In the future there will be religious intolerance and thought-police?

[BobRyan]

Seventh-day Adventists (SDAs) clearly present a view of the future that includes the prediction that even Christians will become "intolerant" of other Christian views to the point of "Thought police" tactics against even other Christians who do not share their views on a particular point of doctrine (a doctrine that is well accepted as "Christian" today.)

But what about today? Any signs of religious intolerance today?

Are there areas of Christian discussion (not CF of course - not joking here) - where if you "think to yourself" that a certain prediction about what will happen in the future is true (for example extreme intolerance will arise in the future even among Christians) - and you can be coaxed into admitting "you think that" - you can then be banned? Is that even possible? Really?

Yes!

Absolutely YES! that is a reality today.

==================================

Thought-police will see you condemned/banned/refused-employment for "having religious thoughts" that they do not approve. In one case it has to do with predicting that in the future religious intolerance will arise, religious liberty crushed.

But in other cases - like Pompeo Senate Confirmation hearing - the candidate is hammered for "having negative thoughts" that LGBT agenda and relationships are not the best.

The idea being that Pompeo should not have employment as CIA director if he "has those thoughts" or does not "shut down the thoughts of others" who dare to express their thoughts.

=========================================

From: California Introduces 'Dangerous Bill' That Would Make It Illegal for Christians to Counsel LGBTQ Adults

California LGBTQ activists have introduced a bill that would make it illegal for Christians to provide biblically based counseling for those wanting to get help for unwanted same-sex attractions.

Assemblyman Evan Low's bill, AB 2943, states that "advertising, offering to engage in, or engaging in sexual orientation change efforts with an individual" is illegal under state's consumer fraud law.

This comes six years after the state deemed it illegal for minors to receive counseling for same-sex attraction, even if they and their parents wanted help.

========================

So now back to the opening comment - the fact that SDAs predict that in the future religious intolerance would arise over the subject of the 4th commandment - is a "thought" such that some groups out on the internet argue -- 'if you think it -- then you must be banned"....THAT is present in reality on some Christian forums today... (But not on this one and not on all of them... still there are a few out there even today)

 

[Tayla]

even Christians will become "intolerant" of other Christian views to the point of "Thought police" tactics against even other Christians who do not share their views on a particular point of doctrine (a doctrine that is well accepted as "Christian" today.)

But what about today? Any signs of religious intolerance today?

Yes, it is everywhere. Catholics vs Protestants for example. Denominations that think they are the only true Church and that only members of their denomination are saved.

 

[LastSeven]

In my province recently a political staffer went to the media demanding the resignation of a member of parliament because this member had dared to opine that this same staffer should find better things to do with his time than to take a day off work to attend the gay pride parade.

That's the definition of bigotry right there. There is no tolerance for any opinion that might appear to be at odds with gay pride.

The fact that they believe they are right to demand a resignation of somebody's position in government because they dared to disagree with how they spend their time is amazing to me. How did we get this far?

 

[LastSeven]

Conversely we've been forbidden from believing anything but the official story when it comes to the holocaust for over 70 years. The entire world is the thought police on that topic. Nobody should dare say anything in public that contradicts the official story, regardless of what's true or false.

Some countries will even jail you for it.

 

[PloverWing]

But what about today? Any signs of religious intolerance today?

Sure, there are lots of situations in which Christians try to restrict the rights of their non-Christian neighbors, and vice versa. But I don't think this is genuinely one of them:

From: California Introduces 'Dangerous Bill' That Would Make It Illegal for Christians to Counsel LGBTQ Adults

California LGBTQ activists have introduced a bill that would make it illegal for Christians to provide biblically based counseling for those wanting to get help for unwanted same-sex attractions.

From the body of the article, it looks like the bill is making conversion therapy illegal. That's much different from forbidding Christian counselling. As far as I can tell, it would still be completely legal for a Christian counsellor to say "The Christian faith forbids intimate same-sex relationships. Therefore, you must be celibate for the rest of your life. I will counsel you in ways to live the celibate life."

 

[BABerean2]

So now back to the opening comment - the fact that SDAs predict that in the future religious intolerance would arise over the subject of the 4th commandment - is a "thought" such that some groups out on the internet argue -- 'if you think it -- then you must be banned"....THAT is present in reality on some Christian forums today... (But not on this one and not on all of them... still there are a few out there even today)

The claim that those who worship on the first day of the week, are following the mark of the beast should be evaluated based on scripture.

Mar_16:2 Very early in the morning, on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen.

Mar_16:9 Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had cast seven demons.

Joh_20:19 Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, "Peace be with you."

Act_20:7 Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight.

1Co_16:2 On the first day of the week let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collections when I come.

..............................................................................

Are we now commanded to keep the "sign" of the "obsolete" Sinai Covenant, which Paul describes below as the covenant of "bondage"?

Gal 4:24 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—

Gal 4:25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children—

Gal 4:26 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.

Gal 4:27 For it is written: "REJOICE, O BARREN, YOU WHO DO NOT BEAR! BREAK FORTH AND SHOUT, YOU WHO ARE NOT IN LABOR! FOR THE DESOLATE HAS MANY MORE CHILDREN THAN SHE WHO HAS A HUSBAND."
Gal 4:28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise.
Gal 4:29 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now.
Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? "CAST OUT THE BONDWOMAN AND HER SON, FOR THE SON OF THE BONDWOMAN SHALL NOT BE HEIR WITH THE SON OF THE FREEWOMAN."
Gal 4:31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.



Heb 8:13 In that He says, "A NEW COVENANT," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.


Heb 12:18 For you have not come to the mountain that may be touched and that burned with fire, and to blackness and darkness and tempest,
Heb 12:19 and the sound of a trumpet and the voice of words, so that those who heard it begged that the word should not be spoken to them anymore.
Heb 12:20 (For they could not endure what was commanded: "AND IF SO MUCH AS A BEAST TOUCHES THE MOUNTAIN, IT SHALL BE STONED OR SHOT WITH AN ARROW."
Heb 12:21 And so terrifying was the sight that Moses said, "I AM EXCEEDINGLY AFRAID AND TREMBLING.")
Heb 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

We have not come to the mountain that burns with fire, but instead to the New Covenant of Christ and heavenly Zion.

Those who claim to be keeping the 4th commandment, and claim those who do not are following the "mark" of the beast have failed to "cast out" the covenant of "bondage".

In Galatians 3:16-29 Paul reveals the temporary nature of the Sinai Covenant.
It was "added" 430 years "after" the promise made to Abraham "until" the seed (Christ) could come to whom the promise was made.

.......................................................................

Jer_31:31 "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—

Mat_26:28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Mar_14:24 And He said to them, "This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many.

Luk_22:20 Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you.

1Co_11:25 In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me."

2Co_3:6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

Heb_8:8 Because finding fault with them, He says: "BEHOLD, THE DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD, WHEN I WILL MAKE A NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH—

Heb_8:13 In that He says, "A NEW COVENANT," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

Heb_9:15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

Heb_12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

...........................................

Act 15:24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:

.

 

[Percivale]

Freedom of thought and religion have been attacked regularly throughout history, and it is important than we stand up for that freedom whether we agree with the beliefs that are under attack or not. I am hopeful that a pluralistic culture where no worldview is in the majority will be a safe place for freedom, since no religion or worldview will have the majority power to squelch others.
There is a difference between real oppression like losing a job or being prosecuted, and simply being avoided or ridiculed because of what you believe. Freedom of association is important too and some beliefs are stupid or evil enough to deserve being ignored or ridiculed, though I prefer to give a respectful rebuttal to anyone willing to listen.

 

[BobRyan]

Sure, there are lots of situations in which Christians try to restrict the rights of their non-Christian neighbors, and vice versa. But I don't think this is genuinely one of them:

From the body of the article, it looks like the bill is making conversion therapy illegal. That's much different from forbidding Christian counseling.

Unless you are the Christian doing the counseling and it is a Christian family that is asking you for help - at which point you are told that your "POV" is illegal in CA for such a context.

As far as I can tell, it would still be completely legal for a Christian counselor to say "The Christian faith forbids intimate same-sex relationships.

But the counselor probably needs to do more than just say "that is a chair.. that is a table" they probably need to set up therapy sessions, recommend some sort of groups to attend, some reading material.. you know the usual that would be "illegal counseling" if you happen to do it in CA.

 

[BobRyan]

Freedom of thought and religion have been attacked regularly throughout history, and it is important than we stand up for that freedom whether we agree with the beliefs that are under attack or not.

True. No one should be denied a secular job or in danger of civil penalties because they "think a certain thought" when it comes to religion or they view the future as containing some event that others do not also predict will happen.

And even more so on a Christian discussion board when talking about what you "believe" will happen in the future.

There is a difference between real oppression like losing a job or being prosecuted, and simply being avoided or ridiculed because of what you believe.

True - everyone has the right to listen or not listen to what someone else has to say.

 

[BobRyan]

Mar_16:2 Very early in the morning, on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen.

Mar_16:9 Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had cast seven demons.

Joh_20:19 Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, "Peace be with you."

Act_20:7 Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight.

1Co_16:2 On the first day of the week let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collections when I come.

.

And so... pretty much everyone agrees that Christ was raised on the first day of the week. Sunday
And so ... pretty much everyone agrees that in Acts 20:7 there was a one-time farewell service for Paul.
And so .. pretty much everyone agrees that in 1Cor 16:2 the church was told that each member should set aside in story - by themselves at home - some portion of funds not to be used during the week so as to be ready to give their gift as promised.

Just as we can all see that in Acts 18:4 "every Sabbath" both Jews and Gentiles gathered for Gospel preaching in the Synagogue.

We are not talking about that.

We are talking about a prediction that in the future Christian intolerance of other Christians would massively increase such that one is not "allowed" to worship on a certain day or else civil penalties would follow.

And more than that - we are talking about the fact that even before that - in fact today... it would be found that some Christian discussion areas would not "tolerate" the view that in the future Christians well be intolerant of other Christians.

 

[BABerean2]

And so... pretty much everyone agrees that Christ was raised on the first day of the week. Sunday
And so ... pretty much everyone agrees that in Acts 20:7 there was a one-time farewell service for Paul.
And so .. pretty much everyone agrees that in 1Cor 16:2 the church was told that each member should set aside in story - by themselves at home - some portion of funds not to be used during the week so as to be ready to give their gift as promised.

Just as we can all see that in Acts 18:4 "every Sabbath" both Jews and Gentiles gathered for Gospel preaching in the Synagogue.

We are not talking about that.

We are talking about a prediction that in the future Christian intolerance of other Christians would massively increase such that one is not "allowed" to worship on a certain day or else civil penalties would follow.

And more than that - we are talking about the fact that even before that - in fact today... it would be found that some Christian discussion areas would not "tolerate" the view that in the future Christians well be intolerant of other Christians.

Does SDA teach that the "mark of the beast" will be related to worship on Sunday?
Yes, or No?

.

 

[PloverWing]

Unless you are the Christian doing the counseling and it is a Christian family that is asking you for help - at which point you are told that your "POV" is illegal in CA for such a context.

But the counselor probably needs to do more than just say "that is a chair.. that is a table" they probably need to set up therapy sessions, recommend some sort of groups to attend, some reading material.. you know the usual that would be "illegal counseling" if you happen to do it in CA.

The problem with conversion therapy in particular is that it rarely works, and sometimes causes harm to the patient.

The law protects freedom of religion, but the law also tries to protect patients from ineffective and harmful medicines and medical procedures. Conversion therapy is one of those places where the two values come into conflict.

Note, again, that a conservative Christian can still counsel a gay person without resorting to conversion therapy. There could be support groups for celibate people to encourage each other in the discipline of celibacy. There could be advice on how to form non-romantic friendships and family groups. There could be psychological support for coping with loneliness. All of this is legal under the proposed California law, as far as I can tell. The target of the law is conversion therapy in particular, because of its low effectiveness rate.

Surely a Christian psychologist would not want to prescribe a course of therapy that is unlikely to succeed and that might cause harm. Surely a Christian would want to find better ways to help a celibate gay patient.

 

[BobRyan]

The problem with conversion therapy in particular is that it rarely works,

One could say that Mormons "rarely convert" or "JW's rarely convert" or "Atheists rarely adopt the view of a 7 day creation week", "Muslims rarely convert to Christianity based on a lecture or document" etc. But its quite another thing to "make the attempt - illegal"

The law protects freedom of religion, but the law also tries to protect patients from ineffective and harmful medicines and medical procedures.

I doubt that counseling is a medical procedure or drug.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Does SDA teach that the "mark of the beast" will be related to worship on Sunday?
Yes, or No?

.

SDAs predict that they will continue to have absolutely no control over the fact that God wrote the Ten Commandments, and they never will be able to change that.

SDAs also stated clearly that merely attending sunday worship services is not the mark of the beast today - nor will that ever be the case. Go to church, read your Bible and pray for an hour every day of the week if you wish.

SDAs predict that some day in the future intolerance of Christian against Christian will get to the point that Sabbath keeping itself will be deemed "illegal".

Many other people "predict that will never happen" -- fine time will tell which prediction is correct.

Rev chapters 13-14 talk about the mark of the beast - and there is nothing SDAs can do to change that - nor would we want to.

Rev 14:12 says "the saints keep the commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" - there is nothing SDAs can do to change that - nor would we want to.

 

[BobRyan]

Conversely we've been forbidden from believing anything but the official story when it comes to the holocaust for over 70 years. The entire world is the thought police on that topic. Nobody should dare say anything in public that contradicts the official story, regardless of what's true or false.

Some countries will even jail you for it.

True - there are disputes over history where opinions are very strong over what did or did not happen.

But the example I give is about religious practice, religious POV being censored and in one extreme case a religious POV that "predicts" that in the future some event will happen... also not being tolerated - rather than simply saying "fine let's see if that happens - I personally doubt it will happen"

 

[BobRyan]

In my province recently a political staffer went to the media demanding the resignation of a member of parliament because this member had dared to opine that this same staffer should find better things to do with his time than to take a day off work to attend the gay pride parade.

That's the definition of bigotry right there. There is no tolerance for any opinion that might appear to be at odds with gay pride.

The fact that they believe they are right to demand a resignation of somebody's position in government because they dared to disagree with how they spend their time is amazing to me. How did we get this far?

It is true that religious opinion that does not applaud the LGBT agenda is actively censored in some contexts. I have noticed more and more that censorship is a common tool in the hands of the extreme left.

 

[BABerean2]

Rev 14:12 says "the saints keep the commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" - there is nothing SDAs can do to change that - nor would we want to.

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law.


Heb 8:13 In that He says, "A NEW COVENANT," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.


Heb 12:18 For you have not come to the mountain that may be touched and that burned with fire, and to blackness and darkness and tempest,
(That would be Mount Sinai.)
Heb 12:19 and the sound of a trumpet and the voice of words, so that those who heard it begged that the word should not be spoken to them anymore.
Heb 12:20 (For they could not endure what was commanded: "AND IF SO MUCH AS A BEAST TOUCHES THE MOUNTAIN, IT SHALL BE STONED OR SHOT WITH AN ARROW."
Heb 12:21 And so terrifying was the sight that Moses said, "I AM EXCEEDINGLY AFRAID AND TREMBLING.")

Heb 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.


Which commandments?

1Jn 3:22 And whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do those things that are pleasing in His sight.
1Jn 3:23 And this is His commandment: that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, as He gave us commandment.
1Jn 3:24 Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.

.

 

[BobRyan]

Does SDA teach that the "mark of the beast" will be related to worship on Sunday?
Yes, or No?

.

SDAs predict that they will continue to have absolutely no control over the fact that God wrote the Ten Commandments, and they never will be able to change that.

SDAs also stated clearly that merely attending sunday worship services is not the mark of the beast today - nor will that ever be the case. Go to church, read your Bible and pray for an hour every day of the week if you wish.

SDAs predict that some day in the future intolerance of Christian against Christian will get to the point that Sabbath keeping itself will be deemed "illegal".

Many other people "predict that will never happen" -- ok fine! Time will tell which prediction is correct.

Rev chapters 13-14 talk about the mark of the beast - and there is nothing SDAs can do to change that - nor would we want to.

Rev 14:12 says "the saints keep the commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus" - there is nothing SDAs can do to change that - nor would we want to.

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law.

1. You apparently found the statements in my post above "irrefutable" - the point is not the we agree on all doctrine - but you are asking about someone "else" believes - and so the details above are accurate in that regard.

Heb 8:13 In that He says, "A NEW COVENANT," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

Hebrews 8 -- the New Covenant the "LAW OF GOD" Known to Jeremiah - "written on heart and mind"

The Old Covenant is the "Covenant of death" 2 Cor 3 -- and is the condition that all the lost are in -- in all ages - where the Law "not written on the heart" condemns them as sinners doomed to the "second death"

Thus it is "still a sin" to "take God's name in vain" even in the NT -- and we all know it.

 

[BobRyan]

Which commandments?

1Jn 3:22 And whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do those things that are pleasing in His sight.
1Jn 3:23 And this is His commandment: that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, as He gave us commandment.
1Jn 3:24 Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.

.

In Matthew 19 Jesus said 'keep the commandments' and he is asked "which ones?" and He gives the answer as coming right out of the TEN Commandments.

Then in Romans 13 -- long after the cross -- Paul gives the exact same set in Romans 13.

 

[straykat]

This is nothing new or "futuristic". The Church, once freed from Roman oppression, set about consolidating orthodoxy by forming canons (the very Bible you read now), and silencing those who held on to anything else. Along with fighting Arianism and other heresies for centuries. The very heresies that came back to haunt them in the form of Islam.

The church has always been fighting. And even in the Apostle's day, John and Paul were already warning about it. Like Judaizers. Do you think these people didn't believe in Christ? They did! They believed in Christ and ____ fill in blank ___. It's that second bit that was intolerable to even the Apostles.

The same with Arius or Gnostics or Montanists. These people were reportedly of good character.. They just believed the wrong things and diminished Christ or the Trinity in some way.