Christianity's Death Throes: Planned "Patriot Pastor" Training To Finalize it's Corruption

Rant, this backlash that we are seeing is the result of the left attacking Christianity for the last 40 years. This wouldn't be happening had the Christians not listened when they were told to shut up and keep their beliefs out of public realm, but had stood their ground as they should have.

If, what you are saying, is that they are being used as puppets in the politicasl game, you are right. One only need to look at the current administration, remember what the president said he stood for, and see what he has actually done, to understand the correctness of your point.

This does not bring Christiantity to its death throes, though.God is still very much in control and He is never surprised by any curretn events we see.

I consider political conservatives and their unholy alliance with wayward, extremists (aka the Religious Right who, of course, are neither) to be just a mere annoyance. It's probably more annoying that they won't actually end up destroying each other or themselves in any comprehensive way.

As a keen observer and active participant in politics for more than 20 years, I've seen all this before - they can win elections but they can't hold power. Even when the Dems had the Christians on their side, the Christians would always start pushing theocracy (though most of them couldn't even pronounce it) and real Americans would see them as a threat to real democracy and civil rights. So, it just follows that you can't win the middle (where all elections are decided) by using any person or group that is way off to either side.

Let's face it: Fundies scare voters. I'm not making a statement about the rightness or the wrongness of the fundies or the voters - I'm just stating the facts of electoral politics. At the moment, it's the conservatives that are starting to scare the voters because, as always, they get a little power and it goes straight to their heads. (As a life-long Dem, I can easily admit that the Dems have been just as guilty in the past as the Republicans currently are.)

This thing about the Patriot Pastors is going to get out and do a lot more harm than good for the Religious Right/Fundies/Conservatives/Republicans and, sadly, it's going to take a lot of very good, moderate, sincere, and wonderful Christians down with it. It might take another 4-6 years but, the Dems will be back in control of all 3 major branches of government before long and then, predictably, they will start to blow it all over, again.

Christianity will lick it's wounds, denounce a few of the false Christian hate-mongers, and recover nicely.

I guess, what I should have written was simply: this is a bump in the road, don't spill your drink.

I can spell "theocracy" just fine, and I also know the definition of that word. Mind explaining to this "Fundie" what your definition is, and how the "Fundies" attempt to establish this particular style of government in this country? I think what you mean is they would like the nation to go back to it's roots, and they would like to reclaim their heritage that they let be stolen from them.

When did the Democrats have the "Fundies" in their house? I'm curious, because I know it hasn't been in the last few decades.

Now, what is it that you call a good, Moderate Christian? Is that one who only takes the feel-good stuff from the Bible and nothing more? Or, is it the Christians who give no appearance of being a Christian and must mention that they claim to be Christian before you would ever suspect it? You know, the ones who Christ make clear He will spew from His mouth, as they are neither hot or cold, but lukewarm?

Thanks for your opinion on what a Good, Moderate Christian is, but I'll place more weight on what God's opinion is, if you don't mind.

Well, if you're going to both ask my opinion and then give it to me, I guess you really don't need me in the conversation, do you?

Let me know if you want to have a serious conversation - if you just want to spew, then, go ahead. The board's all yours.

(a Super Moderator with this kind of demeanor? )

I havent seen your posts in some time having been busy here.

I think having been in politics for so long and dealing with peoples you would be a bit more tolerant than your last post.

I will admit that Thomas Crowne is very opinionated and salty in his posts and not necessarily the most refined in his technique.

However ..you did not answer his question in the format you chose. This too is not high ground.

I have watched politics for years as just a observer and have concluded that politics is akin often to whoredom. The buying and selling of souls for political reasons. Both partys not just one. The partys ,both of them, have come to represent the partys ..not necessarily the public. This is the very essence of the system in operation ..the duality/feudal nature.
I dont think many of the religious affiliations of which you and Thomas make note of take this into consideration while sleeping with politics. This as both of you seem to note from different perspectives will be their undoing. I agree. Most peoples do not see the talmudic nature of politics. A system for the insiders and whom they really represent and a system for the outsiders.. a dual system. Feudal.
The Constitution of this country requires only one system..not this dual headed hydra. This is the essence of what most peoples ..even religious peoples dont know. It will be the undoing of this nation as it has others.
Thomas tends to be Salty in his approach..I dont always agree with him..but I know from whence his Salt comes. He is sectarian ..not nonsectarian. Tolerance Al..Tolerance..the bailiwick of liberals and democrats.

Thanks Al,
Orangetom

Originally posted by darkelf
She left out my favorite. From the KJV

Deuteronomy 32:39 - and there is no god
1 Kings 8:23 - there is no God
2 Kings 1:16 - there is no God
2 Kings 5:15 - there is no God
2 Chronicles 6:14 - there is no God
Psalms 14:1 - There is no God.
Psalms 53:1 - There is no God.
Isaiah 44:6 - there is no God.
Isaiah 44:8 - there is no God
Isaiah 45:5 - there is no God

Maranatha

Right lets look at all of them now...

Deu 32:39 See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.

God is saying that there are no gods with him...

1Ki 8:23 And he said, LORD God of Israel, there is no God like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servants that walk before thee with all their heart:

There are no God like thee....

2Ki 1:16 And he said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Forasmuch as thou hast sent messengers to enquire of Baalzebub the god of Ekron, is it not because there is no God in Israel to enquire of his word? therefore thou shalt not come down off that bed on which thou art gone up, but shalt surely die.

2Ki 5:15 And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him: and he said, Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel: now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant.

All right I've made my point i think The Bible does not say "there is no God" as a compleat statment.

That would be like taking "there is no phalcon" from "there is no phalcon on this site by the one who wrote this" silly...

But heres what the Bible says

Psa 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

A you just another fool who has said in their heart that there is no God?

But aside from that... No religion in politics? Imposable not to have it. We all have beliefs. Atheisim is a belief. Therefore how a person conducts their belief is their religion. Everyone has their beliefs, therefore all practice their religion. Isnt it silly to say "you cant bring what you belive anywhere in politics"?

Originally posted by marg6043
Well James, that is the beauty of the bible it fit one sizes fit all, you can use it anyway you want to serve your personal agenda in the name of a higher purpose.

Kill thee enemies to spread the word of the lord.

At the same time, you can comeback and preach "You should not kill"

You can find in the bible many verses and all of them have many meanings depending of what you are trying to achieve.

Since Christianity was born the bible and religion has become the perfect tool for power.

You know the one thing that I dont seam to understand the whole thing about "power". Next to what Jesus has done on the cross for sinners, is another theme.

The Bible tells that Christians are to be humble, submissive to God, to be as servernts and such. Quite the oppisit to power. I suggest you actualy just read the Bible and see what God wants of christians. See for yourself if the "power hungry" ones are actualy acting as they should.

Originally posted by phalcon

Originally posted by marg6043
Well James, that is the beauty of the bible it fit one sizes fit all, you can use it anyway you want to serve your personal agenda in the name of a higher purpose.

Kill thee enemies to spread the word of the lord.

At the same time, you can comeback and preach "You should not kill"

You can find in the bible many verses and all of them have many meanings depending of what you are trying to achieve.

Since Christianity was born the bible and religion has become the perfect tool for power.

You know the one thing that I dont seam to understand the whole thing about "power". Next to what Jesus has done on the cross for sinners, is another theme.

The Bible tells that Christians are to be humble, submissive to God, to be as servernts and such. Quite the oppisit to power. I suggest you actualy just read the Bible and see what God wants of christians. See for yourself if the "power hungry" ones are actualy acting as they should.

I think the point is, what God wants of christians, and what todays "christians" are doing are two different things, which is what many people are pointing out.

Originally posted by IMPerial
I think the point is, what God wants of Christians, and what todays "Christians" are doing are two different things, which is what many people are pointing out.

Bingo, what we are having in our modern days is fundamentalist Christan's following their own personal agendas in the matters of politics and power.

Perhaps no the regular Mr.Joe that goes to church every Sunday and read the bible, but the more powerful members of our religious and political groups.

One of the most anoying things, that have at times driven me to go outside and SCREAM, is when your trying to have a good discussion with a religious person and instead of telling you what THEY think, they start rambling line after line from scriptures, be it the bible or the Koran, doesn't matter to me, when I talk to someone and discuss something, I want to know what THEY think, not what some smuck wrote some thousands of years ago, things writen for that time and setting, things writen for the beliefs of that time.

Like, I'm talking to this guy I used to go to school with, hes member of some Christian community that some whacky TV preacher started. While remembering old times I ask him if he heard from this other guy that was in school with us too and told him that this guy came out of the clouset shortly after we got out of school and was currently married with his boyfriend.

When I saw the obvious utter pain in his face, I asked what he thought about that and about homosexuality in general(the guy I was talking to used to be a fairly openminded person).

So he started rambling loads and loads of verses from the bible and after he went on ranting about how evil it way, I asked him, "yeah well, that book might imply that its evil and all (but thats open for discussion imho) but what do YOU think?

For 2 hours we talked and for 2 hours all I got from him was what had been drilled into his skill from going to that church. Not once did he even hint at what he as a person that knows this other guy pritty well and had been friends with him too, thinks about it.


It drives me absolutely bonkers that when talking to a religious person from one of the organized religions, they seem to be unable to think for themselves, the only thing they know and are pritty much brainwashed to think and say is whats said in their scriptures and by their preachers or other church leaders.

This is also what terrifies me, because this is exactly how the Spanish Inquisition happend and exactly how so many innocent people died over the ages, just because the followers of these organized religions just follow whatever they are being told and utterly loose the ability to think for themselves and totaly loose the ability to see right from wrong. They totaly depend on their religion to tell them whats right and whats wrong.

One thing they always keep forgetting is that organization gives power to its leaders. Power leads to the seeking of more power untill absolute power is achieved. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I thank you for your discussion on this matter. May I make a few observations and comments?

to IMPerial

Well your right and wrong. Your right that what God wants and how many "christians" are are very often two diffrent things. Your wrong about saying its "Today's". There have been people throughout all of history (well since 33ad at least) Claming to be christian yet not acting like it. My suggestion is this thou, If you are bassing your oppinion on weather Christianity is right or wrong, one needs to look past the people going by that title, and what the Bible has to say about it.

To marg6043

I actualy concider my self a fendumentalist christian. I concider it in the sense of accepting the Bible for what it has to say, and obaying it. Granted I often faill at times. But in esences theres a problem with calling someone a fundementalist who is going after their own adgenda. Again a fundemantilist is someone who follows the Bible in the literalist sence. If a person does that they will see that the Bible requiores them not to follow their own adgenda, and submit to Gods plans for their lives. So in essence a fundementalist cannot follow their own agenda and still be called a fundy.

To thematrix

I do not know much about linux. I know a decent amount about it, but I need to consult the manual. If you were to ask me a question about "How do i partition my hard drive" I may end up quoting to you from the manual. Would this be concidered wrong? If you were to ask me why linux was better operating system them MS Windows, I would give you a few of my own oppinions and then I may quote to you some stats in the Linux manual to prove my point.

Similary I would do the same to the Bible.

Futhermore the Spanish Inq was conducted by the Roman Catholic Church (Which is not christian) They were (and still are verry much so) about controling power. For exmple the Pope is the Head of the RCC. What he says is Gospel truth. However if you read the Bible, Jesus Christ is the head of the church. The Biblical church does not have humans as "Gods word on earth" just shepards who try to the best of their ability to share the Bible with people.

One more thing, back then the Bible was in latin. Most people did not understand latin. So they blindly accepted what ever the RCC preist preached. A Guy by the name of William Tyndale was one of the first to translate it into English. He said something on the lines of He wanted it so that the plow boy could read Gods word just like the priest could.

So actualy the inquisition stated because people blindly accepted the preists words. Now people can read Gods word for themselvs and see that such things like the Inquisions and Witch Burnings etc etc. are totaly against Gods will.

So when people quote the Bible, they are actualy being able to form their own oppinion about it. They just share where they base it from.

Hope I have cleared up some misconceptions.

Originally posted by orangetom1999
I havent seen your posts in some time having been busy here.

I think having been in politics for so long and dealing with peoples you would be a bit more tolerant than your last post.

I will admit that Thomas Crowne is very opinionated and salty in his posts and not necessarily the most refined in his technique.

However ..you did not answer his question in the format you chose. This too is not high ground.

I have watched politics for years as just a observer and have concluded that politics is akin often to whoredom. The buying and selling of souls for political reasons. Both partys not just one. The partys ,both of them, have come to represent the partys ..not necessarily the public. This is the very essence of the system in operation ..the duality/feudal nature.
I dont think many of the religious affiliations of which you and Thomas make note of take this into consideration while sleeping with politics. This as both of you seem to note from different perspectives will be their undoing. I agree. Most peoples do not see the talmudic nature of politics. A system for the insiders and whom they really represent and a system for the outsiders.. a dual system. Feudal.
The Constitution of this country requires only one system..not this dual headed hydra. This is the essence of what most peoples ..even religious peoples dont know. It will be the undoing of this nation as it has others.
Thomas tends to be Salty in his approach..I dont always agree with him..but I know from whence his Salt comes. He is sectarian ..not nonsectarian. Tolerance Al..Tolerance..the bailiwick of liberals and democrats.

Thanks Al,
Orangetom

Whew! This thing is so old I thought it was a dead issue and, while I appreciate your comments, I hardly know where to begin to respond.

Let's start here: I didn't answer the question (assuming you meant about when "Fundies" were with the Dems) because, in fact, I did NOT say that. The Dems never had the hard core bible-thumping "Fundies" with them. They had the majority of Christians on their side for a very long time - particularly in the south. Without researching it too hard, I'd say pretty much up until the Reagan presidency. Around about then, we also saw the rapid rise of the politically active (and savvy) extreme Christian groups. (Sometimes I say, with a smile, back in the days when Christians were nice people. That's an exaggeration to make a point.)

Also, I think I made it pretty clear that a lot of my remarks are solid, rarely disputed, electoral "truisms" - the kind that BOTH parties generally agree upon and attempt to use to their advantage.

Another point that addresses some of your concerns, I hope, is that you don't have to like this game to know how to play it. In fact, it's pretty depressing and nauseating the way we choose our elected officials. Nope, I do not think it's good for this country in the long run. I'm not smart enough to figure out how to get people to really think before they vote. I hope someone will be that smart some day, soon. I don't think it will be me, though. So, since we are not going to suspend elections in this country while we wait for people to educate themselves, I'm just going to keep using the methods and techniques that I've learned (and continue to learn) to persuade this country's "sound bite" voters in the 17 seconds that our voters will, on average, spend considering for whom they will vote (in all but presidential elections).

I do not disagree that this is really pretty awful. What solution can you offer? I've already admitted that I don't have one.

I'm not sure who you are advising me to be tolerant of...Mr. Crowne? I re-read that little exchange and stand by what I wrote. He didn't want a discussion - he wanted a shouting match and he wanted to do the shouting for both of us. Since he made that kind offer, I thought I'd just save my voice. That seemed like a very good bargain to me. I don't do shouting matches.

Anyway, please let me know if I have not been clear in my answers and I'll give it another go. You make some good points and interesting challenges. I don't think we are in exactly the same context, though. Would you accept my statement that I am coming from "how it actually works" whereas you are coming from "how it should work" for the betterment of us all?

[edit on 5-7-2005 by Al Davison]

"sound bite voters". Lol lol..yes I must admit that pretty much describes it. I've never thought of it is those merchandizing terms but that is pretty much on the mark.
That is also pretty much on the mark about the South being democrat even though there were alot of what today would be described as fundamentalist thinking peoples in biblical terms. I never thought of it as occuring around the time of the Reagan Presidency but only that they seem to be reacting to something they percieve as happening or in some cases not happening in the political process....the direction our nation is taking politically.
As to these groups being active or savy ..in the political arena...I dont really think so...they are going to get burned by the very system they are trying to influence for the reasons stated in my previous post.
Yes I will take your word for the concept that it is how it actually works...verses some of what I post as to how it should work.

I do not put much faith in the Church as a institution for change in this arena of politics since most Churchs are registered as tax exempt organizations. This is not seperation of church and state but instead a corporate entity of the state. This is the doing of the Churchs. Churchs should be tax immune ..not tax exempt. This means that the churchs are part of the problem ..not the solution. I only know of a handful of churchs which are not filed as state corporations. You are correct when you say this is not good for the country. Same with sound bite voters.
What it will take is people who are educated outside this system to facts and history not made available through the regular avenues including government sponsored churchs. This is a tall order I will admit. It will have to be done on a local basis first before going to a larger venue. It would take a sufficient number of independent self sufficient people to do this locally. People who can think about the nature of a thing and not be emotionally put on the string easily for votes. One of the favorite pastimes for both partys...emotions.

Thanks for your post Al,
Orangetom

To orangetom1999

You know you have made some of the points that I believe in too. Here in canada we call them "non-profit societies" but very similar to the 401.c in the states.

My take on things are this. In order to stay a NPS one has to follow goverment rules of how to run a NPS. I found that such rules actualy go against how the Bible tells us that we should conduct church business.

And like you said there are only a small handful of groups wo decided not to be a NPS or a 401c.....

With that in mind, Has anyone conciderd that its actualy the Goverment Running the Church Groups, as opposed to the Church Groups running the Goverment?

The thing that gets me is this. The Bible is very clear about this is that the church will NEVER be a world leader. It will allways be despised and rejected, and hated and persicuted.

So really has anyone conciderd that the goverment has had its hand in creating a fake "church" that is diffrent from what the Bible wants as one for their own gains?

The question to ask when you examin the "Church" is what exactly am I looking at? Is this the real one of the Bible, or the fake one of the world?

The Christianity proposed by Dominionists (acknowledged and unacknowledged) has little to do with the teachings of Jesus at all. It's a purely political movement, concerned with exercising power over others, using sexual guilt as a means of political control.

Notice how the Religious Right focuses almost entirely on sexual issues, wheras Jesus barely mentioned them at all. That's because sexuality is a powerful motivator, and sexual guilt makes an excellent means of social control.

You never see these people discussing ethics, materialism, or the other issues at the core of Jesus' teachings. Why? Because they don't care. Those things don't serve to enhance their power over others. Which is what this is really all about. Seizing power. Christianity itself is only a means to an end.

Thanks for your post. Hallelujah. Praise God someone else got it ..understood. At times it seems like a wasteland ..desolate out here.
I agree with what you said the Church will be dispised, hated, and rejected, and eventually persecuted . Many of the posts on this fourm clearly prove this out.
Also agree that the Government will eventually run the churchs through the political power of tax exempt regulation. ie..auditing. This has already happened to many churchs. Dr James Dobson here in America has already had this lesson reinforced as has Pat Robertson as they both have the tax exempt status of a state corporation ...a 501c corporate status granted by the state. This is not seperation of church and state on the part of the Churchs operating either in total ignorance or willfulness. Nevertheless it is a phony.
Also agree these eventually become government run churchs just like the school system. They wont allow anything taught that they dont want in the agenda.
And yes you describe a technique for peeling back the thin veneer of what is shown to see what is actually underneath. This is what the power is of the Word and following the Word for which the world system doesnt want people to know. It will eventually teach you to peel back the veneer and see what is underneath.
What many people do not know ...is that there are many counterfit churchs out there and most of the non believers in these rooms must always hold up one of the counterfits to represent all the churchs as if the counterfits are a automatic default setting to represent all Christianity. They can never think it through...even when you explain it to them.
Most of what passes for Christianity today is doing exactly what the Hebrews of Olde Testament times were doing. Following the traditions of men and passing it off as if it is the Word of God. In addition to that they are using sophistry to undeline their points and decieve many. The Gnostics have moved into many churchs and supplanted the simplicity of the Word just as they did among the Hebrews. Nothing new under the sun.
Observing counterfits and counterfit doctrine is one of the things that came out of occult studies as it seems to be in the Word over and over from Genesis to the last chapter of the Word. It has become a yardstick by which I have learned to measure many things I see in this world..including politics, education.movies, television et al.
Thanks for your posting and support. May the God of our Fathers watch over you and your House.

Orangetom

Originally posted by xmotex
The Christianity proposed by Dominionists (acknowledged and unacknowledged) has little to do with the teachings of Jesus at all. It's a purely political movement, concerned with exercising power over others, using sexual guilt as a means of political control.

Notice how the Religious Right focuses almost entirely on sexual issues, wheras Jesus barely mentioned them at all. That's because sexuality is a powerful motivator, and sexual guilt makes an excellent means of social control.

You never see these people discussing ethics, materialism, or the other issues at the core of Jesus' teachings. Why? Because they don't care. Those things don't serve to enhance their power over others. Which is what this is really all about. Seizing power. Christianity itself is only a means to an end.

Just thought Id throw this in for whoever is involved here.


Joh 8:10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
Joh 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.


Joh 4:17 The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband:
Joh 4:18 For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly.


Mat 9:20 And, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came behind him, and touched the hem of his garment:
Mat 9:21 For she said within herself, If I may but touch his garment, I shall be whole.
Mat 9:22 But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour.


Mat 22:28 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.
Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.
Mat 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.



Mat 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.


Joh 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.



Mat 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.



Mat 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,



Mar 10:11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against herRev 2:22 Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.



Rev 2:21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not.


Jesus hardly ever mentions it?

Carry on.

e-sword

Intresting post you have there but before we go any further ...please read my post above to phalcon.

You are quite correct about one thing though I will take it much further than did your post. Correct...sexuality is definitely a means of political control. No doubt ..you got it quite correct. Not sexual guilt...because alot of people today ..just as in past history dont have the raw material to identify with guilt. It just isnt in them.

I will begin by taking it much further than you can even imagine... Jesus and others in the Olde testament did not dwell on sexuality because it was already dwelt on by the nations surrounding Israel ..carte blanche. Wholesale. They were wide open at it in all kinds of festivals and day to day activities. It is not a new or novel doctrine. No where ,xmotex, do you find instruction Olde or New Testaments for followers of God to define themselves by sexuality. Never. It did not say that people did not have sexuality but that they did not define who and what they were by sexuality. The Pagan/heathen nations were already doing that. Got the point. I am at a loss to understand why you did not post his view?? Can you please explain this absence??
It is obvious both Olde and New Testaments that the Believers were not to do as the nations surrounding them did.

This being said...it becomes obvious that sexual control is politicial control. It is a mechanism to get people to buy more products , ideas, emotions et al. Even to put people on a sexual emotional string to gaurantee that they will pull the correct levers in a voting booth . It is no different than being on a string as a stringed puppet. Both political partys will use this mechanism to achieve their ends..this among those who know and believe is called whoredom. Whether it is merchants doing this or politicians ..politicians are just a different kind of merchant. Common sense.

Xmotex..once you know the abscence of the sexual motives..in Christianity and see the way it is used to control people outside of Christianity ..you see a different result. Also a different mechanism at work.
Dont worry Xmotex...what I am telling you here is way to deep for the bulk of Christians to even recognize ...much less explain or put into words. They too havent a clue.
The power of Christianity is in its Salt...not the organization ..but in the organism...the correct Salt..
This rampant sex and sexuality is olde as mankind itself and can be found with enough digging in certain historical texts. It is the part and parcel of the dominant religions of this world ..always has been and always will be. It has also infiltrated many Christian churchs and often passes for Christianity .which it is not . It is in fact the very control mechanism of which you speak....it is core to perverting the ethics of Jesus also materialism. Any look at the history of merchants and advertising will clear this up.
Christianity rejects this as a lifestyle. The world does not. The world and the World system embraces sexuality carte blanche.
I want to know why you dont seem to be able to make this connection in lieu of what you post.

Thanks ,
Orangetom

orangetom

Thanks, .......I think.

You pretty much made Pauls case in the NT and the prophets' case in the OT.

Its not really a lifestyle that is being rejected tho.
It is the lusts of the flesh. A personal war not a culture war. The flesh is sinful and wars against the spirit.
If you put it in perspective of Spirit vs Flesh then 99% of christians should recognize it

Again...

Originally posted by RANT
So let's call this 'Christianizing America in a political context' then Brand X Activism since it isn't adequately either quite religion or politics, just destroying both. And Brand X Activism then, or that which asks you to Boycott Kraft Cheese for Jesus or Vote a Certain Way or Jeopardize Your Soul for Formal Cooperation in Evil should be a topic of concern to the other "real" Christians as it will eventually destroy Christianity, assuming it hasn't already.

There's an actual topic here.

The conspiracy isn't the "immoral" or non-Christians or secular world or this forum.

If one has the apologetic attitude that it's "no big deal" since the money changers were around before Jesus too, I'd suggest (again) you're missing the point, attacking the wrong people, and (most importantly) share as much guilt in the demise of Christianity as Brand X Activists.