[LUconn]

This is going to be the greatest off topic thread this board has ever produced.

[mrmacphisto]

Is it even worth saying you think I misrepresented only two of the seventeen quotes, Mr Mac? Somehow that doesn't seem to be a very strong response. You can, however, verify my thoughts on your own at moveon.org.

I never said I completely disagreed with everything you said. Besides, your misrepresentation was only a portion of my reply, and only referred to one quote. I brought up points that you didn't even attempt to take on in your reply. In fact, I don't see that you responded to anything I said.

[mrmacphisto]

a government of fundamentalist christians...at least we would have people that know the difference between right and wrong or between what is "sexual relations"

Don't take this the wrong way, but people supported Hitler for very similar reasons. Look at history. Some of his earliest supporters were devout Christians.

I'm not trying to draw comparisons. I'm just saying be careful.

[Baldspot]

Sorry, putting Bible believing Christians in the same sentence as Hitler's followers without offering any substantiation is just like today's drive by media - make a ridiculous statement and hope the implication sticks even if there are no facts to back it up.

Mr Mac does bring up a good point regarding WWII, however, even if he's got the facts wrong.

Hitler's early fans included the media elite here in America. It was Time magazine that gave him their "Man of the Year" award. (I'll go out on a limb here and say there were probably more libs at Time than Bible believing Christians, just a thought)

Also, it was the peaceniks from England and France led by Neville Chamberlain who proudly proclaimed "Peace in Our Time" as they let Hitler break the Treaty of Versailles and subsequent agreements in order to build up his armed forces. Along the way, they snickered at the conservatives led by Churchill who, while in the minority, warned of the consequences of opposing war at all costs. The conservatives eventually did take control of Parliament. Too late for France and almost too late for England.

Throwing today's Bible believing Christians under the bus like that, please, we can go CNN or listen to people Mr Bunnell for crap like that.

[mrmacphisto]

Sorry, putting Bible believing Christians in the same sentence as Hitler's followers without offering any substantiation is just like today's drive by media - make a ridiculous statement and hope the implication sticks even if there are no facts to back it up.

Mr Mac does bring up a good point regarding WWII, however, even if he's got the facts wrong.

Hitler's early fans included the media elite here in America. It was Time magazine that gave him their "Man of the Year" award. (I'll go out on a limb here and say there were probably more libs at Time than Bible believing Christians, just a thought)

Also, it was the peaceniks from England and France led by Neville Chamberlain who proudly proclaimed "Peace in Our Time" as they let Hitler break the Treaty of Versailles and subsequent agreements in order to build up his armed forces. Along the way, they snickered at the conservatives led by Churchill who, while in the minority, warned of the consequences of opposing war at all costs. The conservatives eventually did take control of Parliament. Too late for France and almost too late for England.

Throwing today's Bible believing Christians under the bus like that, please, we can go CNN or listen to people Mr Bunnell for crap like that.

Dr. Walter Wink, in his book Naming the Powers, recounts a report made by a U.S. delegate to the Baptist World Alliance Congress in Berlin, who in 1934 sent back this report of what he found under Hitler's regime:

It was a great relief to be in a country where salacious sex literature cannot be sold; where putrid motion pictures and gangster films cannot be shown. The new Germany has burned great masses of corrupting books and magazines along with its bonfires of Jewish and communistic libraries.

I don't know who worked for Time magazine when Hitler was awarded Man of the Year; do you? Or are you assuming a liberal media bias existed in the 1930s just as it seems to today? Do you realize it was a completely different world then? The terms liberal and conservative held different meanings. Compared to today, the vast majority of people at that time (yes, Democrats too) would have been considered conservative. Before he became known for what he truly was, Hitler was regarded as a great man of high morals, and was supported largely by people who themselves held high moral standards. Hitler may not have risen to power so easily had he not wooed the German Christians, much like American politicians of today attempt to woo the "Religious Right."

I wasn't throwing anyone under the bus, as you so eloquently put it. I was simply warning of the potential side effects that can and do occur when Christendom rises to power. Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it, and Christianity in power has been responsible for far more nightmarish occurrences than having sexual relations with an intern. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. It's a fact.

[LUconn]

hilter argument = strawman. stick to the topic at hand. I find Mrmac interesting as he obviously leans left on certain issues. I'd like to you know your opinion on abortion *gasp*

[4everfsu]

Lets see Christians who support Hitler during WWII. Oh, those must have been the born again christians, right. Or could they have been all those who were not catholic or jewish in Germany at the time and belong to other denominations. Even the crusades in history is Christians vs Islam. Lets see back then the Pope was in power and ordered the crusades, now he was catholic but history records the war as Christian vs the Muslim. So be careful when reading history and who wrote it and from what perspective.
I would take a goverment led by fundamental Christians instead of one led by a man like Hitler. Anyone can say they are an American and not be, just way with a Christian. Christian is more then someone saying they are, it is the walk they have here on earth. Sorry for rambling on.
Another thing about this liberal minded preacher, if you are liberal outside a pulpit you will be the same inside, the same way for a conservative preacher. If you are pro death, you probably will not preach about it, where if you are pro life you probably will. Look at Jerry, he is pro life and he hits on it in the pulpit.

[Baldspot]

Practice what you preach. If you believe it was a different world back then Mr Mac, then why equate today's Bible believing Christian's with the followers of Hitler? Different world - yes or no?

You are the one making the comparison.


BTW - someone from Baptist World Mission took a two day field trip to Germany and wrote a report that smut was off the street. Big Deal.

[mrmacphisto]

hilter argument = strawman. stick to the topic at hand. I find Mrmac interesting as he obviously leans left on certain issues. I'd like to you know your opinion on abortion *gasp*

What is the topic at hand? I thought it had changed to the role of religion/Christianity in politics. Hitler is more than relevant in this case, as he is a prime example of someone who publicly espoused Christianity in order to win religious support, only to use his power to achieve his own personal agenda, which he cleverly disguised as a Christian issue. Let's not forget that Hitler was also anti-abortion and anti-gay. I'm not saying those of us who are either are Nazis; I'm just pointing out how easy it would be for someone to use us the way Hitler used his Christian suppporters.

I could tell you my opinion on abortion, but that's irrelevant here. Why don't we stick to the topic at hand?

[mrmacphisto]

Lets see Christians who support Hitler during WWII. Oh, those must have been the born again christians, right. Or could they have been all those who were not catholic or jewish in Germany at the time and belong to other denominations. Even the crusades in history is Christians vs Islam. Lets see back then the Pope was in power and ordered the crusades, now he was catholic but history records the war as Christian vs the Muslim. So be careful when reading history and who wrote it and from what perspective.
I would take a goverment led by fundamental Christians instead of one led by a man like Hitler. Anyone can say they are an American and not be, just way with a Christian. Christian is more then someone saying they are, it is the walk they have here on earth. Sorry for rambling on.
Another thing about this liberal minded preacher, if you are liberal outside a pulpit you will be the same inside, the same way for a conservative preacher. If you are pro death, you probably will not preach about it, where if you are pro life you probably will. Look at Jerry, he is pro life and he hits on it in the pulpit.

4everfsu, it's the same principle. I realize Catholicism is not the same brand of Christianity as Fundamentalism or Baptism, or any other denomination for that matter, but the principle still applies. Every time any sort of Christianity rises to a high place of power on this earth, it is corrputed by that power.

[mrmacphisto]

Practice what you preach. If you believe it was a different world back then Mr Mac, then why equate today's Bible believing Christian's with the followers of Hitler? Different world - yes or no?

You are the one making the comparison.


BTW - someone from Baptist World Mission took a two day field trip to Germany and wrote a report that smut was off the street. Big Deal.

You can choose to turn a blind eye to the fact that Christians in power have been responsible for many things that probably angered Christ (although He will ultimately be the judge of that). You're obviously choosing to overlook thousands of years of history. I'm not saying Christians haven't been responsible for great things, but those great things were not the result of holding some high governmental office.

Yes, it's a different world today than it was during WWII, or during the Crusades, or during the Inquisition, or during the Salem Witch Trials (I could go on, but this would be superfluous). But each time period mentioned was likewise different from the others. Still, throughout history, the principle remains true. Power corrupts, and Christianity in power is not exempt. If anything, it's a prime example.

My point is not to discourage anyone from employing their values or beliefs when casting their vote. I'm just trying to encourage you to think about what your true values are, what true Christian values are (I personally love a good sermon on campaign finance reform) and vote according to what you actually believe, whether or not the leader you choose is a Christian. A politician can pay as much lip-service to Christians as it takes to get him elected, but his relationship with Christ is something we can only speculate about. Don't bank on a leader just because he professes Christian faith. The world has made that mistake before. We are in such great danger of being used, and that's the main thing I'm trying to point out here. The decision is yours.

[LUconn]

I didn't think that was the topic at hand but if it is, carry on. But my question was more out of curiousity. It's not relevant. I just think that if you told us, you know we would then discount any opinion you have from now on.

[4everfsu]

I'm just trying to encourage you to think about what your true values are, what true Christian values are (I personally love a good sermon on campaign finance reform)

Mac, what you said above helps proves my point, if someone is liberal outside the pulpit they will be the same inside a pulpit.
I take that is what your true Christian values happens to be as stated above. Me personally I rather hear a sermon on tithing.

[4everfsu]

It was a great relief to be in a country where salacious sex literature cannot be sold; where putrid motion pictures and gangster films cannot be shown. The new Germany has burned great masses of corrupting books and magazines along with its bonfires of Jewish and communistic libraries.

Mac the above written about Germany. Did the writer also mention that Hitler burned the Bible?
A christian without a Bible is like a solider without his sword

[mrmacphisto]

I'm just trying to encourage you to think about what your true values are, what true Christian values are (I personally love a good sermon on campaign finance reform)

Mac, what you said above helps proves my point, if someone is liberal outside the pulpit they will be the same inside a pulpit.
I take that is what your true Christian values happens to be as stated above. Me personally I rather hear a sermon on tithing.

Perhaps I should have included sarcasm indicators, because whenever I don't, I inevitably have to go to the trouble of explaining myself. I was making a statement in regards to those who preach largely on political issues, therefore making them Christian issues. I don't know what point that helps you prove, but more power to you if it does.

Mac the above written about Germany. Did the writer also mention that Hitler burned the Bible?

No, that was not mentioned. It would not have made or broken my point even if it was.

I just think that if you told us [your position on abortion], you know we would then discount any opinion you have from now on.

What difference does my position on abortion make in regards to my opinions or arguments? You went on about the Straw Man, but this is an ad hominem if I ever saw one. Besides, it appears some already have their minds made up. My only question is who's making your mind up?

[LUconn]

I'm not using debators tricks or anything. I'm just curious. I know it has nothing to do with what we're talking about. Would you feel better if I started another thread about it so it was appropriatly labeled? I won't though because it's obvious where you stand on that.[/b]

[mrmacphisto]

You have a PM.