Today is a sad day.
"Resolution for the 2017 SBC Annual Meeting - Condemning the Alt-Right & White Nationalism"
It is important to be precise when delicate situations like this exist. As I begin to write this response to the Southern Baptist Convention's Resolution that was posted on May 28th, 2017, I pray for the Holy Spirit to guide my thoughts and to convict those peoples who happen to lay their eyes on my words to be convicted and see the truth within them.
It is time to dissect this resolution and introduce some context.
The Southern Baptists have been in decline.
1. Their Birth rates are down.
2. Their Evangelism rates are down.
3. They don't have an accurate grasp on the condition of their organization, statistically, as they are missing data from 1/4th of their congregations.
4. People are giving less to them
5. In contrast to their decline in population and wealth, they have been steadily growing the NUMBER of churches for the last 18 years, with another 479 (1%) net growth last year. This indicates a tendency to focus on Churchianism instead of being Followers of Christ.
6. More liberal churches within the convention contain the largest amount of baptisms.
I've only been a Christian for about 9 months. Within those months, I have hopped around Central Virginia trying to find a church which is not Social Justice Converged nor lacking in truthful scriptural backing. Initially, I felt a draw towards Baptist churches. Disturbingly, I also felt an intuition that there was a disharmonious spirit in the air within these churches. I concluded that I simply did not have a large enough sample size to formulate a coherent reason why I felt that. With this new resolution, I now have enough information. The corruption has spread to the top.
In their attempt to appeal to the masses, the same masses which would condemn Jesus Christ to Death, they have rejected Him and have become blind.
Now for the line-by-line analysis to back up my rhetoric.
Resolution on The Condemnation of the "Alt-Right" Movement and the Roots of White Supremacy
Submitted to the Resolutions Committee for the SBC Annual Meeting, Phoenix, AZ, June 13-14, 2017
By William Dwight McKissic,Sr.
The use of air quotes indicates that the author does not understand what the Alt-Right even encompasses. Bait and Switch snake-tongue tactic used, swapping out White Nationalism with White Supremacy, even though they are different conceptual models. Note: I do not endorse White Nationalism because it is an incoherent model, seeing as there is no such thing as the "White Nation". White Supremacy is also dumb, primarily because the differences between the white nations are too substantive and broad to categorize as a single entity of supremacy, although there are also ethical conclusions which are foolish in regards to the supremacy of any people over another. I am not up to date on church politics, but it appears that the Resolutions Committee has an opportunity to reject this resolution on June 13-14, 2017. I advise that they do so due to the lack of precision detailed within this document. The author, William Dwight McKissic, Sr. has not taken the time to understand exactly what the Alt-Right ideology is, and therefore is not making correct conclusions. Although he has already been caught in snake-tongue tactics and I haven't even begun to look at the body of the resolution. A couple minutes of intensive research reveals that he has not been known to make wise decisions in his expression of his theology, and I would posit that this resolution is within that same category.
WHEREAS, Scripture teaches that from one man God made every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation (Acts 17:26); and
This piece of scripture is relevant only in pointing out that nations do, in fact, exist, and that they were made by God himself. It is important to note that directly following Genesis 10 to which Acts 17:26 is obviously referencing, The nations then unified in the story of the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11. One can properly infer that this has been the most diverse place in regards to nations, in the history of the biblical story. What did God do? He dispersed them and confused their language. It is God-willed that the nations exist separately from each other, and not mixed together in Unity and in the name of Diversity and speaking the same language. The natural objection would be Galatians 3:28 where Paul says that there is neither Jew nor Greek. If you stop the analysis there, then I would agree with the objection. But we do not stop the analysis there. In context, Paul is talking about how we are not held captive under the old law due to our justification through faith in the Lord Christ Jesus, and because of this, the faith is not limited to any singular nation, class, or sex. If we are to take Paul's words as an indication that when one becomes a Christian, they immediately lost all nationality, then we must also conclude that the concept of slavery and freedom are no longer in existence when one becomes a Christian (thus rationalizing slavery) and that there neither female nor male Christians exist. Now, Acts 17:26 also gives a hint to how we should conceptually model the nations. This verse says that God determined the boundaries of their habitation, which would lead to the conclusion that the nation is not talking about the legal structure above a people, but instead about the people themselves.
WHEREAS, the prophet Isaiah foresaw the day when the Lord would judge between the nations and render decisions for many people (Isaiah 2:4); and
The only comment I have upon this reference to scripture is the fact that we are observably not in the day when nation shall not lift up sword against nation, and I also propose that, as the scripture says, be God who determines that day, not us.
WHEREAS, the Psalmist proclaims the Kingdom is the Lord's, and He rules over the nations; and
Yes, but a nation can refuse to follow his commands
WHEREAS, the promise of heaven includes the eternal blessings of the Tree of Life for God's people, which includes the healing of the nations that comes from the leaves of that tree; and
Do not fall into the false song of utopia on Earth, for it is in Heaven that this healing will be done.
WHEREAS, the supreme need of the world is the acceptance of God's teachings in all the affairs of men and nations, and the practical application of His law of love; and
Yes, which must necessarily include a stringent adherence to the Truth, the Logos. Which is why the author's complete ignorance of Alt-Right philosophy is worrisome, in the least.
WHEREAS, all Christians are under obligation to seek to make the will of Christ supreme in our own lives and in human society, opposing all forms of racism, selfishness, and vice, and bringing government and society as a whole under the sway of the principles of righteousness, truth, and brotherly love; and
Racism is not a coherent idea, and has no applicable definition. The cause of Racism as we conceptualize it is rooted in sin which is deeper than simply a buzzword. Opposing all forms of selfishness? Is this guy following the same Jesus that I claim to follow? You know, the one who said to the Canaanite woman that It is not right to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs. Additionally, His law of love as described in Matthew 22:34-40 is dependent on selfishness. The command to love your neighbor as yourself is dependent on the idea that you have a selfishness inherent within you, and that it is to be used in the functionality of empathy in order to love your neighbor in the same selfish manner in which you would love yourself. Yes, oppose Vice. The next statement is where he goes even further off the deep end. Bringing government and society as a whole under the sway of the principles of righteousness, truth, and brotherly love? I would love to see the justification for that statement. Christianity has an individualistic philosophical foundation. There is a reason that Jesus said to give to Caesar what is Caesars and to God what is Gods. Note that he does not say to make Caesar righteous, to give him truth, or to give him brotherly love.
WHEREAS, just societies will order themselves as free men and women and organize at various times and for various purposes to establish political order and give consent to legitimate government; and
Depends what you mean by free. and political order. and consent. and legitimate government. Lack of precision indicates sloppy thought processes, possibly an emotional reaction, partly caused by his confusion of the incoherent ideology of White Nationalism/Supremacy with the Omninationalist ideology of the Alt-Right.
WHEREAS, the liberty of all nations to authorize such governments will, at times, allow for the rise of political parties and factions whose principles and ends are in irreconcilable conflict with the principles of liberty and justice for all; and
This is actually a completely truthful statement. The only problem is that the context of the rest of the resolution points towards the idea that he is referring, at least partially, to the Alt-Right. This would more accurately be attributed in the context of ideologies which are cradled with Marxist undertones.
WHEREAS, there has arisen in the United States a growing menace to political order and justice that seeks to reignite social animosities, reverse improvements in race relations, divide our people, and foment hatred, classism, and ethnic cleansing; and
Wow, I did not expect him to pivot towards attacking the BLM movement, Post-Modernists, Feminists, and Neocons. Alt-Right philosophy is designed as anti-Marxist. More evidence that he has no idea what he is talking about, and is simply virtue-signalling, or conflating White Nationalism/Supremacy with the Alt-Right, which is inaccurate.
WHEREAS, this toxic menace, self-identified among some of its chief proponents as "White Nationalism" and the "Alt-Right," must be opposed for the totalitarian impulses, xenophobic biases, and bigoted ideologies that infect the minds and actions of its violent disciples; and
I have now concluded that this man is either not well-read, or has a low IQ, or both. The Alt-Right arose from an opposition to all of the accusations he is throwing at the Alt-Right. Holding the gun backwards in your hand is not useful to shooting your enemy. What part of OmniNationalist does he not understand? The right for all nations to have sovereignty over themselves under God is a fundamental right which he is denying due to its "xenophobia" and "bigotry".
WHEREAS, the roots of White Supremacy within a "Christian context" is based on the so-called "curse of Ham" theory once prominently taught by the SBC in the early years - echoing the belief that God through Noah ordained descendants of Africa to be subservient to Anglos - which provided the theological justification for slavery and segregation. The SBC officially renounces the "curse of Ham" theory in this Resolution; now be it therefore
Not necessarily true, but I agree with the renunciation of the curse of Ham theory, as it is not based in truth. I would also suggest that a separate resolution be made for the renunciation of that theory, due to the potential gravitas of the idea. Although, I have not met a single person in my 20 years on earth that actually subscribes to this theory.
RESOLVED, that the Southern Baptist Convention, meeting in Phoenix, AZ, June 13-14, 2017, denounces every form of "nationalism" that violates the biblical teachings with respect to race, justice, and ordered liberty; and be it further
To denounce every form of nationalism, which he air quotes due to his inability to grasp the concept, is to embrace globalism and all of its subsequent consequences. This NeoBabelism that has taken over this man's mind is dyscivic. Sad! I will take this moment to make the claim that OmniNationalism does not violate the biblical teachings of anything, let alone respect to race, justice, and ordered liberty.
RESOLVED, that we reject the retrograde ideologies, xenophobic biases, and racial bigotries of the so called "Alt-Right" that seek to subvert our government, destabilize society, and infect our political system; and be finally
Right here he exhibits another instance of snake-tongue. He has attributed retro-gradation to the Alt-Right, which is a modern movement which is harmonious with historical reality, and he does not distinguish the concepts of race vs nation in his mind. It is almost as if the author is incapable of seeing anything except the color of peoples skin. Societies which have fallen to the Prince of Lies should be destabilized, and the modern day political system is worse than a joke, it is fulfilling the agenda of Neobabelism and Anti-Christianity. The author sees a needle enter into the political system and assumes that a virus is about to be injected, when in fact the vaccine is being administered for the infection which already exists within the system.
RESOLVED, that we earnestly pray, both for those who lead and advocate this movement and those who are thereby deceived, that they may see their error through the light of the Gospel, repent of their perverse nationalism, and come to know the peace and love of Christ through redeemed fellowship in the Kingdom of God, which is established from every nation, tribe, people, and tongue.
I appreciate the call to prayer. In the same way that I appreciate the Islamic call to prayer. If one is praying that his resolution goes through, then one is not praying to the Creator God of the Universe, the Logos who is Lord Christ Jesus. It is not the Gospel which brings light, but the Word Himself. It is humorous that he claims that the people who are fighting for the sake of Christendom are deceived. I seem to recall a saying by someone important about taking a log out of your own eye before taking the speck out of your brother's. His last statement is particularly troubling, as he claims the the Kingdom of God is established from every nation, tribe, people, and tongue. This is false. Christendom is established by the Christians. By definition, if a kingdom is established by any other people, then it is not the Kingdom of God.
Conclusion: William Dwight McKissic Sr. Should immediately resign from all of his positions within the Church due to:
His Lack of understanding of the concepts to which he purports to write about.
His blatant endorsement of the destruction of a Pro-Christian movement.
His bearing of false witness to brothers in Christ.
His snake-tongue presentation of this resolution.
His being a Social Justice Warrior.
If the SBC makes this resolution permanent, that institution shall be fallen to the Prince of Lies. To prevent this, all members of the SBC must get a copy of SJWs Always Lie and to clean up the convention of any Anti-Christian offenders. No matter how big they are, or insignificant they seem.
Thank you for taking the time to read this,
Theodore C. Brave
P.S. You can follow me on twitter @RealTheoBrave and on Gab.ai @TheRealTheo
Feel free to E-mail any long-response at TheodoreBrave@gmail.com
Well said. Amen.
ReplyDeleteYour critique is greatly weakened by your own misrepresentation of white nationalism. Most white nationalists are supportive of what you call omninationalism (I like the term, by the way). We are comfortable with sovereignty and self-determination for all peoples, white or not.
ReplyDeleteWhile we support sovereignty for individual white nations - Norway for the Norwegians, France for the French - we also see ourselves as part of a broader racial & cultural bloc, just as there are other civilizational blocs that transcend national boundaries (the Islamic world, black Africa, etc.) Nations exist within these broader blocs of kindred peoples.
For obvious reasons, future sovereign white nations must have a meaningful level of solidarity with one another. We can't afford the catastrophic petty nationalism of the past, which resulted in everything from disastrous brother wars to misguided imperial adventures in the Third World. White nationalism is not your grandfather's nationalism - it is a refined version that grasps the racial realities which prevail across the planet. In a world with a rising Asia & Third World more broadly, failure to cooperate with and support our racial cousins is the path to subjugation and eventual extinction. We no longer live in a world where we can tear away at one another while expecting the non-white world to remain listless and passive.
My objective was to represent neither White Nationalism nor Alt-Right ideology.
DeleteTo be precise, White nationalism is a dumb idea because there is no such thing as The White Nation. There do exist white nations, but those are not within the same category of analyses. The fact that there exists White nationalists who are supportive of omninationalism is not relevant.
I understand your idea of being a part of a civilization bloc. I propose that the fact that they are transcendent of national boundaries shows that they are not useful as a proposition of policy.
The proposition that white nations must have a meaningful level of solidarity with one another is a false one. This is supported by the phenomenon of white liberals (france) being observably less reliable allies than non-white nationalists (chinese) when it comes to fighting bad civilizational blocs (Islam).
I agree that the nationalism of the past was misguided, mainly because there was also the idea of supremacy tied up within classical nationalism. Therefore, OmniNationalism.
My Grandfather's Nationalism was Turkish, so interesting question: I am one of the whitest people you will ever meet. Yet I have 100% Turkish blood and can trace my ancestors back to Turks within 5 Generations. Do I count as within this civilization bloc of "White Nationalism"? Am I considered White? It would definitely be more accurate to describe myself as Turkish in order to talk about my genetic origins.
And this leads into the point that the racial realities to which you refer has its basis in the expression of alleles. When we conceptualize a people group, it is more accurate to use their familial Nationality. It is also more accurate to use European Nations instead of White Nations because there exist nations not in Europe who are white and do not share the same expression of values, ideology, behavior, etc that your White Nationalists do. Even within the united states there exists different nations of white people who have fundamentally differing genetics and beliefs. Modern White Nationalism is not refined in the most generous definition of the word. Maybe you should examine the 16 points of the Alt-Right to see whether or not your concerns of "extinction" is relevant.
The people who like to tear away at one another are White Nationalists who prefer to tear away a scientific basis for identifying groups of people, and ONLY use their eyes to observe what is right.
"My Grandfather's Nationalism was Turkish, so interesting question: I am one of the whitest people you will ever meet."
DeleteNo, you are not. There is much more to race than phenotype - lots of non-Europeans can "pass" as Europeans. Coincidentally, I once knew a Turkish girl who could easily pass as European. Great girl, but white as we use the term? No.
"Yet I have 100% Turkish blood and can trace my ancestors back to Turks within 5 Generations. Do I count as within this civilization bloc of "White Nationalism"? Am I considered White?"
No, you are not. White (as we use the term) is simply shorthand for those descended from the indigenous peoples of Europe. That's either your ancestry, or it isn't. In your case it isn't, and is perhaps part of the reason why you don't seem to grasp what we mean by white nationalism. The European peoples share common racial, historical and cultural roots. The fact that you, as someone of Turkish descent, place no value on this is not surprising.
In any event, I appreciate your candor as to your racial background. Your criticisms of white nationalism are, to be charitable, unsound. Whether this lack of understanding is willful or not, I have no idea. However, non-Europeans can be friends and allies of whites, and we can work for our mutual benefit.
I, for one, am more than willing to support nationalism for non-European peoples, but only if there is reciprocity. Yet non-Europeans never, ever get to define us. We define ourselves - all tribes do. Our identity is ours alone. We don't require the permission of non-whites as to how we identify, and we aren't asking for it.
Well,
DeleteNow you are fudging definitions of words.
If you want to support the historically European nations, then describe yourself as a European Nationalist.
No, the inability to grasp what you mean by white nationalism is because white nationalists are unable to properly communicate a coherent idea because the idea itself is incoherent.
This is why people don't like white nationalists. Macro is not Micro. To observe that societies' ideologies, behavior, etc is strongly influenced by their historical ancestry is not the same as observing that an individual is strongly influenced by their great great grandfather. Especially if that individual has an observable behavior of going against the pattern of the heritage.
Your point about defining yourselves. Fine, go ahead. But you do not recognize that within the umbrella description of white nations, there exist distinctly definable nations. Your ideological forefathers were the ones who created the European Union.
"If you want to support the historically European nations, then describe yourself as a European Nationalist."
DeleteIt's wonderful when non-whites tell Europeans how we should identify ourselves, and what political objectives we're allowed to pursue. Would you presume to do the same for Amerindians? Asians?
"...white nationalists are unable to properly communicate a coherent idea because the idea itself is incoherent."
White nationalism supports whites having sovereignty and self-determination. We care about the survival and development of European man. I'd say we're rather clear about our core objectives.
"But you do not recognize that within the umbrella description of white nations, there exist distinctly definable nations."
Of course we recognize that. Any other straw men you'd like to set up and then knock down?
"Your ideological forefathers were the ones who created the European Union."
Hardly, though I will reiterate that a certain level of white solidarity will be necessary. The world is no longer Europe's plaything. The exact form that this solidarity will ultimately take? Hard to say. It will no doubt be heavily influenced by the global threat level of competitor civilizations, which may wax and wane over time. One thing is for certain: any political association created by white nationalists would look very different from the anti-white European Union, which the vast majority of white nationalists hate and despise (with a couple of notable exceptions).
In any event, do as you wish, but I'll make a parting observation: your inept attacks on white nationalism only weaken what was otherwise a credible critique of the modern church.
"Would you presume to do the same for Amerindians? Asians?"
DeleteYes.
I support all nations having sovereignty and self-determination, including the white nations. That is a fundamental point of the Alt-Right.
If you would recognize the distinctly definable nations, you would not be a white nationalist, you would be an Omninationalist.
The current iteration of the EU, of course white nationalists hate it. But my claim is not that the current EU was created by your ideologal forefathers, it is that the European Union was created in the first place by your predecessors.
You have been acting like a moderate this entire conversation.
I write a critique of a church
You decide to shoot to the right instead of saying that the church is wrong
But of course, you can't get past the idea of using skin color as a basis for describing your ideology.
The nature of cognitive dissonance is that you cannot see when you are in it.
There is no such thing as The White Nation.
“No, you are not. White (as we use the term) is simply shorthand for those descended from the indigenous peoples of Europe. That's either your ancestry, or it isn't. In your case it isn't, and is perhaps part of the reason why you don't seem to grasp what we mean by white nationalism. The European peoples share common racial, historical and cultural roots. The fact that you, as someone of Turkish descent, place no value on this is not surprising.“
DeleteIf by white you mean one of three generalized races, Caucasian, Mongoloid or Negroid, then yes, ethnic Turks are white, though certain ethnicities in Turkey (the nation) will obviously vary. “Brown” is not a race, but a visual property. “White” has become a politicized as a concept—often by people like Trainspotter who are willfully obtuse to understand the differences between visual properties, ethnicity, and race. Azeris and Turks are both Turkic people, who are genetically and racially speaking White/Mediterranean/Caucasian. Hair, skin and eye color can vary from Mediterranean phenotypes to Nordic phenotypes.
“Yet non-Europeans never, ever get to define us. We define ourselves - all tribes do. Our identity is ours alone. We don't require the permission of non-whites as to how we identify, and we aren't asking for it.”
The problem is that you are defining what is white for ALL whites. Whites are able to make up their own minds when it comes to what is good for their race, their families, and their communities. We certainly do not need to be badgered to identify squarely with how white people ought to think and act.
“White nationalism supports whites having sovereignty and self-determination. We care about the survival and development of European man. I'd say we're rather clear about our core objectives.”
And what about those whites who are in opposition to this philosophy? Do they automatically lose their “white card”? Are they labeled “race traitors”? Exactly why white nationalism lacks broad based appeal.
“In any event, do as you wish, but I'll make a parting observation: your inept attacks on white nationalism only weaken what was otherwise a credible critique of the modern church.”
Actually, he has opened up a gashing wound on your logic.
“In a world with a rising Asia & Third World more broadly, failure to cooperate with and support our racial cousins is the path to subjugation and eventual extinction.”
You are assuredly being overdramatic here, as white people are far from being dominated and being bred out of existence.
Bravianthought, the Southern Baptists are not "converged". That is a Fake News Story.
ReplyDeleteTrainspotter...
"Most white nationalists are supportive of what you call omninationalism."
Apparently, "omni-nationalism" was a term coined in 2006 by this man. Clearly, Vox Day did NOT coin this term.
https://skrattaren.bitbucket.io/posts/omni-nationalism/
Indeed (there are different meanings of "Omninationalism)...this concept means something different to different people. Hence, there will be endless debate as to what is its "true" meaning.
"While we support sovereignty for individual white nations - Norway for the Norwegians, France for the French..."
Except America has been other than a white nation. Vox Day claims the United States is not a nation founded on a proposition. Only the founding stock, those from the British Isles, are the “original Americans”. He touts that the the non-British were unable to appreciate AND have shown a knack for perverting, our republican form of government, on the grounds that its foundational underpinnings are specifically peculiar to the British Isles. So, for those readers here whose ancestors came from Ireland, Germany, Italy, and Russia, you are in essence a “fake” American. You have to go back.
But don’t fret. In United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), the Supreme Court ruled that a child born in the United States of Chinese citizens, who had at the time a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and who were carrying on business there other than for the Chinese government, automatically became a U.S. citizen. This decision established an important precedent in its interpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
"In a world with a rising Asia & Third World more broadly, failure to cooperate with and support our racial cousins is the path to subjugation and eventual extinction."
That is patently false. Refer to John 4:1-42. Jesus broke with societal and religious customs to honor the dignity of the Samaritan woman. He associated with a woman of mixed origins, a moral and social outsider, in public and asked her for a drink of water. He demonstrated dignity of the most highest degree-every person is precious.
God has commanded his disciples to love all of humanity. When God communicates Himself, when He fills us with Himself, He fills us with His Divine Life, with His infinite Love, for He is Love. He confirms that we must share in this Divine nature for God to attract us to Himself because sharing His Grace is His nature.
All men are equal in their natural dignity; human beings are NOT superior or inferior in this regard. Moreover, God created us in His likeness. As the children of God, we are redeemed by Christ, and bear witness to His divine calling and destiny, regardless of one's group identity and locality on this Earth. To deny these truths is to deny the authority of God. God has identified His people as those who adhere to His ways, the brotherhood of humankind. God unifies humanity under His banner.
From the beginning, this one Church has been marked by a great diversity which comes from both the variety of God's gifts and the diversity of those who receive them. Within the unity of the People of God, a multiplicity of peoples and cultures is gathered together. Among the Church's members, there are different gifts, offices, conditions, and ways of life. The great richness of such diversity is not opposed to the Church's unity. Yet sin and the burden of its consequences constantly threaten the gift of unity. And so the Apostle has to exhort Christians to "maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."
I did not say that the SBC was converged. I do observe that it is in the process of being converged.
DeleteGod also commands us to hate, including hating those who lie.
DeleteOdd that you fail to mention that?
Your statement that 'All men are equal in their natural dignity' is a lie.
Therefore I hate you.
"Your statement that 'All men are equal in their natural dignity' is a lie."
DeletePatently false. The value of human life is intrinsic, for it derives from God, who made human beings in his own image (Gen. 1:26–27). All human beings have a special type of dignity which is the basis for (1) the obligation all of us have not to kill them and (2) the obligation to take their well-being into account when we act.
I am in Central Virginia (Richmond area) and would welcome the chance to fellowship. If you post an email address I'd like to get in touch.
ReplyDeleteTheodoreBrave@gmail.com
DeleteOutstanding response. I'm 20 myself and it's an encouragement to find that there are other Christians my age who oppose the convergence of the Church. Godspeed.
ReplyDeleteHere's a better resolution:
ReplyDeleteWHEREAS in Genesis we learn God created the nations.
WHEREAS in Revelations we learn God will receive the nations at His side.
IT FOLLOWS that it is God's Plan that the nations reach the end times intact.
IT FOLLOWS that amalgamating and destroying the nations mid-journey is against God's Plan.
WHEREAS sabotage of God's Plan is defiance of God's Will.
IT FOLLOWS that Babelism is heresy.
WHEREAS heretics are the enemies of God.
WHEREAS God commands us to meet His enemies with perfect hatred.
IT FOLLOWS that Babelists must be met with perfect hatred.
WHEREAS the resolution confirms the Southern Baptist leadership as Babelists.
IT FOLLOWS that God commands us to destroy the Southern Baptist leadership.
WHEREAS the doctrine of perfect hatred forbids clemency, mercy or compassion.
IT FOLLOWS that God commands us to destroy them utterly.
Very interesting. The primary issue I find with your resolution is that the SB leadership are not all Babelists, as the resolution is only the expression of one individual. If the SB leadership then endorses this resolution, then your resolution would have a stronger standing. I would also suggest citing bible verses to specifically make the points, as many Christians get triggered if they don't see bible verses in theological statements. Consider it a form of smart rhetoric.
DeleteThe leadership in a Southern Baptist Church is in the local congregation, the pastor, the deacons, and the trustees. The Convention does not dictate any policy to the local church. This resolution has not been voted on, has not been passed and is the opinion of one man.
ReplyDeleteYou have been a Christian for 9 months. You are still drinking the milk of the word, not eating the meat.
More, smaller churches is not "churchian". It is how the early church started. You need to find a spiritual mentor who knows the Bible and give a little less attention to internet warlords.
Correct.
DeleteI assure you, I have eaten many meat.
Smaller churches can be Churchian. Big churches can be not Churchian. The size of church is irrelevant.
I have many spiritual mentors, I have been receiving good discipleship.
Thank you for your concern though.
I'm about 12 months as a Christian.
DeleteAre any of your mentors writing online please?
Not my personal ones, no. If you want some good online sources to draw inspiration and understanding from them try:
DeleteMenofthewest.net
Dalrock.wordpress.com
And begin reading theological works by classical scholars like Aquinas. There are a metric crapton of archived sermons online from before the modern age of depravity, consider meditating over the scripture presented within those sermons
"Omninationalism" sounds like another form of globalism. Nationalism can't exist without supremacy. The whole point of a nation is that it holds a particular conception of the good supreme and others inferior. If youre saying all the nations can equally, with equal rights, and equal legitimacy, hold conflicting conceptions of the good supreme, then youre just describing globalized liberalism, which is exactly what globalists are working for. Omninationalism will necessitate enforcable rules imposed on nations to protect the equal rights of other nations.
ReplyDeleteSJWs always lie.
DeleteSJWs always project.
MPAI
DeleteYoure essentially describing a mitigated form of the european union expanded to encompass the whole world.
DeleteStop putting words in my mouth., each individual nation should have sovereignty over themselves, and should survive and prosper according to themselves.
DeleteYou clearly don't understand the implications of your own idea. You should read Zippy: https://zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2015/09/23/how-no-enemies-to-the-right-perpetuates-the-mind-trap/
DeleteBabel is precisely a defiance of God command to spread and populate the earth. And an attempt by man to unify themselves against God.
ReplyDeleteGod's division is to prevent them from staying in one place and to force them to populate the earth.
I will however grant that the nations disappear and new nations appear all the time. Some nations merge together and become new nations and others meet their demise by their own sins. Or kingdoms will take on new identities.
"Babel is precisely a defiance of God command to spread and populate the earth. And an attempt by man to unify themselves against God."
DeleteHere is an impressive rebuke.
http://azure.org.il/include/print.php?id=536
Impressive rebuke.
ReplyDeletesitus sabung ayam berlaga terbaru
ReplyDeletemau yang asik ? ayam bangkok petarung
ReplyDelete