Is there a war on Christianity in America's Left?

[Spartan]

No it isn't.
If you aren't a Roman Catholic, who comprise a rather large majority of Christian believers, then the majority of Christian believers disagree with you about something.


Doesn't matter how many years of studying subjective opinions you have. It remains subjective opinions.

12 years of Catholic education, where religion was a core requirement. I do know what Christians believe and teach.

One thing I couldn't help but notice was the non-trinitarian theology of the Original Testament. From Adam to Noah to Moses to Samuel, the Prophets who really knew God never even heard of Jesus or the Triune Nature of God. But, the OT is in the canon.

What's with that?

Tom

Here's just one example from the OT that God is more than just the Father:

Plurality in personal pronouns (such as "us" and "our") when used in reference to the Lord, lends additional documentary evidence for the plurality of God. A good case in point is Genesis 1:26:

"Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness,
and let him have dominion over the fist of the sea, and over the birds
of the air, and over the livestock, and over all the earth."

Here, we see a conversation that is taking place prior to the creation of man. Who is this person or persons with whom God is conversing? First, this 'person' or 'persons' is able to communicate with God in His own realm of timeless eternity. Because man had not yet been created, He was not speaking to someone of earthly intelligence, but someone in the heavenly, supernatural and eternal realm.

Secondly, this person or persons with whom God is communicating apparently has the same kind of creative ability as God ("Let us make"). This clearly implies a cooperative effort between God (Elohim - plural) and the person or person with whom God is speaking.

And finally, the person or persons with whom God is speaking is comparable, or identical, with God ("Let us make man in our image, after our likeness").

When confronted with this passage, skeptics often claim that God is speaking with angels. However, this explanation fails to address a number of problems. First, there is no indication found anywhere in the Bible that says angels can create life. Secondly, nowhere is it indicated that angels were ever made in the image and likeness of God. And finally, there is no indication from scripture that mankind was ever made in the likeness of angels.

Just one more example. In Genesis chapter 11, God is looking down at man's attempt to build the Tower of Babel to make a name for themselves. In verse 7 God states:

"Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand one another."

Once more, the personal pronoun "us" is used as a reference to God. Note that in verse 11:5 it is "the Lord" that is referred to when "us" is later used ("The Lord came down to see the city").

 

[Spartan]

You really think that's a rational comparison between the state of the USA when Bush left office and when Obama did?
Seriously?
This country was a disaster when Obama got elected, and most of his tenure was dominated by Republicans who were determined to do as much damage as possible so that they had stuff to blame Obama for.
Tom

Obama gutted the military for one thing. Tried to change an election in Israel. And helped turn America into a modern-day Sodom and Gomorrah for another. And there's a lot more than that.

 

[paarsurrey]

First of all, I am not a Christian. I have no dog in the race. I am a Jew. If anything, you would think I would have a bias against the Christian church given our history.

There are two forces marginalizing Christianity. The main force is Islam.

Now Muslims in my own country are just fine. They've grown up here, and have assimilated American values like freedom of religion. They are horrified when people of other religions are persecuted.

That is not what things are like in Muslim countries around the world. In fact, just today I was reading that Christians in Egypt are going through yet another round of heavy persecution. When I say persecution by Muslims, I mean destruction of churches. I mean the execution of those who convert to Christianity. I mean false charges against Christians for so called blasphemy against Muhammad. In these countries, a Christian can die for being a Christian. The terrorists in Sri Lanka targeted Christian Churches in particular, you know.

The second source of religious persecution is coming from the secular left, especially anti-Theists. Using revisionist history, they seek to marginalize Christianity and remove it from public existence. IOW, they would like to emasculate it, so that it cannot function in a way that effects civic and cultural life. They do this primarily by trying to shame it, presenting only one side of its history, and removing from history all of the good that it has accomplished, and the fact that it has been central to our culture and therefore even to the secular government that sprung from our culture.

They have passed laws that have consistently placed rights NOT embedded in the constitution over the right to freedom of religion, which IS expressly protected by the constitution. A business literally had to take it all the way to the Supreme Court that given their religious beliefs, they should not be forced to provide a gay wedding cake. It is absurd that this kind of religious discrimination goes on.

Does one mean that people with No-Religion whatever nomenclature they have are inclining towards Extremism, please?
It is too bad. The world needs peace and justice. Right, please?

Regards

 

[dianaiad]

Yes 'Redress' not 'revenge'; nothing to do with war at all. It is about evening out Christian privileges, so that non-Christians have the same benefits..

Baloney.

"redress" is "you have these advantages and privileges, so we should have them as well."
You are talking about 'evening out,' which is "we don't have these privileges, so you can't have them either."

I've never been fond of making everybody equal by making everybody equally deprived.

 

[Altfish]

Baloney.

"redress" is "you have these advantages and privileges, so we should have them as well."
You are talking about 'evening out,' which is "we don't have these privileges, so you can't have them either."

I've never been fond of making everybody equal by making everybody equally deprived.

Baloney to you too.

Redress can also be reached by removing privileges. eg, in my country our Parliament has 24 CofE Bishops - un-elected, just installed by right.
Now I'm not asking for 24 Methodists, 24 Jews, 24 atheists, etc. No, I just want none of any denomination.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Baloney.

"redress" is "you have these advantages and privileges, so we should have them as well."
You are talking about 'evening out,' which is "we don't have these privileges, so you can't have them either."

I've never been fond of making everybody equal by making everybody equally deprived.

Many of the privileges demanded by Christians can't be given out equally.

For instance, consider prayer at public meetings: many Christians want these prayers to be Christian-only or nothing. When Muslims or Satanists show up asking to give invocations too, the Christians shut the whole thing down.

Or take here in Canada: our head of state is the head of a church: the Church of England. It's not like we could - or would want to - mandate that the Queen be head of every church. It's better to just separate the two offices, IMO.

Secularism would mean equal treatment of religion, but many Christians take it as an "attack" when Christianity is treated as just another religion.

In the cases where secularists talk about actually taking things away from religion, they're generally talking about things that would help everyone:

- getting rid of the clergy housing allowance deduction reduces the tax burden for everyone.

- replacing chaplains with qualified counsellors means that the people they serve get better care.

- taking away special access to government for religious organizations means that government is more accountable to the people.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Baloney to you too.

Redress can also be reached by removing privileges. eg, in my country our Parliament has 24 CofE Bishops - un-elected, just installed by right.
Now I'm not asking for 24 Methodists, 24 Jews, 24 atheists, etc. No, I just want none of any denomination.

OTOH, it would be funny to do this with the Act of Succession: "instead of saying that just Catholics can take the throne, now we're going to say that nobody of any religion can be the monarch!"

 

[Shad]

Well, honey.. media got it wrong. There has NEVER been a US Consulate in Benghazi.

Yes I know. The US government called it a mission facility specifically even in reports that mention other nation's consulates while using the specific word

 

[dianaiad]

Well, how would you undo the invasion of Iraq or the slaughter of Deir Yasin?

'Undo?" One cannot undo history. One might as well ask how one 'undid' the invasion of Gaul, or the conquest of the South Americans by the Spanish, or the invasion and capture of slaves by the Portuguese (and the willing sale of enemy tribespeople to the slavers) or....every single perceived injustice perpetuated upon one group by another.

Look....I'm LDS. A "Mormon." I have personal family history of being discriminated against. I have PERSONALLY been discriminated against because of my beliefs. I've had rocks thrown at me. I've been refused employment (btw...I don't blame the school that didn't hire me one bit; they have the absolute right to ask that the teachers in an evangelical Christian school believe as they do, and I just could not sign their 'statement of faith.' That doesn't mean that it wasn't my religion that cost me the job, because it was). I get mocked a lot.

My great grandparents, however, were pioneers, early converts to Mormonism, and they had to deal with losing their homes more than once. They were kicked out of two states...and finally the United States entirely. They were made legal prey--as in, it was legal to shoot any Mormon on sight, man, woman or child. They were driven from their homes in the middle of winter, to begin that journey to Utah. They had to deal with having all their property confiscated by the government yet again, when Buchanan sent "Johnson's Army" against them, to arrest and haul Brigham Young back to Washington to stand trial (they didn't succeed at that) and to install an occupation force of federally appointed people to 'govern' Utah. Their families were torn apart, and women who HAD been doctors, lawyers, writers, poets...all were forced into hiding and were not allowed to be doctors, lawyers...or elected officials. Gee....does that sound like something you've heard of recently?

..............and it wasn't some Islamic terrorist group that did it. It was the US Government, on US soil (well, U.S. territory).

Whenever I 'debate' against people who claim that the Mormons only got what was coming to them because they didn't believe the 'right' way, I get the instant bitters. I get really, really angry, and if you want to talk about 'redress,' I can't help but think that...proper 'redress' would have me owning ten miles of prime Mississippi river front property right in the middle of one of the more busy industrialized shipping centers on that river.

However.

The people who own it now didn't take it away from ME, now, did they?

How would my getting all that land (and the shipping companies that occupy it) make anything better? How could it NOT cause real, understandable and justifiable resentment, anger and outrage on the part of those who honestly obtained it, even if the people they got it from weren't all that honest? Or if the people four generations back were nasty, miserable slave owners?

Because, of course, they were.

We can't undo anything. What we CAN do is try to fix the disparities now.

Right now. Not the disparities of yesterday. Not the ones of last year or a decade ago.

The ones that happen today.

And those who are feeling bitter about what 'you guys' did to 'our ancestors
really do need to 'get over it.'

Because there is no repairing that. No healing that. We can only 'heal' what's happening right now.

 

[sooda]

Obama gutted the military for one thing. Tried to change an election in Israel. And helped turn America into a modern-day Sodom and Gomorrah for another. And there's a lot more than that.

What Church do you belong to?

 

[columbus]

Obama gutted the military for one thing.

What does that mean?
When Obama left office, we had a military equal to most of the rest of the world.
Are you implying that Obama was a little bit less warlike than his predecessors? I ask, because that sounds quite Christian. To be peaceable.

Tried to change an election in Israel.

What do you mean by that?
You mean like Trump and Putin did?

And helped turn America into a modern-day Sodom and Gomorrah for another.

What do you mean by that?
Sodom's gravest sin was being unwelcoming to strangers. "Non-citizens". That's Trump!

And there's a lot more than that.

What do you mean by that?
Because, as far as I can see, Trump is closer to being an anti-Christ than anyone who has been a serious contender for POTUS in my whole life. And he got the support of the large majority of conservative Christian voters.

That's the War on Christianity. It's being fought by conservatives against people who who try to put Christian morals into practice, on a large scale.
Tom

 

[QuestioningMind]

Sir, I don't know how you missed it, but I'm Jewish. I'm NOT wanting Christians to have special treatment. I'm wanting them to have the same treatment as everyone else. Right now in the USA it's Muslims that are getting preferential treatment.

I did not miss the fact that you are Jewish. The fact that you are Jewish does not mean that you can't incorrectly believe that Christians in the US are being persecuted against. The very fact that you think that calling the victims Easter Worshipers instead of Christians is in any way shape or form persecuting Christians suggests that you don't comprehend what true persecution is. After all, how many NON-Christian 'Easter Worshipers' do you know of?

 

[QuestioningMind]

Apparently Jewish people are concerned with religious freedom for all religions. What hurts one group hurts us all.

Aside from your ridiculous claim that calling Christians Easter Worshipers, can you provide me with some examples of the horrible persecution that Christians are subjected to in America?

 

[sooda]

'Undo?" One cannot undo history. One might as well ask how one 'undid' the invasion of Gaul, or the conquest of the South Americans by the Spanish, or the invasion and capture of slaves by the Portuguese (and the willing sale of enemy tribespeople to the slavers) or....every single perceived injustice perpetuated upon one group by another.

Look....I'm LDS. A "Mormon." I have personal family history of being discriminated against. I have PERSONALLY been discriminated against because of my beliefs. I've had rocks thrown at me. I've been refused employment (btw...I don't blame the school that didn't hire me one bit; they have the absolute right to ask that the teachers in an evangelical Christian school believe as they do, and I just could not sign their 'statement of faith.' That doesn't mean that it wasn't my religion that cost me the job, because it was). I get mocked a lot.

My great grandparents, however, were pioneers, early converts to Mormonism, and they had to deal with losing their homes more than once. They were kicked out of two states...and finally the United States entirely. They were made legal prey--as in, it was legal to shoot any Mormon on sight, man, woman or child. They were driven from their homes in the middle of winter, to begin that journey to Utah. They had to deal with having all their property confiscated by the government yet again, when Buchanan sent "Johnson's Army" against them, to arrest and haul Brigham Young back to Washington to stand trial (they didn't succeed at that) and to install an occupation force of federally appointed people to 'govern' Utah. Their families were torn apart, and women who HAD been doctors, lawyers, writers, poets...all were forced into hiding and were not allowed to be doctors, lawyers...or elected officials. Gee....does that sound like something you've heard of recently?

..............and it wasn't some Islamic terrorist group that did it. It was the US Government, on US soil (well, U.S. territory).

Whenever I 'debate' against people who claim that the Mormons only got what was coming to them because they didn't believe the 'right' way, I get the instant bitters. I get really, really angry, and if you want to talk about 'redress,' I can't help but think that...proper 'redress' would have me owning ten miles of prime Mississippi river front property right in the middle of one of the more busy industrialized shipping centers on that river.

However.

The people who own it now didn't take it away from ME, now, did they?

How would my getting all that land (and the shipping companies that occupy it) make anything better? How could it NOT cause real, understandable and justifiable resentment, anger and outrage on the part of those who honestly obtained it, even if the people they got it from weren't all that honest? Or if the people four generations back were nasty, miserable slave owners?

Because, of course, they were.

We can't undo anything. What we CAN do is try to fix the disparities now.

Right now. Not the disparities of yesterday. Not the ones of last year or a decade ago.

The ones that happen today.

And those who are feeling bitter about what 'you guys' did to 'our ancestors
really do need to 'get over it.'

Because there is no repairing that. No healing that. We can only 'heal' what's happening right now.

Nice rant.. Who do you think it criticizing the Mormon church here on RF?

 

[Altfish]

OTOH, it would be funny to do this with the Act of Succession: "instead of saying that just Catholics can take the throne, now we're going to say that nobody of any religion can be the monarch!"

I.m all for that

 

[Spartan]

What do you mean by that?
Sodom's gravest sin was being unwelcoming to strangers. "Non-citizens". That's Trump!
Tom

God created borders. Trump's just trying to enforce the law. It's the liberals who are violating it by creating sanctuary cities and helping illegals avoid ICE.

As for Sodom and Gomorrah, you may have overlooked this:

"Jude 7 – “In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.”

"The second-century BC Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs labels the Sodomites 'sexually promiscuous' (Testimony of Benjamin 9:1) and refers to 'Sodom, which departed from the order of nature' (Testament of Nephtali 3:4). From the same time period, Jubilees specifies that the Sodomites were 'polluting themselves and fornicating in their flesh' (16:5, compare 20:5-6). Both Philo and Josephus plainly name same-sex relations as the characteristic view of Sodom.[78]" Responding to Pro-Gay Theology, Part III

 

[columbus]

God created borders.

You, uhh, got Scriptures to back that up?

Or are you just asserting your personal anti-christian opinions? Because that's what it looks like. You support leaders who find lust more important than Jesus's ethics.
Like Trump.
Tom

 

[Oeste]

Trump is in office not because he doesn't have warts that many Christians and conservatives have noted and discussed, but because even with all his baggage he was STILL a much better choice for president than that lying, greedy, corrupt, immoral, left-wing, incompetent, cellulite-infested, walking gas bag Hillary Clinton

So after taking the platform to tell us about the "objective truths of God's word" you now descend into a nasty, condescending, and degrading argument in favor of moral relativism????

Isn't @Spartan the same poster who argued against moral relativism a few posts back?

And the problem with subjective morality that departs from objective Biblical principles? It's the broad road that leads to destruction at the Judgment.

Trumps just trying to enforce the law...
..."The second-century BC Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs labels the Sodomites 'sexually promiscuous' (Testimony of Benjamin 9:1) and refers to 'Sodom, which departed from the order of nature' (Testament of Nephtali 3:4). From the same time period, Jubilees specifies that the Sodomites were 'polluting themselves and fornicating in their flesh' (16:5, compare 20:5-6). Both Philo and Josephus plainly name same-sex relations as the characteristic view of Sodom.[78]" Responding to Pro-Gay Theology, Part III

You argue for the Trumps one moment then argue against "sexual promiscuity" the next???

If that isn't an argument for "subjective morality that departs from objective Biblical principles" I don't know what is.

If I recall correctly, this is a guy who sleeps with porn stars, brags about grabbing the private parts of married women, and who's claimed he's never needed to ask God for forgiveness. You expressed concern earlier about the "soul of America" yet America's First Lady is the first "First Lady" to have voluntarily posed topless and nude. Now anyone can take a peek at our First Lady any time they want.

I'm not criticizing...everybody has to make ends meet and we have all done things that we're not proud of, even if any sense of moral regret appears notably lacking from this White House. But I am having trouble understanding your rationale. Why make arguments about sexual promiscuity if you're not going to hold everyone to the same high standard? Is God as much a respecter of persons as you are, or does your non-denominational church of one hold some people more accountable to "objective biblical principles" than others?

 

[Spartan]

You, uhh, got Scriptures to back that up?

That God created borders? The Bible and borders

Or are you just asserting your personal anti-christian opinions? Because that's what it looks like. You support leaders who find lust more important than Jesus's ethics.
Like Trump.
Tom

Ha. For the record I'm pro-Christian, not anti-Christian. As for Trump, if Jesus Christ were running on the GOP ticket the liberals would find a way to hate him.

There are no perfect candidates. But we have one in office who has created the best economic record in 50 years, and who is pro-Christian and pro-national defense.

If you're voting for left-wing candidates, then I feel sad for however you want to try to justify that.

 

[Spartan]

So after taking the platform to tell us about the "objective truths of God's word" you now descend into a nasty, condescending, and degrading argument in favor of moral relativism????

Isn't @Spartan the same poster who argued against moral relativism a few posts back?

You argue for the Trumps one moment then argue against "sexual promiscuity" the next???

If that isn't an argument for "subjective morality that departs from objective Biblical principles" I don't know what is.

If I recall correctly, this is a guy who sleeps with porn stars, brags about grabbing the private parts of married women, and who's claimed he's never needed to ask God for forgiveness. You expressed concern earlier about the "soul of America" yet America's First Lady is the first "First Lady" to have voluntarily posed topless and nude. Now anyone can take a peek at our First Lady any time they want.

I'm not criticizing...everybody has to make ends meet and we have all done things that we're not proud of, even if any sense of moral regret appears notably lacking from this White House. But I am having trouble understanding your rationale. Why make arguments about sexual promiscuity if you're not going to hold everyone to the same high standard? Is God as much a respecter of persons as you are, or does your non-denominational church of one hold some people more accountable to "objective biblical principles" than others?

If you're trying to argue I should have voted for Crooked Hillary instead of Trump, then you're going to lose that argument. She's as corrupt and incompetent as the day is long.

And for the record, I'm enjoying Trump's record economic success and all his other achievements.