we can now contemplate a form of existence that is no longer really human. We are on the cusp of manufacturing digitized genetic hells that are far more nightmarish than anything that Dante could ever have imagined.
Upvote
0
- Mar 18, 2014
- 38,116
- 34,054
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
For @SolomonVII as well:
The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage
Above an article from the Atlantic 1926 about the Soviet efforts to destroy traditional marriage. Interesting read.
Upvote
0
SilverBear
Well-Known Member
Moses married Zipporah, a Cushite woman the Eldest daughter of Jethro a priest in Midian, she wasn't Ethopian.
It is often falsely claimed she was black because some say that a Cushite was someone from south of Egypt. The bible names the lands south of Egypt Nubia and Abyssinia (Isa 18: and Zep 3:10) not Cush.
The book of Ezekiel tells us that Cushites come from Arabia and Persia not Ethiopia. This is supported by the book of Isaiah which speaks of the great Chshite leader Nimrod who was from Mesopotamia.
Saying that Zipporah was black because she was as a Cushite is dependent on the same translation and biblical passages that racists use to justify prejudice – specifically the Curse of Ham. Cush was the eldest son of Ham and he and his descendants were cursed to be social inferiors of the other sons of Noah because he saw Noah naked – after Noah got drunk and stripped down…so obviously it was Ham that had the problem. Ham translates as burnt or black indicating (to some) that Ham was black as were all his descendants.
Right. The legal recognition of millions of marriages will make marriage disappear.
Polygamy is actually the marriage of one man to two or more women. Polygamy condoned biblically.
you don't know what Gnostic actually means do you?
Wow, just wow.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
It is sometimes claimed that Numbers 12:1 refers to Moses' wife Zipporah (Exodus 2:21), and that she was descended from the man named Cush
(Kuwsh: H3568) in Genesis 10:6. But the Bible does not refer to Zipporah as being descended from Cush. Instead, she was most likely a Midianite.
For she was a daughter of the priest of Midian (Exodus 2:16-21), which was the land of the Midianites. They were descended from the man named
Midian who was a son of Abraham (Genesis 25:1-2). So the Midianites were not descended from Cush, the son of Ham (Genesis 10:6). Also, it would
make no sense for Numbers 12:1 to be referring to Zipporah, just based on its timing. For Numbers 12:1 refers to what occurred at one point during
the Exodus, whereas Moses had married Zipporah in Midian some forty years earlier. For Moses was eighty years old at the time of the Exodus
(Exodus 7:7), whereas he had been only forty years old when he fled Egypt to Midian (Acts 7:23-29) and married Zipporah. So regarding Numbers
12:1, it would make no sense for Miriam and Aaron at that point in the Exodus to suddenly speak against Moses for something he had done forty
years earlier. Instead, Numbers 12:1 means that Moses married a black woman at that point in the Exodus. Either Zipporah had died before that
point, or Moses took a second wife, like how Jacob had had two wives (Genesis 32:22).
In Numbers 12:1, the original Hebrew word "Kuwshiy" (H3569) translated as "Ethiopian" could be used to refer to black people, just as its related word "Kuwsh" (H3568) could be used to refer to a part of black Africa south of Egypt. For Jeremiah 13:23 employs Kuwshiy, translated as "Ethiopian", to refer to black people's distinctive skin. And Esther 1:1 employs Kuwsh, translated as "Ethiopia", to refer to the westernmost extent of the Persian empire, like how "India" in Esther 1:1 refers to its easternmost extent. The Persian empire included Egypt, so that Kuwsh in Esther 1:1 can refer to a part of black Africa just south of Egypt. Similarly, Daniel 11:43 can employ Kuwshiy, translated as "Ethiopians", to refer to black people living just south of Egypt, like how the "Libyans" in Daniel 11:43 live just to its west. Also, Ezekiel 29:10 can employ Kuwsh, translated as "Ethiopia", to refer to a part of black Africa on the southern border of Egypt. For in Ezekiel 29:10, the original Hebrew word (Migdowl: H4024) translated as "tower" referred to the city of Migdol which was in the north of Egypt, while "Syene" in Ezekiel 29:10 was a city in the south of Egypt, on the border with a part of black Africa. So Ezekiel 29:10 meant that God would make Egypt desolate from Migdol to Syene, from north to south.
Regarding the man named Cush (Kuwsh: H3568) who was the son of Ham in Genesis 10:6, it is sometimes claimed that the name "Ham" means "black", so that the descendants of Ham were black people. But the original Hebrew word (Cham: H2526) transliterated as "Ham" does not mean "black", but "hot" (Strong's Hebrew Dictionary). So both Ham and his son Cush (Kuwsh: H3568), and Cush's descendants such as Nimrod (1 Chronicles 1:10) could have been white people. Nonetheless, the people called by the related name Kuwshiy (H3569) could have been black people. For the word when used to refer to a people is consistently translated in the Bible as "Ethiopians", and the Kuwshiy people are never said to be descended from the man named Cush. So they could have gotten their name from the color of their skin instead of their descent. For it is said that the word "cush" can mean "black" (See Easton's). The white man named "Cush" could have been named that for some other reason than his being a black person, just as, for example, the white man named "The Black Prince", the eldest son of Edward III of England, was called that for some other reason than his being a black person.
The legal recognition of millions of anti-Biblical, homosexual marriages is just the first step toward making Biblical marriage, and then marriage in any sense, disappear (1 Timothy 4:3), during the time of the future Antichrist, who will also make meat-eating disappear:
1 Timothy 4:1 ¶Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
6 ¶If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.
Here the enforced vegetarianism, like the enforced non-marriage ("Forbidding to marry" in 1 Timothy 4:3), refers to what the future Antichrist will bring upon the world. For he will be a Gnostic (1 John 4:3; 2 John 1:7). And Gnosticism forbids eating animals, and forbids marriage.
But not homosexuality (Romans 1:26-27). Also, even heterosexual polygamists are forbidden to hold any leadership position in the Christian Church (1 Timothy 3:2; 1 Timothy 3:12; Titus 1:5-7).
Gnosticism is an ancient religious movement which says that everything material is inherently evil, while only that which is purely spirit can be good. Gnosticism teaches that all humans used to be purely spirit and dwelling in bliss from all eternity in a purely-spiritual heaven, called the "Pleroma", until by some mishap, humanity fell into the material universe, and became trapped within fleshly bodies. Gnosticism reviles YHWH, the God of Biblical Christians, and the Creator of the material universe and of all fleshly bodies, as an evil, subordinate deity, a "Demiurge", who is keeping humans imprisoned and suffering within fleshly bodies and in the material universe.
Gnosticism became one of the main enemies of the early Church, and it will become the greatest enemy of the Church during the future Tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24. For the future Antichrist will be a Gnostic. He will teach the Gnostic/antichrist lie that Christ is not in the flesh (1 John 4:3). And the Antichrist, like the Gnostics, will utterly revile YHWH (Revelation 13:6, Daniel 11:36). The Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of Revelation's "beast") will instead bring the world into the conscious and open worship of Lucifer (Satan, the dragon), and himself (Revelation 13:4, Revelation 13:8, Revelation 12:9).
-
Gnosticism has some core teachings in common with Buddhism and Hinduism:
1. The material realm is unreal and evil. (Both Buddhism and Gnosticism got this mistaken idea, originally called "Maya", from Hinduism.)
2. People must strive to escape the material realm completely, and enter a state which is wholly non-physical (Parinirvana in Buddhism, the Pleroma in Gnosticism). Buddhism and Gnosticism got this mistaken idea, originally called "Brahman", from Hinduism.
3. The way for people to get free from their imprisonment within the material realm is through their minds attaining a certain level of enlightenment (Nirvana in Buddhism, Gnosis in Gnosticism). Buddhism and Gnosticism got this mistaken idea, originally called "Moksha", from Hinduism.
4. The way for their minds to attain this certain level of enlightenment is through following the way of the Serpent (one legend of Buddhism says that the Buddha was given the true Buddhism by the King of the Serpents; and in Gnosticism, Gnosis comes from the Christ/the Serpent). Both Buddhism and Gnosticism got this mistaken idea of the enlightening serpent, originally called "Kundalini", from Hinduism. (Regarding the serpent in Genesis 3, Gnostics see him as the good guy, while they see YHWH as the bad guy.)
The Bible contradicts each of the four points above:
1. The material realm is real, and was created by YHWH God as something very good (Genesis 1:31). God Himself is in the flesh (John 1:1,14, Luke 24:39), and He remains wholly without sin (Hebrews 4:15). So there is nothing evil about matter in itself.
2. People must strive to attain to a resurrection (Philippians 3:11) into an immortal human body of flesh and bones like the immortal human body of flesh and bones which Jesus Christ obtained at His resurrection on the third day after His death (Luke 24:39,46; 1 Corinthians 15:3-4,21-23,51-53, Philippians 3:21, Romans 8:23-25), and in which He will remain forever as Christians' fully-human mediator/high priest (1 Timothy 2:5, Hebrews 2:16-17, Hebrews 7:24-26). His tomb is empty (Matthew 28:6), and at His Second Coming, He will show the scars of the Crucifixion on His body (Zechariah 13:6, Zechariah 12:10-14).
3. Resurrected people who have been truly enlightened/illuminated (Ephesians 1:18, Hebrews 10:32) by Jesus Christ (John 14:6-7, John 8:32, John 3:36) will remain in the material realm (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29), ultimately living on a New Earth with God (Revelation 21:1-4).
4. The Serpent, Satan/Lucifer, is the deceiver of the whole world (Revelation 12:9).
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,024
- 7,364
- 60
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Not surprising, we have watched moral and religious objections to same sex unions equivocated with racism and sexism, now equivocated with hate groups. It's a zero tolerance for traditional religious Christian conviction, it shows an underlying contempt for religion. If you dare oppose abortion, same sex unions or even hint that you believe in the literal truth of Scripture your immediately maligned, derided and castigated in the strongest possible terms.
I'm a Democrat and I have come to resent their insinuations and this is pretty typical of how they view evangelicals and fundamentalists. You have to wonder what went so wrong with the right in electing Trump, how could Christians support this guy. What you might not realize is that they were driven to the far right by the extreme left, who gives them no consideration, uniformly condemning their religious and moral convictions as hate and bigotry.
Clearly, there are worse people in Florida that espouse hate and violence. There is no sense in this, I can only hope the court dispensation will reflect.
Upvote
0
That's right, understanding "traditional" as "Biblical" (cf. 2 Timothy 3:15 to 4:4).
Also, it is sometimes asked why some Christians say that "political correctness" is Satanic. The answer is: Because it loves to focus on things which directly contradict Christian, that is, Biblical, morality, making "political correctness" anti-Christian. And so it is one of Satan's tools by which he is preparing the world to accept the future Antichrist's one-world religion (of Gnostic Luciferianism, also called Satanism), which could begin to be foisted upon the world in only a few years from now.
Note that Satanism is not against religion per se. Indeed, it is its own religion.
Also, Biblical Christians need to be aware that during the future Antichrist's literal 3.5-year worldwide reign (Revelation 13:4-18), even though the world will consciously and openly worship Lucifer (Satan, the dragon) and the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of Revelation's "beast") (Revelation 13:4-8, Revelation 12:9), this will not require that the Antichrist's one-world religion will say that Jesus is evil, or will turn the world against Jesus. For almost the entire world reveres Jesus, at least as being a good man. The Antichrist could confirm this basic world belief, but simply (in his words) "clarify" that while Jesus is indeed a good man, he is not the Christ or the Son of God (1 John 2:22). No doubt the Antichrist will also deny that Jesus suffered and died on the Cross for our sins, as this, just as believing that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God (John 20:31, John 3:36), is one of the core beliefs of the Gospel by which people become saved (1 Corinthians 15:1-4).
So what the Antichrist could do is keep the idea of a good Jesus, but strip it of everything by which Jesus saves people from hell. And this would not require that the Antichrist deny Jesus' Second Coming. Indeed, the Antichrist and his False Prophet (of Revelation 19:20) could even try to employ to their own ends the Biblical prophecy of Jesus' Second Coming, as well as the Muslim prophecy which says that the miracle-working prophet Jesus will return bodily from heaven in the last days in order to bring the whole earth into the worship of the true God. For the False Prophet could claim that he is Jesus returned (via reincarnation). And he could perform amazing miracles (Revelation 13:13) as purported proof of his claim (cf. John 3:2). This is one reason why it is important to know when and how the real Jesus' Second Coming will occur (Matthew 24:29-31; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8; 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17, Revelation 19:7 to 20:6, Zechariah 14:3-21).
Once the False Prophet by his amazing miracles has brought the world under his spell (Revelation 13:13-18, Revelation 19:20), including many Muslims and Christians who may not care much for scriptural dogma, but could go wild over his signs and wonders, he could begin to (in his words) "restore to the world the real message which was spoken by me (Jesus) at my first coming, and by the great prophet Mohammed, but which message became corrupted by power-hungry men when they copied and changed the early manuscripts of the Bible and the Koran". He could then gradually initiate the world into the Antichrist's Gnostic Luciferianism (1 John 4:3, Revelation 13:4-6), also called Satanism, a religion which could have existed since ancient times in some "mystery" cults, and still exists today in the highest degree of initiation of a worldwide secret society. The False Prophet could present his miraculously calling fire down from heaven (Revelation 13:13) as purported proof that Lucifer (the dragon, Satan) and the Antichrist are the true God (Revelation 13:4-8, Revelation 12:9), in an inversion of how back in Old Testament times, the prophet Elijah miraculously called fire down from heaven in order to prove that YHWH is the true God (1 Kings 18:37-39).
The person whom the Antichrist will revile is YHWH (Revelation 13:6, Daniel 11:36), whom many people mistakenly think of as being (in their words) "the God of only the Old Testament, that cruel and hateful God who commanded people to commit genocide, and kill babies (1 Samuel 15:3), whereas Jesus came and preached love for everyone (Matthew 5:44)". The truth is that Jesus Christ confirmed that the God of the Old Testament, YHWH (Deuteronomy 6:4-5, Leviticus 19:18), is the same as the God of the New Testament (Mark 12:29-31), and that the Old Testament is true (Matthew 5:17-18, Luke 24:44-48). Jesus suffered and died for our sins in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy from YHWH (Isaiah 53; 1 Peter 2:24). And He rose from the dead in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy from YHWH (e.g. Psalms 16:10, Acts 2:31). Jesus died to establish the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28), which YHWH had foretold in the Old Testament (Jeremiah 31:31-34). And Jesus died to bring about the defeat of Satan (Hebrews 2:14), which YHWH had foretold from even the first book of the Old Testament (Genesis 3:15).
Nonetheless, building on many people's misconceptions of YHWH as being (in their words) "the cruel God of the Old Testament", no doubt one of the future Antichrist's chief blasphemies against YHWH (Revelation 13:6, Daniel 11:36) will be that YHWH is an evil god. This is one of the ancient blasphemies of Gnosticism, another being the antichrist lie that Christ is not in the flesh (2 John 1:7). The world will be deceived into completely rejecting YHWH, and worshipping Satan and the Antichrist instead (Revelation 13:4-8, Revelation 12:9). But Satan might not be worshipped as "Satan", which almost everyone sees as a bad name (it means "Adversary"), but as "Lucifer" (Isaiah 14:12), which means "the morning star". The Antichrist could falsely say that it is YHWH who is the true "Satan", the true "Adversary" of mankind. And the Antichrist could claim that even 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 together prove this, by showing that it was the single entity of YHWH/Satan who moved King David to number Israel. Of course, the truth is that 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 together simply mean that YHWH used Satan to move David. YHWH elsewhere rebuked Satan (Zechariah 3:2), so they are in no way the same person.
Because the Antichrist and his False Prophet (possibly masquerading as Jesus) will deny that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:22), and will deny that Christ is in the flesh (1 John 4:3), and because they will bring the unsaved world into the worship of Lucifer (Satan, the dragon) instead (Revelation 13:4, Revelation 12:9), they could falsely say that (the non-mortal flesh) Lucifer is the Christ, that the new name of Christ (Revelation 3:12c) is "Lucifer Christ". For just as "Lucifer" means "the morning star", so Christ is the morning star (Revelation 22:16b). Also, Christ identified himself with the serpent (John 3:14), and Lucifer is the serpent (Revelation 12:9). Also, Christ said: "Ye are gods" (John 10:34), and it was the serpent who said: "ye shall be as gods" (Genesis 3:5).
But the truth is that Lucifer fell from his office of morning star (Isaiah 14:12), and became Satan (cf. Luke 10:18). Jesus Christ has taken over the office of morning star (Revelation 22:16). And Jesus Christ identified Himself only with the brass serpent on the pole in Numbers 21:8-9 (John 3:14), which typified Jesus Christ's crucifixion for our sins (John 19:16, Matthew 26:28). And in John 10:34, Jesus Christ (John 20:31) was quoting YHWH in Psalms 82:6-7, which shows that even though humans have knowledge of good and evil as gods do (Genesis 3:22), they will still die like humans (Psalms 82:7), contradicting the serpent's lie (Genesis 3:4). Nonetheless, the Antichrist could falsely say that Lucifer is the Christ, and the true and beneficent God of mankind, and that the False Prophet is the miracle-working prophet Jesus (cf. John 3:2, Acts 3:22-24), returned to point the world to the true Christ/God. The Antichrist could falsely say that he (the Antichrist) is the human/divine "Son" of Lucifer, who must be worshipped as God along with Lucifer (Revelation 13:4,8). This would be similar to how Biblical Christians rightly worship the human/divine Jesus Christ (John 1:1,14) as YHWH God (the Son) along with YHWH God the Father (John 20:28, Hebrews 1:8).
Near the end of the future Tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24, unclean spirits like frogs will come out of the mouths of Lucifer, and the Antichrist, and the False Prophet (Revelation 16:13). And these unclean spirits like frogs will go forth and perform amazing miracles to convince the world's armies to gather together at Armageddon (Har Megiddo: Mount Megiddo in northern Israel) (Revelation 16:16), in an attempt to fight and defeat YHWH Himself (Revelation 16:14, Revelation 19:19). After gathering together at Armageddon, the armies will travel south and pillage Jerusalem, right before the real Jesus (who is YHWH: John 10:30) returns from heaven and defeats them completely (Zechariah 14:2-21, Revelation 19:20 to 20:3).
So the Second Coming of Jesus Christ will be a total shock to the world. The world will have been expecting to wage war against some evil Old Testament god named "YHWH" with the help of the good Jesus (played by the False Prophet), and with the help of the true and beneficent Christ/God (played by Lucifer), and with the help of the good Son of God (played by the Antichrist), and with the help of the good angels of God (played by the fallen angels of Lucifer: Revelation 12:9). But then, instead of some evil god appearing in the sky, the world could see the glorious sign of the Cross (cf. Matthew 24:30), the symbol of the good YHWH suffering and dying for our sins (Acts 20:28b). And then the world will see the glorious appearance of the real Jesus, sitting on a white horse descending from the sky (Revelation 19:11-21).
When the people of the world realize at that moment how thoroughly they have been duped, and see in the sky the huge angelic armies (2 Thessalonians 1:7, Matthew 25:31) of the true Jesus, the true Christ, the true Son of God, and the good YHWH, who are all the one and the same Jesus Christ of Nazareth, then they could utterly mourn and wail for themselves (Matthew 24:30, Revelation 1:7), knowing in their spirits that Jesus has returned in wrath, to destroy most of them for their unrepentant sins (2 Thessalonians 1:8-9, Revelation 19:15-21).
Upvote
0
compassion 4 humanity
Active Member
There are genuine hate groups out there. Then there's Christian groups, which are no way hateful. The SPLC is grouping them together.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
SolomonVII
Well-Known Member
- Sep 4, 2003
- 23,138
- 4,918
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Greens
It was not the extreme left that drove people to Trump. It was the mainstream left, as typified by the media, and mainstream politicians.
Just as a personal anecdote, when I first came here, I used to avoid OBOB. I knew the teaching well enough, on abortion, SSM, and all the social issues, and didn't really know if I even believed in them or not. Then one day, I found this book by this Princeton professor, Robert George, and found his arguments strong enough that I thought I would share there finally. There was something in those arguments that had the potential to make me an actual believe in Catholic moral dogma.
It really opened my eyes when I found myself in a Catholic sub-forum of all places to be labeled as well, 'self-righteous. to paraphrase, just for making the argument for what Catholic dogma teaches anyway.
There is nothing quite like being placed into the bigot box for making arguments that I had not even been all that committed to at that point to harden my views.
Upvote
0
- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,024
- 7,364
- 60
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
It's always the same, ten years of debating Creationism, the arguments were predicable and always personal. Quote from Answers in Genesis and you will barely get a word in edgewise, getting shouted down by a chorus liars, liars, liars. There was always someone who did nothing but insult creationists. Then you find out what the source of all this is, some kind of academic or scientist post a short but scathing indictment and gone.
This is coming out of those Ivy League colleges. Our universities have become immersed in ad hominem rhetoric leveled at evangelicals. It's curt, condescending and constant over one simple point of contention, the reality of God and miracles. I learned everything I could about the fossils and genetics, it's actually a fascinating subject, with one singular focus, human origins. They simply will not focus on the facts, it's inevitably dragged down to ad hominem attacks. The evidence gets buried and the conversation descends into a downward spiral.
All roads in these discussions lead back to history. So of course I took an interest in the philosophy behind these arguments. Rome and the early Protestants fought bitter wars, the Thirty Years War and the Civil War in England being two of the worst. While all this was emerging western civilization was developing democracy and to great effect. During the Scientific Revolution central Europe plunged into a the Thirty Years War and the factions were spread like wild fire. What survived was traditional Christian theism, apparently unaffected by the turmoil. With some major points of doctrine in dispute Catholics and Protestants still had pretty much the same core beliefs especially with regards to the miracles surrounding redemptive history. That would all change after the French Enlightenment, now most of the Protestant and Catholic seminaries follow the same secular academics of an atheistic materialist worldview.
At the heart of the article in the OP, beyond anything Kennedy said or did. There is this core response to a writer that insists on the Christian foundations of the United States. Without a single substantive point with regards to our actual history it's branded 'fake history' and it goes in circles from there. Abortion and gay rights are two of the three issues involved in the culture war. It's a war of attrition and it's little more then social engineering. If you have moral and religious objections you must be a bigot, not an alternative worldview, the moral equivalent of a racist. What you never get a chance to talk about are the substantive issues, all they need to know is that your opposed to same sex unions and abortion.
The Creationism controversy could be contentious but after the Dover case it died down. The pro-life movement has made some progress and continue to be persuasive and effective. The gay rights agenda got everything they wanted in the courts and in the political arena but that's not enough. If you have religious and moral convictions that run counter to their social agenda you are branded a hate group. This has descended into slander with the mainstream forces, secular and academic voices chanting in unison, that the opposing view is lies, fraud and hate.
I've seen a lot of this, the issues change but the rhetoric never does. BTW, I'm a Democrat and support same sex unions, with some profoundly moral and religious reservations. As a legal and political issue I don't have a problem with it, on a personal level I think it's perverse. I don't have a problem with abortion on demand in the first trimester, which is all the compromise I can stomach. I have no issues with evolution except at the point of origin. I would love to be able to meet people half way but you can't because the contentious element of these discussions make common ground a no man's land. I didn't start the culture war but I understand the nature of it. It will always come down to moral judgement and how you treat those with a difference of opinion. The SPLC failed in that regard and the only real question is if they broke the law in the process. i think they should lose this law suite but we will see.
Grace and peace,
Mark
Last edited:
Upvote
0
SilverBear
Well-Known Member
I can point to dozens even hundreds of examples from this forum alone that that show your claims to be false. Those with "moral and religious objections" are repeatedly asked to provide evidence to claims, to provide tangible examples, to come up with a logically consistent argument but these requests go unanswered and they have gone unanswered for years and years.
what is wanted is the same rights and protections everyone else enjoys and that is no where near being achieved.
Bull. Bull is the nicest response that can be made to this sad attempt at pretending victim hood.
The forum is very anti-gay. Has it been labeled a hate group?
That leads back to your dislike of being labeled the "moral equivalent of a racist" The minority changed but the rhetoric and the tactics remain exactly the same. it is hard and often impossible to distinguish homophobic rhetoric and racist rhetoric.
meeting people half way and agreeing on common ground has its basis in mutual respect for others even if there is disagreement. But you can't toss around words like perverse and expect anyone to believe you are viewing others with respect.
Not a difference of opinion its how those who are different are treated.
How?
do you have any reason for this opinion beyond your dislike of what what the SPL said?
Upvote
0
- Sep 6, 2016
- 15,961
- 10,817
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,024
- 7,364
- 60
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Sounds great, let's hear it.
I don't believe that for a minute. They got everything the wanted and it's not enough, now it's flowers and cakes. The real issue is religious and moral objections that you have no tolerance for. I think same sex unions are perversion, is that hate?
I'm not the one hiding behind a victim hood.
No, but it's not getting the attention of the status quo, at least not yet.
Do you ever try?
It's a perversion of the natural use of the body, I'm not shy about saying that. On the other hand, I support equal rights. I have moral and religious objections while I support the legal and political support of same sex unions. Those issues are not mutually exclusive, unless you don't like my moral and religious reservations.
Gays are not being more mistreated the heterosexuals as far as I can tell. Not accepting them as normal and natural is being condemned and it gives no consideration to real world conviction, that's just plain wrong.
They failed to recognize religious and moral conviction that does not espouse hate. That's clear moral failure.
What they said is because Kennedy is opposed to homosexual behavior he is worse then Nazis. They put him at the top of the list and that is moral failure.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
