What do liberal socialists and alt-right Evangelical X-tians have in common?

a reply to: ChesterJohn

I don't smoke.

There are such Beasts...in fact millions, as they elected the Trump admin into office. The religious propaganda fills the evangelical churches. I've witnessed it first hand. They compare Trump to Cyrus. They call him the Lord's anointed. They call him the Lord's representative in D.C. I'm telling you they (Trump & Co.) are the rod of the Lord's anger, and He will use them to judge the apostates who elected them.

Monetary or not, the Tithe is part of a fulfilled set of Laws. The Levitical priesthood is gone. Tithing has no place in the Church. It only fuels corrupt ministries.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Alt-Right Evangelical X-tian's!??

Man what are you smokin' over there?

There is no such animal except in your drug fueled dreams.

So now 30%+ of Christians in this country don't exist? If you think they don't exist you may want to open your eyes. Look at who your vice president is.

a reply to: Barcs

NO, what doesn't exist is your insistent that 30% of Christians (1/3rd of all types) are racist, socialist and Alt Right X-tians. X-tians is something made up by you here on ATS and is not recognized as any Group of Christians by any groups of Christians in the world. If I was to put any group under that title it would be JW's (a christian cult) seeing they believe the cross was in the shape of an X not a small t.

Nation of Islam is a alt left liberal organization that supports Dems, and are a far left "blacks are superior to whites" group. Meaning that they are BLACK SUPREMACIST who also support the Dems Socialist agenda. But I don't hear you spouting off about the alt left and their definate connection to socialism and one wolrd order.

I my self am a Conservative Independent Fundamental Baptist, I am in no wise connected to anyone of the Alt Right, Nor do I hold to any type of socialist views. Nor am I a white supremacist or a socialist. Plus we do not recognize the noms de guerre/pseudonym, X-tians.

You will find the Roman Catholic Church (a Christian cult which makes up the largest number of people who claim to be Christians) and liberal Pentecostals are far more socialist and are more likely to vote Democratic and support one world order and open borders socialism.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

You will find the Roman Catholic Church (a Christian cult which makes up the largest number of people who claim to be Christians) and liberal Pentecostals are far more socialist and are more likely to vote Democratic and support one world order and open borders socialism.

You hit the nail right on the head Chester. Actually Jesus taught that a true follower of His should give unto the poor and needy as that person has prospered. I believe that alone would eliminate poverty if we all did as Jesus taught.

The tithe was to be given to only the Levitical priesthood because the Levite tribe was not allowed to own property or build wealth. The tithe was to be given by the eleven tribes to support of the Levites and the maintenance of the tabernacle. That ordinance did not apply to the doctrine of Jesus through James simply because giving according to one's prosperity was by love and not law and would far exceed a tithe.

Some Roman Catholic organizations did require an income statement of their congregations and the priest did exact an expected obligatory [tithe] yearly payment to their church. I know that to be a fact in my era as a youngster. I am not saying that all of the Catholic churches did this because I am not privy to that information but I know that I had many friends of the Catholic faith that were required to be evaluated by the church. I don't know the penalty of anyone that rebelled but imagine that it would be religious disciplinary action of some sort.

God be with you Chester ---------

They are both victims of propaganda. And they both make the following mistake...

Proverbs 14:12

12 There is a way that seems right to a man,

But in the end it leads to death.

National socialism oppsoite to socialism ("liberals")


Its the wether of what?

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Barcs

NO, what doesn't exist is your insistent that 30% of Christians (1/3rd of all types) are racist, socialist and Alt Right X-tians. X-tians is something made up by you here on ATS and is not recognized as any Group of Christians by any groups of Christians in the world. If I was to put any group under that title it would be JW's (a christian cult) seeing they believe the cross was in the shape of an X not a small t.

Nation of Islam is a alt left liberal organization that supports Dems, and are a far left "blacks are superior to whites" group. Meaning that they are BLACK SUPREMACIST who also support the Dems Socialist agenda. But I don't hear you spouting off about the alt left and their definate connection to socialism and one wolrd order.

I my self am a Conservative Independent Fundamental Baptist, I am in no wise connected to anyone of the Alt Right, Nor do I hold to any type of socialist views. Nor am I a white supremacist or a socialist. Plus we do not recognize the noms de guerre/pseudonym, X-tians.

You will find the Roman Catholic Church (a Christian cult which makes up the largest number of people who claim to be Christians) and liberal Pentecostals are far more socialist and are more likely to vote Democratic and support one world order and open borders socialism.

I guess I was referring to Christian fundamentalists. I thought they were considered alt right because of their extreme views (ie science denial and attacking science, spreading hatred against homosexuals, etc). I guess they are more the "religious right". This is why labels like that are stupid. There is no alt right or alt left. Just individuals with more extreme views than others. I didn't think that racism was a requirement for "alt right".

a reply to: Barcs

1) we have fundamental beliefs but they only apply to our spiritual practices in our gatherngs and homes, not to our govt.

2) I nor any like me support any kind of SOCIALISM/communism

3) I nor anyone I know HATE homosexuals. We do not agree that it is normal, but accept it because in Roms 118-31 it says God gave them over to it because they failed to give him glory for the knowledge of him in nature and keep him in their knowledge (public educational system). So we can recognize those who God has given over to a reprobate minds by what they practice, say and do.

4) Being spiritual is not equated to being religious. Religious people will lop off heads and spread hatred. Spiritual people wait and test the spirits. As long as we can live peaceably with men, as much as it lieth with us, we do so. But if you come into my church trying to shoot up the people, I guarantee you will meet return fire and will be carried out with a sheet over you carcass.

5) Alt-right extremist are mostly white supremacist. I cannot speak for evangelicals because I am not one. So I compared your version of the alt -right extremist with the opposite Alt-left extremist NOI who are Black Supremacist.

This we can know extremist on both sides are racist, misogynist, classicist, homophobic, gender confused, artiest, murders, criminals, liars, and more and love those who agree with them and do the same things.

I just can't wonder why the white supremacist and the BLM can't get along they are exactly alike, they have more in common with each other than they do with me.

a reply to: sedna9

Socialism is a national goal of the left. So they are one and the same when it comes to liberals which include BLM and the Bernie supporters.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: sedna9

Socialism is a national goal of the left. So they are one and the same when it comes to liberals which include BLM and the Bernie supporters.

There is a big difference between pure economic socialism, and the democratic socialism that people like Sanders support. It's not as extreme as you think. America has always been and likely will always be capitalist until it falls. Allowing the government to regulate certain industries that shouldn't be profit based in the first place(like education and health care) is not really socialism. It's logical and works in many of the best educated nations in the world. Obviously you don't want the government to run everything, but why allow people to exploit education and health care for profits? We're talking about our children's intelligence and people's lives here. Socialism just has a negative stigmatism, so it's used to label people based on extremes. The term "leftist" or alt right to me just continues to divide people. The same is true with your use of "left" above.

I can't really disagree with your 5 points above. You are right, extremists of all types have a lot in common, even though they are on opposite sides of the spectrum. There's a reason I consider myself an independent centrist.

a reply to: Barcs

No there isn't, but every Democratic Socialistic govt failed economically, brings Venuzuela to mind that's right it was a democratic Socialistic Govt. A few democratic social govts in Africa ended up a warring Islamic State.

Cleanse fold and manipulate

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

There is no legal compulsion by which an evangelical can be imprisoned and have their assets seized if they decide to stop paying their tithes... it would be a better world if the same could be said about government taxes. Also, government taxes are used to pander to voters, ensuring that a slender majority of voters are on the dole enough to ensure continued support for the government's taxation theft. I see no similarities between that and church tithing. That said, I don't know too many Christians who tithe 10%, either... far too expensive in these days of imprisonments and seizure.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Barcs

No there isn't, but every Democratic Socialistic govt failed economically, brings Venuzuela to mind that's right it was a democratic Socialistic Govt. A few democratic social govts in Africa ended up a warring Islamic State.

Bernie Sanders wasn't trying to turn the country economically socialist, however. Venezuela had the government run pretty much everything. Sanders wasn't advocating for that, only that the government control certain industries that shouldn't be profit based. Yes, it's a huge difference, Sanders wasn't trying to eliminate capitalism and turn us socialist, but again, that's what the opposition painted so that's what people go by. Saying that complete socialism is the ultimate goal of the left is absurd. The opposition just associates his views with that to project that image and discredit him, but that's not what he's trying to do at all. You can have a capitalist country with the government regulating certain industries. That doesn't make it socialist, that's just the stigma.

a reply to: Barcs

I cal you on that Bernie is an avowed Socialist, one payer system is a socialist idea for medical care.

Bernie is a socialist true and blue as well as an Elite.

To get a society to go for Socialism all you have to do is ruin it by executive orders liken unto those of Obama over the last 8 years, If Hillary got in by the end of her term the US would be ready for Socialism.

The Russians also never wanted Trump or Hillary in office they wanted Bernie. Why else were they so eager to get the DNC hacked documents to the press. To show she stole it and get Bernie back in the picture.

Right now because Trump is in office the Elites have gone to plan B, artificially increase the Stock exchange. Just as OPEC has been doing for years artificially increasing the cost of OIL, causing the cost of living to sky rocket even in low income states like West Virginia

Now they have to deal with a businessman who knows how to deal.

HORRAH!!!

a reply to: Barcs

Do you believe that government should control certain moral aspects of life based on "Judeo-Christian" standards, to prevent the degeneration of society?

For example, limiting marriage to the union of one man and one woman, or prohibiting the recreational use of marijuana?

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

One sides gives their money freely. The other side are thieves that steal your money. Pretty straight forward.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

That's just the slippery slope fallacy. Just because somebody lets the government run health care, doesn't turn them into capitalist hating socialists. Do you even realize how difficult it would be to transition from a capitalist society to a socialist one? It's pretty absurd how people argue that health care being run by the government will lead to economic socialism. It won't. Most capitalist countries already have socialized health care. Stop pretending like Obama even had the power to change us from capitalism to socialism. He doesn't. He would sooner be assassinated then eliminate big business that runs the country and even helped get him elected. Calling "left" socialist is just the stigma, it's not even remotely realistic. Sorry, but you are just being alarmist here. "OMG! THEY SOCIALIZED HEALTH CARE, THAT MEANS FULL BLOWN COMMUNISM IS RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER!!!! RUN!!!" Sorry, that's just the mantra from the extreme right wingers. It's not actually socialism.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Barcs

Do you believe that government should control certain moral aspects of life based on "Judeo-Christian" standards, to prevent the degeneration of society?

For example, limiting marriage to the union of one man and one woman, or prohibiting the recreational use of marijuana?

That is a loaded question. I strongly believe the government should stay out of religion, and religion should stay out of the government as our constitution states. They shouldn't be enforcing any religious standards at all. Morality is different. Obviously they should enforce penalties for egregious things like murder, assault, stealing, things that harm other people, but for things like gay marriage, sexuality and smoking weed, the government should stay out of. I believe most issues should be controlled by the states, not the federal government, but oppressing homosexuals over a religion should never happen.

a reply to: Barcs

I agree with you 100%. However, I will note that not all moral standards recognize murder, assault, rape and theft as acts of immorality (ISIS comes to mind). Therefore we should not treat those issues as universal moral issues, but instead as infringments of personal liberty. Morality is subjective. Liberty is a bit more objective.

When it comes to economics, I apply the same principle. Government should be there solely to recognize and protect liberty (not to guarantee prosperity). So government involvement in industry would be on the same level as government sponsoring religion.