Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Saturday, December 16, 2017

Reprinted with permission from Right Wing Watch

 
This article was made possible by the readers and supporters of AlterNet.

49 Responses to Leading Right-Wing Christian Figure Calls For A ‘More Violent Christianity’

  1. So according to the Christian right, Jesus didn’t just ride dinosaurs…he body slammed them. Hallelujah! That must have been Leonard Cohen’s inspiration (body slamming dinosaurs).

    Apparently Jesus died for your right to violently take those liberal dudes down to the ground.

    Because as Jesus used to say, “we’re gonna make Nazareth great again!”

  2. The “Reverend” has a point. None of the NATO members barked at Trump when the latter pushed the PM of Montenegro out of the way to have his picture taken at the front of the pack. What the alt-Christian leader does not understand is that those leaders will never talk or act the way Trump does because their upbringing, values, and behavior are the exact opposite to Trump’s. They simply find ways to distance themselves from people like The Donald, and pursue solutions that allow them to defend themselves and improve their standard of living without U.S. involvement. The immature, violent, behavior the pseudo Christians love, is no match for the composure, maturity, and intellect, of a true leader.

    • Amen. PM Markovic probably didn’t have any “make Montenegro great again” rallies. If Trump’s utter incompetence ever starts producing “make Germany great again” rallies, that could be a different kettle of fish.

      • Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj331d:
        On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
        !mj331d:
        ➽➽
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash331TopSpotGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!mj331d..,…..

    • Of course, Marcon turning the tables on him by making Teflon Donnie believe he was about to get a “handshake from Hell” again, only to have the Frenchman turn aside and embrace Merkel was worth the wait! Here’s poor Teflon Donnie with his hand stuck out and nobody waiting to shake it.
      Once a low-class slob, always a low-class slob.

    • The Reverend suffers the same shortcomings that we all do. It’s much easier to focus on things we don’t like about other people so we don’t have to deal with issues in our own lives. Anyone who has read a chapter of the new testament understands this guy just doesn’t get it.

  3. If Donald Trump is a good example of a proper Christian leader and one we should follow, then I want nothing to do with that Christianity. I was raised in the Southern Baptist Church by a father who was a deacon, and my grandfather was a Southern Baptist pastor. But I was taught as a child that people who acted and lived the way Donald Trump does, and who like that lifestyle, were children of the devil who were lost and would end up in hell.

    • Yes. Those were the teachings of the time.
      Also:
      — Unmarried mothers were bound for eternal damnation.
      — Homosexuality reserved your spot in the Lake of Fire.
      — Fatherless children were to be shunned.
      — Mixed-race marriage was not recognized in the eyes of god.
      The I discovered that religious services are performance art. They don’t mean anything at all.

      • I agree with everything you said. Fortunately, I’ve grown up and learned a lot, and learned not to accept the dogmas of the past. Also, my parents never taught me those things, simply because they weren’t interested in focusing on those things. But many of their friends and acquaintances did focus on those things and were quick to condemn people because of those things.
        For some examples, a couple of the girls I went to high school with, got pregnant without getting married. Though my parents did hold the view that what they did was unwise and not socially acceptable (and my parents were in a lower-middle-class social group), they never said those girls were doomed to hell.
        One of my mother’s aunts lived nearly all her adult life with a woman. Neither of them ever married or had any children, and except when at work, they both liked to wear blue jeans. I am convinced that they were lesbians, who kept it hidden because they would have been ostracized, but my parents never commented on their relationship and always welcomed them at any family gatherings, and treated the other woman as a welcome part of the family.
        A girl I played with as a child (actually not so much with her as with her older sisters) who was brought up as a Mormon, married a black man, and moved into the house my parents had lived in at one time, just down the street from where I lived from the age of 10 till I became an independent adult. My parents didn’t talk about her a lot, but when they did, they never condemned her, but were concerned about how she and her husband would be accepted by the rest of the neighborhood.

  4. Please take note, everyone, to this latest example of the collapse of Christianity as an Institution. My comments are not to disparage Christianity’s Essence—an essence which is inviolable and has energized all the major Religions which God has deigned to send in succession to all the peoples of the world from the time of the first metaphorical “Adam and Eve”, up to the present time. And He has done so, by sending a variety of “Lesser” Prophets, and “Greater” Prophets—each having a specific Mission and a different Author to address generations of humans as we’ve evolved through various eons of our existence as a species. This pattern is something I learned of when first encountering the Baha’is in Jackson, Miss. in the 60’s, through my dad; from there, I’ve been evolving in my understanding of the Message of Baha’u’llah and learned of this grand pattern which was hidden from me until that encounter.

    Each Religion has its “Alpha” and an “Omega”—in other words, a time allotted to it, after which the “Wine” of its efficacy diminishes, and has to be replenished with a subsequent Message. Just as going through school, one doesn’t stay in one grade or at a specific level with the intent to remain at that level—as the mind and our experiences change, the Message must be tailored to attend to the spiritual/social developmental needs of successive shifts in human society.

    So, it is obvious again, as illustrated by the cleric described, that the period of Christianity’s ability to edify and inspire towards nobility has expired.

    Take a look at this citation by this Christian minister who clearly has been left out in the cold:

    ” ‘America needs ‘a more violent Christianity.’ He cited President Trump and Greg Gianforte as examples of violent men who are properly ‘walking in authority.’
    ‘The only thing that is going to save Western civilization is a more aggressive, a more violent Christianity,’ he said.”

    There is so much more to say about this degenerate pronouncement uttered by a most ignorant so-called Christian. I’ll have to address that in a follow-up.

    • Aggressive violent Christianity is all part and parcel of the overall theme of Jesus’s ministry at the time, “Make Jerusalem Great Again.”

      • I must protest, in a respectful manner, on behalf of Jesus, and on behalf of Christianity in its Essence.

        First of all, we make an extremely serious effort to fault Jesus, and His Message, just because many clerics have taken upon themselves to distort the person and the Message of Jesus. We would also be in serious error, to attribute to the generality of Christians what those so-called Christians claim to be the message of Jesus.

        I challenge anyone, as any Baha’i would, to put forth anything in the New Testament that supports and condones the nonsense attributed to this depraved and confused clergyman; and I also challenge anyone to put forth any justification for certain clergy to have abused young boys(and girls); and I also challenge anyone to show evidence that the racists of America and elsewhere are given a mandate to terrorize other Christians, black, white, or whatever, just because they are of dark complexion.

        The Message of Jesus isn’t allowed to be corrupt in its essence, because the Source Himself isn’t subject to errors and flaws, which are innate in ordinary human beings by contrast.

        The bottom line is that it would be wrong for me to condemn the Message of Jesus, and(God forbid) to condemn Him, because of impulses which lead so-called Christians to speak and behave in such barbaric ways as demonstrated throughout Christianity’s history, and whose behavior is a direct violation of the Message of Jesus, and a disrespect on their part for the majesty of Jesus.

        I say this as a Baha’i, and by definition of this fact, as a defender of Jesus and of His Message.

        Peace out!

        • Frankly, we really don’t know what “Jesus” said at all. Those sayings attributed to him are a decidedly mixed lot, some contradicting others, but this is what one would expect from a man. That, of course, in no way constitutes evidence that these are things he actually said. I have not read the arguments, but some have contended, and apparently produced supporting evidence of some sort, that “Jesus” is an entirely fictional character. Others – whom I have read – contended and produced evidence that most of the “new” ideas attributed to him were in fact the teachings of the much-misrepresented Pharisees, or that the “Barabas” the crowd called for was in fact the “jesus” on which the whole thing is based (Bar Abbas apparently means “son of the father,” which would fit).
          Obviously, people such as those discussed in this article could be relied upon to be shouting the modern equivalent of “Crucify him” if the words attributed to “Jesus” are in fact his, and he appeared on earth as before and taught them.
          Unfortunately, modern “faith” more often than not seems to shield the believer from the actual facts of any story from any era.

          • You bring up an important point which I would like to elaborate on, so humor me, please.
            Yes, it’s uncertain with 100% accuracy of what Jesus or any of the Messengers of the past said with certainty. Even Biblical scholars dispute what was actually said. The exceptions are with the Qur’an, which as Muhammad received His inspiration and began to recite in Arabic, there were always companions who would write down on stone tablets, papyrus, or wood, what was being recited by Him; plus the Arabs had prodigious memories and a long tradition by that time of reciting long poems and other literary works. At some point shortly after the verses were revealed, they would recall from memory and someone would codify and verify what the person remembered. Zayd and Ali were the most reliable and trusted by Muhammad to perform this service.
            Later, Orientalist scholars in the West, mainly in European universities, and later Muslim scholars would between the two regions of scholarship confirm the authenticity of the Qur’an—a work that hasn’t undergone any changes over the centuries. Unlike numerous interpretations and reinterpretations that characterize the Torah and the New Testament. The same authenticity of Revelation exists insofar as the Writings of Baha’u’llah of the Baha’i Faith is concerned. Plus, Baha’u’llah would either write down in His own handwriting, or would have an amauensis write down what He was revealing, look at what was written, and correct the mistakes Himself, and have the scribe write down the correction. The scribe himself had to write very quickly because the verses were spoken with such rapidity and in such quantity that the poor man had trouble deciphering his own penmanship.

            But—and this is a big BUT. Regardless of the “authenticity” of every word spoken by Jesus, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and all the other major and “minor” prophets, the important thing us to weigh the general tone of all those Books with the overall tone and intent of the entire corpus, and look to see if such sayings of those Messengers led to a direct and measurable effect on the entirety of the community being addressed at the time.

            After all, the power and influence of the Words attributed are best judged by the “fruits” yielded than the actual texts written down on paper. The ability to raise up the conscience of an entire community to cause new institutions and civilizations to arise, wheter it be the Persian dynasty influenced by Zoroaster, or the Islamic influence on Europe by introducing the concepts of hospitals and universities—things unheard of during the Dark Ages—and the efflorescence of the arts and sciences as a result of the influence of Islam, are just some of the evidences of the transformative powers of the “Words” spoken, regardless of whether they’re perfectly recorded.

          • As I said to someone else, I respect your thoughtfulness and intelligence, and my general impression of your faith is favorable, though I know relatively little in the way of details, but I have to think it’s long past time that people take to heart the saying attributed to Oliver Cromwell, if memory serves, even though from what I know of him and his followers, it appears he never took his own advice: “Consider, in the bowells of Christ, that you may be wrong.”
            The gist of my argument is that NO ONE should act in matters affecting others based solely on the sayings – or purported sayings – of an ancient religious figure, or the dogmas of ANY religion or philosophy not based on reasonable evidence, and especially not use any kind of force or other compulsion upon non-believing – or even believing – persons. One also should not cite as facts or evidence in such matters the articles of faith of his or her religious doctrine.
            In the main I strongly agree with almost all of the positions you take on political issues, but I cannot accept the arguments based on your religion as even as good as those based on common human thought on ethical matters. None of the worthwhile ethical concepts of Christianity or Islam, or any other religion of which I am aware, are unique to that religion. As Richard Dawkins has pointed out, people are generally not good because they selected the right faith; they are, except in extreme circumstances, equipped with a built-in (or accultureated in) moral sense which allows them to admire the good points of the religion they choose (when they have a choice). I would say that it is my opinion that almost no one has ever been made good by religion: good people are what give religions their good reputations, and for the most part, bad people who “discover Jesus” or whatever, tend to become WORSE as a result. Others are no longer simply disagreeing with them; they are insulting ruler of the universe – who naturally sees things in much the same way the believer does, whatever the texts say – and deliberately and knowingly choosing to do evil just to defy it (the divine being). It seems clear to me that the people cited in this and many other articles on the “Religious Right,” or whatever one calls it provide convincing evidence of this thesis.

          • Well, your response is Exhibit A why America and the world is in a tailspin. Your fundamentally flawed system of conduct isn’t worth a farthing if the only standard of proper behavior and upright sentiments is your ego, or the sayings and standards of other flawed humans.
            By your persistent denial of the obvious indications that there is a Source higher than you or I, you carry on as though you’re your own standard of proper conduct. On what do you form your basis on what you perceive to be proper conduct and moral values?

            I find your attitude problematic, a source of much of the misery humans have to endure, why racism is on the rise, etc., etc. And furthermore, if you would observe carefully, you will note that those who deny the efficacy and validity of Religion have PRIMARILY been those who we properly would call ‘Africans” who migrated into Europe. Am I correct in assuming that your parentage and more immediate ancestral roots are from that region?

            Any rational and logical mind would readily conclude that morality doesn’t appear from a vacuum—how else would humans know how to properly conduct themselves without a frame of reference? And from where did such a frame of reference derive? Did Europeans devise out of the blue their own what the standards of behavior should be? Are there any other groups of Modern Humans on the face of the earth of the same nihilist viewpoint as yours and of those who are of the same cultural milieu as you? By God–No there aren’t any other group of people on the planet who have evolved as central tenets nihilism as a basis for social and spiritual order.

            I say this to you, not to show animosity, but to help to guide you to see the inherent weakness of your philosophical outlook—a product of a cold and dead philosophy originating among, of all peoples, those who settled in western and central Europe once having arrived there from Africa, by way of the Levant.

            To briefly summarize—Is there such a thing as a student when there is no Teacher? Can a chair exist with out a carpenter? Is it possible for sheer nothingness all of a sudden to acquire Existence on its own?

            These are the kinds of questions a true seeker of knowledge is compelled to ask. As for those who show no interest in such musings, they may as well be considered lifeless husks with the ability to show electro-chemical impulses, this giving the facade of being alive.

          • Well, this is awkward. I wrote what I thought was a respectful dissent and got back some accusation that I propose relying on ego for moral guidance. If anything, that was what I argued many “religious” people do, dressing it up with carefully-selected [mis-] quotes and out-of-context quotes from their man-centered “scriptures,” and any scientific literature they can twist or corrupt to fit their ends.
            No, I do not argue that the ego is a reliable guide to good behavior, nor did I imply such a ridiculous thing.
            Evidence shows that even animals, not to mention small children not yet corrupted by the artifice around them and old enough to be beyond the initial period of purely selfish need, have an inherent, if somewhat rough and unpolished, sense of justice and fairness. There is considerable scientific literature discussing the evolutionary value of a reasonable degree of altruism and self-sacrifice for relatives and close associates, at least (and in some cases, for something resembling a religion for social solidarity in the early stages of biological and cultural development). Even those who seek to convert others to their religion rely unwittingly on this non-religious moral sense in their arguments: how else could they say one religion is “better” than another, or than no religion at all?
            I do not deny in an absolute sense some “higher power,” though explaining it is a far, far greater challenge than explaining the world without it. I do deny that it is any of the human-created “gods,” or that – if it exists – it has much, if any, relationship to the clearly man-created religions. The closest approximation – and a rather loose one – would be divinity in the (Hindu) Advaita-Vedanta sense, shared to some degree by some Mahayana (or even Therevada) Buddhism, and among some Chinese Taoists, all of whom have managed to develop ethical systems sharing some of the “unique” features of Christinanity, Islam, and Judaism, and perhaps Bahai (in this last I surmise from ignorance; did I even spell it correctly?). All of them also have their flaws, and have acquired a heavy baggage of colorful and interesting, but not particularly helpful – in my opinion – features. The strength I see in them is the admission of mystery and unknowability by human intellect of the ultimate divine, also found in some heretical or borderline sects of the “big three” from the Middle East, though the latter are usually loaded with even heavier, though not necessarily more extensive, human-accrued baggage to avoid the extreme homicidal (or genocidal, or even omnicidal) tendencies that seem to be inherent in the Father-King sky god “faiths.”

          • Is there such a thing as a student when there is no Teacher?” For me a more practical way to address that is does learning depend on being taught? For me the answer is an emphatic no. In fact, most learning is self-directed. Surely as one with certain experiences a “teacher” can facilitate learning associated with those experiences. This is more important for highly specialized technical abilities but not so for questions of being. We can engage our own awareness of our lived experience and learn from that.

            “Can a chair exist with out a carpenter? Is it possible for sheer nothingness all of a sudden to acquire Existence on its own?” Interesting speculations but can “God” or a creator being under whatever title be the cause of its own existence? How did the creator come to be, out of “sheer nothingness”?

          • How did the creator come to be, out of “sheer nothingness”?
            Hard to answer if the “creator” had substance.
            Easy to answer since no creator/god ever has, does not now have, and never will occupy any presence outside the imagination of human beings.
            We’ve been creating god since we painted in caves and adorned ourselves with the teeth of our predators. We superimposed god onto our environment to make sense of the things we could neither explain nor understand. We still do. For some, it’s a comfort. For too many others, god is a tool to usurp power or wealth from whoever is insufficiently “blessed”.

          • IMHO there is no way to know whether “God” exists other than in the imagination. It’s equally mind blowing to contemplate the cosmos whether or not we posit a creator. So… I prefer to focus on life as I know it and focus on understanding my experience though I do like to philosophize. I agree that the idea of a creator god has been largely used to benefit church and state though some individuals, like Aaron, have used it to expand their experience.

          • OK, let me help clear up your misconceptions, and I do so not from the standpoint of being better than you, but from a point of view and perception that has allowed me to escape the limitations of the Western way of perception.
            First, have you known of a chair that understood the carpenter? Can a finite mind encompass the essence of an infinite mind; or put it this way, can an elementary school child conceive of differential geometry or of the application of linear operators and other techniques of linear algebra, or of Hilbert Space, to explain quantum mechanical principles??
            To pretend to be able to assess the nature of an Essence who created an infinite universe, is the height of arrogance and hubris, qualities which we westerners have in nauseating abundance. One may as well say they understand infinity completely, and can see the end of the real numbers.

            Know this, my friend: Whenever anyone claims to be able to understand the unknowable, the incomprehensible, then such an entity will fit neatly in the finite mind of the one contemplating such. Which therefore renders the “infinite” finite, since it is now confined in the thought of said finite mind.

            Is this not so? And

          • “OK, let me help clear up your misconceptions, and I do so not from the standpoint of being better than you, but from a point of view and perception that has allowed me to escape the limitations of the Western way of perception.”

            I don’t take offense. I’ve read many of your posts and agree far more than disagree. However, the sentence quoted above does imply that you are somehow more perceptive of “true reality” than am I. I suggest that is your belief, not a statement of fact. You may have to some degree escaped the limitations of Western perception (whatever that is) but you can’t escape the limitations of human perception.

            “Can a finite mind encompass the essence of an infinite mind” With all due respect I find that question as useful as “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin”. You presume an “infinite mind” but I do not, just as I don’t presume the existence of angels.

            “To pretend to be able to assess the nature of an Essence who created an infinite universe, is the height of arrogance and hubris, qualities which we westerners have in nauseating abundance.” I agree about Western arrogance and hubris but isn’t being able to assess the nature of an Essence who created an infinite universe” what you are claiming?

            “any thought of a lower entity comprehending something or someone outside its realm of comprehension doesn’t mean that the incomprehensible doesn’t exist.” Yes, absence of proof is not proof of absence. I think that’s a good argument for questioning the authority of an atheist viewpoint but not convincing as a proof of a creator.

            “there is a phrase which Baha’u’llah uses in referencing God that always reminds me of direct and indirect indications of God’s existence. The phrase is this: “…O Thou Who art the most manifest of the manifest and the most hidden of the hidden!”

            I think that is convincing and soothing to the believer but unconvincing as a “proof”. It comes down to you either believe in “God” or you don’t. No evidence will ever “prove” the correctness or falsity of your belief.

          • Everyone is subject to what they perceive as a “misconception” in others. There is no doubt that Pharoah thought that Moses was delusional and suffering some form of “misconception” from a frame of reference that revolved around things tangible. Thus Pharoah rejected the “proofs” put before him by Moses because they didn’t conform to the frame of reference he and his advisers had fashioned based on their worldly view which was confined to material substance; the same scenario and relationships defined Nimrod’s view of the “proofs” put before him by Abraham; Abu Sufyan and the other leaders of Mecca contested the proofs put to them by Muhammad, again because he felt Muhammad suffered from “misconceptions”, and therefore he rebelled and disputed the proofs put to him by Muhammad.

            Now, here we are today with people doubting the Message of Baha’u’llah, and I’ve been offering the barest outlines of His Message for you, but you deem it a “misconception.

            Are you beginning to see the pattern?

            In each Day and Age, those who had an overconfidence in their “misconceptions”, and who therefore rejected the Messengers in each Age, were generally members of a class of individuals who became “earth-bound”, by virtue of their insistence on seeing something tangible. However, in each case I cited, those who accepted the Message didn’t apply just their “head”, but utilized their “heart” as well. If you were to at least try to take some initiative to read for yourself a sample of the voluminous Writings and proofs laid out plainly, and do so weighing the Writings not according to the sayings of men and women, but use logic, your experiences, and use your heart, you may begin to see the validity of His Message.

            Caiphas was a learned Jewish leader who let his own conceptions of what was the preferred way to assess the Message of Jesus get in his way, and therefore he failed to appreciate who Jesus was. But Peter, a simple fisherman with no education whatsoever, was able to discern the truth of the Message of Jesus, because Peter used his “heart” and that innate intelligence that can’t be measured with an IQ test.

            So, my friend, don’t follow the flawed path that Caiaphas, Abu Sufyan, Pharoah, and others followed. Use that innate ability to “feel” and understand with depth, without reliance on what is apparent on the surface or conforms to limited knowledge by the “learned” of this day and age, as was done in the past which caused the generality of people to rebel against each Messenger who has appeared to humanity since the first metaphorical “Adan and Eve”.

          • You used the word “misconception”, not me. For me to label your beliefs, or for you to label mine as misconceptions presumes that one of us knows the REAL TRUTH about our existence. I certainly don’t make that claim for myself and while I respect your commitment to your beliefs I think they represent your truth not THE truth.

            Frankly I’m not interested in religions of revelation except in a philosophical sense. Jesus, Moses, Baha’u’llah etc. may have been wise men, not the only ones, and not special to me just because they claim a direct relationship with God. For me my spirituality is found and developed in my daily experience without the filter of received wisdom from another’s experience. The best “wisdom” I’ve found in writings about questions of being are found in zen, the secular kind.

            I’ve found a quote by Andre Gide to be useful in my own searching. “Trust those who seek the truth. Doubt those who have found it.”

        • “and I also challenge anyone to put forth any justification for certain clergy to have abused young boys(and girls), and other despicable examples of behavior on the part of erroneous clerics;”

          Easy. That’s how they signal that a new Pope has been selected. That white smoke is really just the steamed tears of altar boys.

  5. The word the rest of the world uses for violence in the name of one’s religion is “jihad”.
    The noun the rest of the world uses for people who engage in violent acts in the name of one’s religion is “terrorist”.

  6. Christianity along with all other religions is the bane of human existence. If there were no such thing as religion, wars would be at a minimum.
    And what about this christian crap that says god is love? Whoever coined that phrase certainly wasn’t thinking clearly.
    Christians don’t want to admit it, but their religion is man made. There is absolutely no proof positive that any god even exists. It’s all a belief system and too many people get carried away with their beliefs.

  7. Welcome to Christian Taliban and soldiers of WCSA [White Christian State of America]. Zionists will love them.

  8. Gee and all along I thought Jesus said “Blessed are the Peacemakers!” Thanks for straightening that out Reverend “Dickwad!”

  9. Bring those hairbrained bastards on so we can send them to their warring creator.. I’m sure intelligent christians will be blessed for riding civilization of these lowlife degenerates by their peace loving God.

  10. Sure. I double dare covfefe poopy pants Trumpkins to say the words RADICAL CHRISTIAN TERRORISM. Tweet him unmercifully, people, until he says the words out loud in public.

    • Just reading through the comments under this article show clearly that virtually all organized religions of today have been created and run by false prophets. False prophets who have created false doctrines which have sadly led many misguided people into totally distorting the true message of the Gospel that Jesus preached; distorted the Gospel to the point that they have even fought misguided wars which have killed many in the misguided belief that they were fighting these wars in the name of Jesus. When Jesus clearly preached that we should even love our enemies and pray for them; and even turn the other cheek when we have been attacked.

      These misguided religions have so distorted the true message in the Bible that many are being turned away from Christianity because of the awful example that people belonging to these misguided religions have shown to the world in the false name of Christianity. When in reality, these misguided religions have become nothing more than surrogates of the Devil.

Leave a reply