https://www.facebook.com/buttonpushertees/videos/503514296682383/

American White Evangelical Christianity is now a part of a white supremacist Movement that makes a fortune selling guns to people who should not have them, in order to stay in power.

The guns sales part is questionable as there's a lot more to the story but this form of religion is now used as a tribal organizing principle for far right white identity politics.

If this upsets some of you, please consider the following:

A hundred years ago before the First World War, Protestant evangelicals were the driving force behind the Progressive Movement. In the 1930s, many Catholics were social conservatives but many were also liberals. The church you went to didn't necessarily determine how you voted.

But after the societal changes of Vietnam War and the civil rights era, this form of religion began to organise around preventing further social change. Groups like the Moral Majority became prominent in politics. Politicians began to court these groups but always held them at arms' length. A dynamic feedback loop arose from the increasingly more extreme demands of evangelical groups, constant new enemies to fear (first the ERA, then punk rock, then child abuse, then gay people and gay marriage, then trans people, now climate change, etc), their need to raise funds and political demands for legislation to recreate society in their image. As time passed, they demanded more and more influence and this began to shift the balance in the two main political parties -- which originally had a mix of many different interests. Add into this mix economic and social anxiety and the situation became very extreme. The political parties are now extremely polarised and elections are decided by a minority of extreme voters instead of a broad moderate majority.



https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/05/a-match-made-in-heaven/521409/


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosperity_theology


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/16/white-identity-politics-isnt-just-about-white-supremacy-its-much-bigger/


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2017/08/16/what-if-western-media-covered-americas-white-tribalism-the-same-way-it-covers-other-nations/



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/26/2017 10:58AM by anybody.

Never mind the fact that there are liberal Evangelical congregations and conservative Evangelical congregations just like there are conservative areas and liberal areas of the country. Never mind that most congregations have members of various races. Never mind why you singled out Evangelicals at all. Just say the magic word "racist" and watch the hysteria unfold.

Most people aren't comfortable with hate. But it's much easier if you say "I have nothing against (group x,y, or z) but it's against the Bible. It's not me. I'm just following the will of God."


But what is the "will of God?" This is something theologians have argued about for millennia. People have tried to find justification in religious scripture for just about anything.


Religion doesn't make people buy guns, but if you have irrational fears about "them" and how "they" are planning to "take over" and end your way of life as you know it, you start to look for any explanation for what you think is happening. Some people find an explanation in the extremist version evangelical Christianity that promulgates white identity religion and blames everything that is going "wrong" on just about any other group of people that you can name.


If think this sounds like something straight out of groups like "The Order," you'd be right. The difference now is what used to be extreme is becoming more and more mainstream.

There are some people who believe anyone who supports the GOP or has conservative political leanings is automatically racist. The reality is that in the GOP primary Christians who attended church weekly were far less likely to vote for Trump than people who claimed to be Christian, but didn't attend church. And Trump did not have majority support during the GOP primary. The candidate I supported was for immigration reform while securing the border and was Hispanic. In fact all of the polls of GOP voters showed the majority held that position, but there were simply too many GOP candidates to overcome the minority that was for Trump. Some evangelical leaders were vocally against Trump not to mention many of the leading conservative voices such as the Weekly Standard, National Review, Hot Air and Eric Erickson's web site. The only true thing you can say is that in the primary unchurched Evangelicals supported Trump. Unfortunately, we were given a choice in my state between two crooks and a loony tune. Worst choices of my lifetime. And of course Trump did not get the majority of voters in Utah either.

Only the ones that scream the most are.

Cue the "no true scotsman" argument in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

The only religious group that voted for Trump more than Mormons was white evangelicals males. Meaning Mormons are the most racist religion except for white Evangelical men.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/how-the-faithful-voted-a-preliminary-2016-analysis/ft_16-11-09_relig_exitpoll_religrace/

@koriwhore, so why is it that only the religious groups are racist? That doesnt even make sense.

You keep making this sound like it is about religion when it isnt. If voting for Donald Trump is your only evidence of "racism" then clearly your problem is with Donald Trump not religion.

You just want to make it sound like it is about religion when in fact you just dislike conservatives. Isnt that so?

I felt like an idiot googling, "Are religious people more racist?"
But I asked the obvious question.
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/651755

@koriwhore,
The article says >>>The researchers said, almost as an aside, that “only religious agnostics were racially tolerant.”<<<


That article is completely stupid to say the least. It actually says that the only group that isnt racist is agnostics. It makes it sound like all religions are racist.

koriwhore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> https://www.facebook.com/buttonpushertees/videos/5
> 03514296682383/
>
> American White Evangelical Christianity is now a
> part of a white supremacist Movement that makes a
> fortune selling guns to people who should not have
> them, in order to stay in power.


The best thing about these sort of sweeping generalizations based upon zero evidence is what you can learn about those who actually believe them to be true.

Perhaps it is an atheist/non believer paranoia much like Christians supposedly believing there is a war on Christmas.

Here's the "extreme" part of this idea -- while it's not "atheist paranoia" (the groups actually exist), it's also not "christianity in America." It's a small but very loud subset:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity

It's also not all evangelical christians. Not even close.
It would be foolish, however, to ignore those American evangelical christians who DO explicitly or implicitly align with racist ideas and policies...they should be openly condemned and criticized.

This just proves my point. The article says "Christian Identity is not an organized religion, and is not connected with specific Christian denominations; instead, it is independently practiced by individuals, churches and some prison gangs."

It doesnt have anything to do with any Christian denomination...

It isnt even an organized religion.

But yet people try to blame Christian denominations or all Christians in general for their beliefs.

That's why I posted it :)

There are "evangelical" voices on both sides. It would be great if they'd agree on what "evangelical christianity" is, but I wouldn't hold my breath for that...

http://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2017/august/trump-evangelical-advisers-charlottesville-white-supremacis.html



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/27/2017 03:59PM by ificouldhietokolob.

The basic definition of the term evangelical relates only to the Great Commission imperative to preach the saving grace of the Gospel and to make disciples. In that sense all Christian denominations are evangelical.

Ok.
Except that the Roman Catholic church calls itself "apostolic," not "evangelical."
And the ones that call themselves "evangelical" do so to differentiate themselves from the thousands of sects they don't consider to be "evangelical."

So you guys can argue among yourselves about the "evangelical" moniker. In the meantime, I'll call the ones who call themselves "evangelical" evangelical. And not the ones that don't. OK? :)

You may call them whatever you wish. I gave the essential definition of the term evangelical for clarification in the discussion. Some on the board appear to use the term interchangeably with terms like fundamentalist or extreme right wing. Such terms do not address the essential definition of the word no matter your clever word play.

kentish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You may call them whatever you wish. I gave the
> essential definition of the term evangelical for
> clarification in the discussion.

Well, you gave *your* definition.
Not everyone (including churches that call themselves "evangelical") agree with your definition.
That was my point.

> Some on the
> board appear to use the term interchangeably with
> terms like fundamentalist or extreme right wing.
> Such terms do not address the essential
> definition of the word no matter your clever word
> play.

What "clever word play?" It's the thousands of christian sects that use the term to differentiate themselves from thousands of other christian sects that are engaging in "word play." Take up your issue with them, not me. I just pointed out that you declaring what you insist it should mean doesn't really mean anything in the real world. It's like insisting on a particular interpretation of a bible verse as the only valid one -- the thousands of christian sects who insist on different interpretations would consider yours 'heretical' and ignore it. Billy Graham didn't agree with you, for example...

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/14/evangelicals-defined-history-american-evangelicalism_n_1277352.html

I would be interested in any quote from any church that gives a clear and contrary definition of the term evangelical. It is interesting that you would use Billy Graham, who does not in the article give a specific definition of the term, who was himself a renowned evangelist whose specific ministry was to bring people to a saving knowledge of Christ...that and little else but the very demonstration of the term. An evangelical ministry and process supported by mainline churches such as Anglican as well as those who actually do represent the term. Evangelical is not a specific set of beliefs as much as it is the process of presenting the Christian Gospel.

kentish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would be interested in any quote from any church
> that gives a clear and contrary definition of the
> term evangelical.

How about the "National Association of Evangelicals?"

https://www.nae.net/what-is-an-evangelical/

According to them, what makes a church "evangelical:"

Conversionism: the belief that lives need to be transformed through a “born-again” experience and a life long process of following Jesus

Activism: the expression and demonstration of the gospel in missionary and social reform efforts

Biblicism: a high regard for and obedience to the Bible as the ultimate authority

Crucicentrism: a stress on the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross as making possible the redemption of humanity


They barely mention part of your definition.

Or how about the "Evangelical Manifesto," which also doesn't agree with your definition, and specifically lists "evangelical beliefs" that one MUST have to be an "evangelical?"

http://evangelicalmanifesto.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Evangelical_Manifesto_Summary.pdf


> It is interesting that you would
> use Billy Graham, who does not in the article give
> a specific definition of the term, who was himself
> a renowned evangelist whose specific ministry was
> to bring people to a saving knowledge of
> Christ...that and little else but the very
> demonstration of the term. An evangelical
> ministry and process supported by mainline
> churches such as Anglican as well as those who
> actually do represent the term. Evangelical is
> not a specific set of beliefs as much as it is the
> process of presenting the Christian Gospel.

Not according to the "National Association of Evangelicals" or the "Evangelical Manifesto," which mentions a specific set of beliefs.

See above.

I'd also disagree with your description of Billy Graham and his "ministry." But then, I'm not an "evangelical...." :)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/27/2017 07:22PM by ificouldhietokolob.

I see nothing in the NAE reference that falls outside the decision I presented. Belief in scripture, good works, action, are givens. All are geared to the making of converts, the process of evangelism.

Kentish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Belief in
> scripture, good works, action, are givens.

But you just said there were no specific beliefs involved?
Oops.

Let me ask you this: are mormons evangelicals?
If not, why not?

Because they don't have specific beliefs?
Oops again.

> All
> are geared to the making of converts, the process
> of evangelism.

...and there go the goalposts, moving further and further away.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/27/2017 07:41PM by ificouldhietokolob.

...then there's this:

https://www.npr.org/2015/12/19/458058251/are-you-an-evangelical-are-you-sure

and evangelicals who don't share such views are differentiated by the terms left leaning or liberal evangelicals...

We humans are so obsessed by labels, aren't we? :(

Labels are toxic.
Like identity politics.
Like Culture War
We dont hVe "Culture War, we have a Holy War on science, thats killing us.

"Labels are toxic.
Like identity politics."

says the person who started the thread using identity politics...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/27/2017 11:02PM by isthechurchtrue.

I think if this was about atheism, it would have been removed within the hour. :P

I really don't get the evangelical anti-abortion before EVERYTHING else position.

I am anti-abortion. I was raised Catholic. I am a vegan and I don't believe in killing ANYTHING, not even human fetuses.

However, come on, people. This Roy Moore person is so obviously guilty and the standard position (it appears) of the Christian conservatives in Alabama appears to be that all that is irrelevant if it means there could be another member of the Congress who would vote to uphold abortion laws. It seems so counter-intuitive to me.

Just don't get it.

Especially since legal abortion is a supreme court decision, and congress *can't* vote to uphold abortion laws or not.

During the last several presidential elections, I had numerous people tell me, "Oh, I just have to vote for a president that's against abortion, so we can end it!"

I remind them that the president has *zero* power to end (or not end) abortion.

That's usually when they start calling me names. :(

We've gone beyond normal decency. We've gone beyond normal discourse. We've gone beyond objective, fact based scientific reality.

Unlike Mormonism, this tribal identity came from the bottom up instead of from the top down. They are supporting Roy Moore and Donald Trump because of emotion and identity and not rational thought.


Does this sound rational to you? It's not. It's totally crazy. It doesn't sound so crazy if you live in this conspiracy theory driven world:

Abortion and white genocide
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqzBGPrgbVc


An extreme example, yes -- but many people think along these lines.

So where to turn? What can fix it? What will make the world as it's "supposed" to be? Let's create a patriarchal theocracy based on "Biblical" law! That will solve everything! It doesn't matter how we get there or by what means we achieve it. The end justifies the means. Praise the Lord!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/27/2017 10:06PM by anybody.

I actually think it's less about saving unborn babies and more about controlling women. If women are forced to remain pregnant and have offspring they are automatically limited in the amount of power they can accumulate and wield.

That's the end result but they don't say that way.

Not only does the president have little power over abortion other than appointing judges who oppose it, abortion was hardly a big issue for Jesus.In fact he never said a single word on that subject or their other favorite-gay rights. I wonder why this brand of Christians isnt focusing on something Jesus actually preached.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/27/2017 09:54PM by bona dea.

bona dea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not only does the president have little power over
> abortion other than appointing judges who oppose
> it, abortion was hardly a big issue for Jesus.In
> fact he never said a single word on that subject
> or their other favorite-gay rights. I wonder why
> this brand of Christians isnt focusing on
> something Jesus actually preached.

The 'Christians and Alabama voters' are focusing on what 'Jesus' actually preached ----- doing something for Americans and most Alabama residents!

In spite of 'unproved accusations' voters are looking at a 'bad alternative democrat' with little to 'no' agenda or plan versus an R that can support an R agenda for Americans ---- there is a plan!!!

He talks about abortion --- not much can be done here!

Health care is a 'right' ---- then supports O Care which is failing. So where is the plan or any D plan????

LGBT rights ---- great that supports what % of Alabama???

Gun rights ---- need some limitations! Really, not advocating much more than enforcing current laws.

Tax simplification ----- make it easier but no specifics other than not the R plan.

In summary, we have another 'bad choice' with little to no agenda to do anything in Washington!! I don't think it is about 'abortion' at all it is about electing someone that will do something for the good of America versus just obstruct!

Couldnt disagree more