You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “The Deafening Silence of the Christian Church”.
« Previous Post Welcome to Police State U.S.A.
Glenn Beck, Gold, and Stupid Politicians Next Post »
What say you?
Great post CL! I too have been deeply disturbed by the silence from the Christian Churches. Glenn Beck is trying to wake to churches up. I'm not sure the spark is there anymore in the organized church.
Great post CL. One of the best Ive read.
No fair! JC beat me!
Thank you, thank you!
We are living in the Great Apostasy, the "falling away first" that Jesus described would be one of signs of the end. Charles Spurgeon first noticed the phenomenon in his series of essays, The Downgrade. Then during the late 1800s and early 1900s, churches started to be Sunday clubs, as described by Joseph Cook in his lecture Socialism, with precludes on current events. The National Council of Churches and World Council of Churches tried to promote ecumenicism and used the already ignorant church body to cheer lead for the social gospel, a well-known tool of collectivists. I notice Richard Land of the Southern Baptists is advocating amnesty, btw, he's a member of CFR, just sayin'.
I've done a map of Bill Buckley and you'll find that he is CFR and a Bilderberger, plus he was real big buds with Kissinger. I had a post a while back about the John Birch Society getting the shaft because they were too close to the truth.
The scanner business is not about safety. If they were serious about safety, they would do as the Israelis do. No, this is a test to see how sheeplefied the American people have become.
Thomas Jefferson was NOT a christian. He in NO way wanted a christian nation. No where in the constitution are any provisions made to create a christian nation.
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press,Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
-Establishment of religion means just that. There shall be no official religion. Pray to god all you want, there is NO prohibiting the free exercise thereof, just no establishment of religion. That means Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or whatever.....
I said nothing in regards to, or even implied a "Christian nation" in this post.
All of the founding fathers with the exception of three were Christians, most of them Calvinists. When it says no establishment of religion, it means what they understood it to mean - You couldn't make all of the colonies Episcopalian because they had a real problem with that in the old country. For 150 years the supreme court and every other court accepted this interpretation. What has happened is that secular humanism, atheism, etc. has excused itself from the religion requirement. These philosophies have aggressively tried to "establish" themselves in schools, media, and the public square. This is contrary to first amendment, which also says the free exercise thereof. If a community wants to publicly pray, the ACLU should not have lawyers there ready to sue them. I read last week where some kids and their teacher were praying outside of the supreme court and a capitol cop came over and told them to stop. WTH
-But that doesn't mean we should establish ANY notion of a national religion. The founding fathers made a few mistakes in the constitution (like the institutionalization of slavery) but that was corrected with time by the 13th & 14th amendments.
But they were spot on by separating our government from religion by adding this as the FIRST of the ten original amendments. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...."
-How much clearer could they be, their own personal beliefs notwithstanding?
I think it is because many Christians believe that we are in the end times, they figure "What the heck, we can't change what is happening if it is foretold in the Bible". What they don't realize is that only God knows when the end time will come. It could be another 1000 years.
I feel it is a Christian's responsibility to speak up regarding the fate of our country.
We Americans reach an impasse on this issue of a Christian Nation. Believers are of the opinion that since God is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, then we are a Christian Nation. Weren't the founding fathers Christian? -Naturally. The citizens of the United States were almost ALL descendants of protestant Europeans.
However, the U.S. Constitution is the official framework of our structure of laws. Had the framers of the constitution wanted us to be a "Christian Nation" then they would have spelled it out. That they did NOT do this is evidence that they wanted...
1. The right to worship (or not) as each citizen sees fit.
2. The separation of the government FROM religion.
I have no problem with any religion, until they want to encode their religious dogma in our legal code and governance.
We are given several verses, nay, chapters that give details of what to look for so we'll know the time. But that doesn't mean we roll over and stop speaking out for what is right.
Part of what made America special was our strong church. When people police themselves because they will know they will face a righteous and holy God at the end of their life, we don't need a police state. That is why John Adams said that our government is designed for a moral and religious people and WILL NOT work for any other.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/07/blasphemy_day_is_30_september.php
David, you're the only one talking about a "Christian nation." My post didn't discuss it, nor did it imply it, and the other commentors haven't brought it up either. You're arguing with ghosts.
This post was a condemnation of Christians who allow/support the state going where it doesn't belong, such as taking naked pictures, invading privacy, abusive and violent tactics to "legislate morality," and aggressive support of war.
I wanted to disagree with the article but it was too non-specific. What exactly do you want "the Christian Church" to condemn, specifically? Who speaks for "the Christian Church?" I'd very much like to know the answer to the latter quextion. I'm a Protestant, and most of us can't even agree on simple inconsequential matters, let alone profoundly important issues.
That said, all I can do is speak for myself. I oppose the war on drugs, not because I believe that it is wrong to "legislate morality" but because it is futile in this instance. I've learned from the history of Prohibition that the cure is worse than the disease. I certainly don't agree with abusive cops. Who does? I support "just wars" (such as WWII). Who doesn't? Sounds to me as though you are looking to pick a fight with some unknown, faceless "Christian Church" that does not exist. Where I come from we call that a straw man.
I'm sure I must be missing something.
What we're saying is that the church fell down on the job of extolling individual rights, which our essential to a free country. It is not denominational to believe that everyone is born in the image of God and that their birthright is that of freedom. Read the sermons of 18th century pastors and see if you don't see a huge difference today. Over time, especially beginning in the Wilson era of progressivism, many denominations started to promote the Christian's duty to the state. This ushered in the social gospel heresies that mainline churches subscribe to today. Instead of individuals serving individuals, as God commands, we are supposed to serve some nebulous "greater good". As a consequence, charity increasing became the government's domain as welfare legislation increased, what had been the church's essential role in the community decreased.
What did we do with the homeless before shelters? In John Adams, by David McCullough, we get the story of John Adams' father, a deacon, having to take in a young woman who was left with no where to go. It was his duty to provide her a home as a deacon. Try that today.
The point of this post is that the church in America from around 1730 - 1850 brought the natural rights of man (this might be what's confusing you) to the public forum. The church abandoned discussion of these absolute truths to gimmicky religion that appeals to the heartstrings, but not to reason.
Excellent summation, as well as addition to the post!
Has your church condemned the airport porno-scanners? Do they speak out against the violence used in the War on Drugs? Or are they most likely to make excuses for these things? The state has to "save us?" Eerie statement, isn't it?
The Christian church should condemn everything and anything the state does which violates man's natural (God-given) rights. Period.
A refreshing article, and it's good to see from the comments that there is a vibrant and interested audience.
I may black sheep myself with this, but I extend my own Christina sentiments to include the abolition of the death penalty. I see no reason to give the State the right to kill.
JackieDurkee above makes a good point about the "endtimes", and it is worth noting that such ideas were readily embraced by the previous administration. In fact, both the 12 year Reagan/Bush era and the W presidency leaned a good deal on Bible prophecy as a guide to foreign policy, much to the detriment of the Muslim world(and by proximity to the USA, Central America).
Personally, I find it astounding that Christians have consistently aplauded what amounts to mass murder, virtual genocide, crimes against humanity, and every conceivable evil in the pursuit of global power as led by the US government. That Christinas would be so easily blinded, duped, and/or flattered into such atrocities and still revel in them is a smear on the very face of our faith.
Our citizenship is in Heaven. Our faith is in God and Christ, not any political system, leader, or party.
The Bible mentions an evil world power that dominates the entire earth, right? How is it that so many Christians are waiting for that "empire" to emerge while living in the richest, most powerful, and most expansive empire that has ever existed? Am I missing something here?