Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
He's the Anti-Christ in like every way. But he's white, so it's all good.
Yuck! At least Nicolae Carpathia from Left Behind was good looking and not an orange turd.
The three of us on Lemmy that get that joke are all ROLLING.
Confirmed.
I wished I didn't get it. But all that rot is behind me now.
I got the joke and I've never read a Left Behind book, but I have read much, but not all of-
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2015/11/05/left-behind-index-the-whole-thing/
And if you have read the books, you'd probably appreciate it more than I do, but it's the most in-depth takedown of a book, let alone a series of books, that I have ever read. Like paragraph by paragraph sometimes.
Oh geez I've been wondering about this for twenty years! I caught the first post or two as they came out, right as I was still in the thick of cultural Christianity but not really serious about it—later, as I began shuddering at what I had been, I idly wondered to myself about this series and whether it had continued, but never enough to actually go looking for it. Thank you for bringing it back to my attention!
No problem. I'm really tempted to start over again from the beginning, but it's such an epic website to go through.
I'm not religious anymore but I still think that was a really cool science fiction series.
Just for some context here. In the US, Christianity is everyday, more an identity than a religion. The "evangelicals" that support Trump overwhelmingly don't attend services, don't read the Bible, and don't pray unless they're in trouble. The evangelical movement has been cooped by the Republican party so thoroughly, that there isn't much difference between conservative politics and Christian belief in the average worshiper's mind. Christianity is the justification for having power, not the ethic of how to wield it.
I'm not playing "true Scotsman", or trying to define what a Christian ought to be. I'm just posting this for the people who are mystified at the disconnect between the teachings of Jesus and the support for regressive and hateful politics.
It's ironic that apotheoses of the individual, so central to modern conservative thought is antithetical to patriotism, faith, and family values.
The evangelical movement has been cooped by the Republican party so thoroughly
I would reverse that, it's the republican party that has been taken over by the evangelicals. In the end it's the same result though.
I would argue that Christianity has moved much further toward reactionary politics than the other way round. Evangelicals in the 70s were pro-choice for example. I'd also point out that reactionary politics is at a high water mark while Christianity is in decline.
There's a trap in being a critic of religion that one tends to overestimate the power of faith.
Evangelicals in the 70s were pro-choice for example
now you're just making shit up.
No, its true. Evangelicals have been massively radicalized by the right ever since the 80s. This Politico article goes over the history of the rise of the radical right, and they discuss how abortion was only used because it was more convenient than their actual goal. Some choice quotes (emphasis mine):
The history of that movement, however, is more complicated. White evangelicals in the 1970s did not mobilize against Roe v. Wade, which they considered a Catholic issue. They organized instead to defend racial segregation in evangelical institutions, including Bob Jones University.
The historical record is clear. In 1968, Christianity Today, the flagship magazine of evangelicalism, organized a conference with the Christian Medical Society to discuss the morality of abortion. The gathering attracted 26 heavyweight theologians from throughout the evangelical world, who debated the matter over several days and then issued a statement acknowledging the ambiguities surrounding the issue, which, they said, allowed for many different approaches.
“Whether the performance of an induced abortion is sinful we are not agreed,” the statement read, “but about the necessity of it and permissibility for it under certain circumstances we are in accord.”
Two successive editors of Christianity Today took equivocal stands on abortion. Carl F. H. Henry, the magazine’s founder, affirmed that “a woman’s body is not the domain and property of others,” and his successor, Harold Lindsell, allowed that, “if there are compelling psychiatric reasons from a Christian point of view, mercy and prudence may favor a therapeutic abortion.”
Meeting in St. Louis in 1971, the messengers (delegates) to the Southern Baptist Convention, hardly a redoubt of liberalism, passed a resolution calling for the legalization of abortion, a position they reaffirmed in 1974 — a year after Roe — and again in 1976.
When the Roe decision was handed down, W. A. Criswell, pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas and sometime president of the Southern Baptist Convention, issued a statement praising the ruling. “I have always felt that it was only after a child was born and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual person,” Criswell declared, “and it has always, therefore, seemed to me that what is best for the mother and for the future should be allowed.”
Hell, as noted later in the article, Falwell didn't even start bitching about abortion until like 5 years after Roe.
I’m not playing “true Scotsman”, or trying to define what a Christian ought to be. I’m just posting this for the people who are mystified at the disconnect between the teachings of Jesus and the support for regressive and hateful politics.
I literally got called a communist by family members for actually acting the way they raised me, because apparently its communist to want to care about less well off people than yourself (and we weren't even doing that well to start with....)
He really does check all the boxes.
Deception - committing direct electoral fraud, defamation, his nicknames, really everything he says is deceptive in some form to some degree
Promoting evil deeds - inciting violence, racism, normalizing rape
Idolatry - trump has christians idolizing him and praying to him directly
Persecution of believers - he's telling christians he's tricked into following him that real medicine is bad and taking medication that gives them heart attacks and injecting bleach will save them
I'm not Christian beeteedubs, just a fan of irony
Woohoo, nice! Good post
He really does check all the boxes.
Pride, greed, wrath, envy, lust, gluttony and sloth... yep, every one.
Ticked every box of mine, tbh.
Pride - the Trump towers, how he talks about himself
Greed - he won't pay the contractors who did work for him just to save a couple dollars
Wrath - inciting violence, full page advertisements advocating the death penalty, says he loved to fight, any kind of fight, including physical.
Envy - obsessed with Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote , wants to be a dictator like the leaders of China and North Korea,
Lust - Trump is a rapist, and committed constant sexual harassment in the White House often.
Gluttony - obviously eats too much McDonald's and drinks too much soda, bottomless appetite
Sloth - avoided presidential duties to watch TV for hours, live tweets the TV he's watching for hours, is never prepared for meetings, delegates work and then takes credit for it.
not prosecuting and jailing for rape is what normalizes rape.
/hair split
Apt username
Persecution of believers
What's the passage on that one? Could it mean trumpWorshippers persecuting people who actually believe in the kindness and support tenets of Christianity but who aren't [MAGAts || Christians]?
Posted in another comment, way more specific.
2 Timothy 3:12, taking about the end times, and it certainly could be interpreted that way:
"Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution."
No shit. Anyone not drunk on the Kool aid can easily see this, the dude is the devil incarnate, and an absolute moron.
points to Revelation to where the false prophet rises to unlimited power
Fuck.
Those red hats do seem to have a "mark of the beast" flair to them. They aren't the permanent mark indicated in Revelation 13:16, but I think if you wear it every day it may as well be.
I'm not a Christian, but his followers certainly are. I wonder how they don't see it?
The Bible also says the mark is required to do business, like buying food at the store. The similarities are interesting, but it's not like you can't apply many of them to other terrible leaders throughout history. And since Revelation is actually referring to Rome and Nero, it makes sense why the author is able to encapsulate the concept of "terrifying leader" so well.
But to your point, they don't see it, because like everything in religion, you can pick and choose what you like. That's why there's so many sects of Christianity, and why at least one scholar calls Trump's version "American Fundamentalism." Trump is the messiah they've been waiting for.
They don't see it, because they don't want to.
It's permanent in the sense that once someone sees you in it they'll never look at you the same.
Omg totally. It's like a brand. But not that kind, that it also is. Oh, snap. That's the etymology of the modern use of the word... Huh.. TIL as I type this....
But yeah, that describes how I viscerally respond to seeing it. They needn't have the rest of their face if it were a 666 on the forehead, it'd be all you see. Same w the hats now. Face is irrelevant. Hat says enough.
I think they don't see it because the people who support Trump and see him as a harbinger of prosperity are the same people who take the Bible at face value and are already of the belief that should the Rapture come tomorrow, they certainly won't be left below.
They believe in the wrathful God of the Old Testament, they are fundamentalists and they are a far cry from what good Christians can be. Should Jesus come tomorrow, these people would have him lynched as a pinko liberal, labeling him the antichrist.
They're not Christian because they have read the Bible and learned to love thy neighbor and become a righteous person, they are Christian because they have been told a lake of hellfire awaits those who don't accept Jesus and they were indoctrinated into the religion of Revelations. They've been fed the cherry-picked apples of knowledge by pastors with agendas and never challenged the version of God they were given.
Trumps persecution by the state and mainstream politics fuels this fire. Surely if he were the antichrist he would not have been challenged by the DOJ and "anti-christian" liberals. In their minds, his path to the white house, as a leader of men, parallels Jesus.
False prophet? He seems more like the epitome of Satan. Except without the intelligence or logic.
Satan gave humans knowledge, while God punished all of humanity for attaining it. Satan wants you to love yourself and do the things that make you happy. God wants you to become an ascetic and live in subjugation to his desires.
Sounds more like the epitome of Yahweh than Satan.
Er, howabout nothing supernatural, just a dying narcissist?
The main flaw in this article is that they're comparing Trump's book to God's book, and both were ghostwritten.
Been saying that for 8 years.
Any “Christian” who supports Trump will undoubtedly burn in Hell for… …an eternity
No big deal
No they won't, since hell is not real. But it's a useful idea created and perpetuated by the elite to keep the poors in line.
Don't do that, they are Christians. These people are the ugly side to Christianity, own it and fix it, don't push them off as "not real Christians" cause they very much are