The American Spectator

Southern_Comment| 7.29.11 @ 7:09AM

I'm here in Bama - and Mark Tooley - PLEASE do some research instead of making inaccurate assumptions. Alabama until this last election, had a state congress ruled by Dems for the past 112 years - which is why you had a strong KKK here(as that was started by the dems) - why you had MLK, another republican, march against the doings of Alabama. Birmingham, being poor (due to the massive amt of corruption in it's city's government), is exemplery of what happens when Democrats are given free reign. When you go to b'ham, you don't see a beautiful city - you see the poor, more slums than city. BIRMINGHAM IS LEFT - and to say otherwise is not only ignorant but just as discriminatory as the idiot posts from yahoo bloggers slamming the South. From a conservative, I expect better than to keep inaccurate stereotypes alive - and ones that inaccurately portray southern conservatives as racist and corrupt. Thanks Mark - I'm absolutley unimpressed.

USSAlabama| 7.29.11 @ 9:15AM

It's time states took back the powers they were originally endowed with.

If States could issue immigrant-worker temporary visas it would be easier to deport those who don't have one. The criminal element in the equation would be filtered out that way making deportation of those not possessing one much easier.

Every illegal immigrant we have here is not necessarily someone we would want to deport. No church has any business putting it's two cents into the equation.

If a State can issue temporary worker visas, it is thus getting registration of it's aliens. They contribute here more than other minority populations who are not aliens; in this state, at least.

This is not a matter for a church, and it is not a humanitarian issue. This law could be a better law, but it's time for States to have the powers they were originally intended to have and the Federal Government should rewrite immigration law to accommodate the 21st century. Without amnesty for anyone.

Occam's Tool| 7.29.11 @ 7:25PM

B'ham---Northside, Slums; Southside---much nicer. But I've heard it has gotten worse since I left in 2000.

Quartermaster| 7.29.11 @ 10:24PM

I don't see anything that Tooley wrote that should have set your teeth on edge.

And the Klan was not started by the Dems, but by out of work Confederate Junior Officers after the war. As a joke, no less. It got taken over by the anti-reconstruction resistance to oppose the corruption of the occupation governments imposed by the radical Republicans.

If you are talking about the new Klan, the Klan post 1915, that was a completely different kettle of fish, and you should qualify your rants so people will know which you are referring to. It is in doubt that Dems even formed that Klan, although there is no they took advantage of it.

Quartermaster| 7.29.11 @ 10:24PM

I don't see anything that Tooley wrote that should have set your teeth on edge.

And the Klan was not started by the Dems, but by out of work Confederate Junior Officers after the war. As a joke, no less. It got taken over by the anti-reconstruction resistance to oppose the corruption of the occupation governments imposed by the radical Republicans.

If you are talking about the new Klan, the Klan post 1915, that was a completely different kettle of fish, and you should qualify your rants so people will know which you are referring to. It is in doubt that Dems even formed that Klan, although there is no they took advantage of it.

Quartermaster| 7.29.11 @ 10:25PM

p.s Alabama did not have the strongest of the Klan either. That honor goes to Ohio, believe it or not.

Occam's Tool| 7.30.11 @ 1:42AM

Actually, Indiana.

Publius| 7.31.11 @ 7:37AM

What metric(s) does one use to determine the "strongest Klan?"

daddio| 7.29.11 @ 7:10AM

Obviously the leadership of the mainline churches have been co-opted by the liberal elite and function as a mouthpiece for that trash. And they wonder why Americans are saying "No thanks!" and leaving their churches. We see the BS. We smell the BS. My father was a Methodist minister in central Missouri for years. He and his flock smelled the BS from on high too. There is a real disconnect between the congregations and the upper leadership of the churches. The common people see this for what it is, and see how wrong headed these people are.

Mark in LA| 7.29.11 @ 12:20PM

The churces was to fill their pews with these illegals. That is why they are so high and holy - they need the bucks.

Patrick| 7.29.11 @ 5:19PM

You have never been an usher I see.

lc| 7.29.11 @ 8:13PM

You're absolutely right. I was raised Methodist, got married and changed church affiliations. Was recently changing churches again (as the recent Presbyterian one also fell into that trap), checked out the Methodist again. Looked at the national online site and was shocked. They're promoting UN stuff. They've fallen away from the truth. Finally did find a church but it took at while.

Southern_Comment| 7.29.11 @ 7:15AM

As for the sentiments down here in Alabama - we're upset with these churches. We see it as a ploy to get noticed in the media hoopla. That's all it is. Alabamians realize the part of the law about transporting was not aimed at the churches, but at the construction companies knowingly hiring illegals and transporting them to jobs.
Second, and on this regard we're really upset and disgusted. The churches all in the name of getting their mugs in the paper - are tossing over their own congregrations for a select few - a select few who are criminals (and I better not hear some bs about God not seeing borders I'll cite you numerous examples from the bible saying otherwise). These churches involved in this - they care about their publicity and SHAME ON THEM ABSOLUTELY SHAME ON THEM - for in their vanity and greed they have forsaken their flocks.

Southern_Comment| 7.29.11 @ 7:19AM

Lastly, our law may be necessarily strict - but I believe that Ga has passed an equally strict law as well as several other states - apparently liberal preachers are as dumb as the general population of liberals (and to the church those same liberals that fight for rights of the criminal and abortion).

Appleby| 7.29.11 @ 7:23AM

Jesus never condoned lawbreaking; He said to render to Caesar the things that are Caesars.

None of Jesus teachings were aimed at forcing our neighbours to feed His sheep. They were instructions to INDIVIDUALS to do so. Likewise, forgiveness and justice were individual mandates to be practiced within the law; the Pope visited his would-be assassain in prison and forgave him, but he did not break him out of prison!

The Sixties Are Over. Its time the hippies grew up.

oldfart| 7.29.11 @ 7:31AM

Hippies grow up? They are still so stoned they think it is 1966!! And you are right on the money. Jesus never said for the Roman Empire to fee the people - he said for the people to help as they can and are motiviated.

soljerblue| 7.29.11 @ 1:47PM

At no time did Jesus ever ask government for anything. Even at his extremity, standing before Pilate, he asked no mercy, saying only that Pilate had no power over him not granted "by my Father in Heaven" His revolution was one of the human heart, not government.

Bill| 7.29.11 @ 12:53PM

Jesus DID say to the rich young man who wanted to follow Him as His disciple that he should give all of his money to the poor, but that was a special condition; Jesus NEVER said that everyone should do that.

Appleby| 7.29.11 @ 1:35PM

In the case of the rich young ruler, Jesus' point appears to be that one should get rid of anything that stands in place of God, or between God and himself. That may be wealth, it may be a gourmet appetite, it may be your SmartPhone, and it may be your Bugatti Vayron...and it also may be your Victum Status.

Just to mention the other oft-quoted saying of Jesus, his observation that it's harder for a rich man to enter Heaven than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle -- he wasn't saying that it was impossible (with God all things are possible), just that it's difficult, possibly because rich men have a lot on their minds that can get between them and God.

Please also note that Jesus appears in one instance to speak approvingly of a dishonest steward. I personally don't think he was praising dishonesty -- just ingenuity.

Patrick| 7.29.11 @ 5:26PM

Coupled with the parable of the unmerciful debtor, and numerous other teachings, we find that those who forgive what is done unto them are in turn forgiven.

This does not mean that something wrong has been done or that the act wasn't wicked. Rather, it is that we are free to be thankful for what has been freely given to us, a forgiveness that exceeds any tresspass that another finite human can ever render against us.

oldfart| 7.29.11 @ 7:39AM

I was confirmed in the Methodist Church in the 1960's and was the youngest at-large member of the Official Board for my congregation. I was very active. But when there were some 'discussions' between the Official Board and the Bishop's office over policy - not faith - the Bishop reacted by hiring a person to check on the background of the most vocal member (not me), to try to find some dirt to get this person to shut up. When word got out there was serious debat whether our church should leave the Methodist communion. The decision was made to stay - I left the Methodist communion and never looked back. The rot was already there over 40 years ago. No wonder their number are dropping.

Patrick| 7.29.11 @ 5:30PM

The rot has been around since the previous gilded age. "Social Gospel" was what it was called, Judas protesting the use of spikenard upon Christ is what it truly was.

Melvin| 7.29.11 @ 7:44AM

Someone feel free to correct me if I am misguided here, but it seems that Churches have stepped away from celebrating and teaching the gospel, that they seem more like politicians with clerical collars.
In my opinion this is why many at least here in the United States are turning away from churches, because the want to seek sanctuary from life's daily grind, only to enter the church and hear it from the pulpit, and it isn't the word of God.
This is one of the chief reasons that I have not attended organized religion since dad and mom used to drop me and my sisters off at the Methodist Church.
A born again type one day confronted me, and told me I was going to burn for not being born again. I calmly replied, "Last time I checked only God had the moral authority to pass judgment upon my miserable soul. The born again sputtered, developed a stomped on bullfrog look and stormed away.
When Churches start interpreting states law instead of interpreting the word of God, it is time to seek sanctuary else where.

Southern_Comment| 7.29.11 @ 7:49AM

Amen.

oldfart| 7.29.11 @ 8:36AM

A 2nd AMEN on that.

Appleby| 7.29.11 @ 10:59AM

This is exactly why I am now a Catholic. I have never heard politics preached from the pulpit in any Catholic church I have attended. In the Anglican church the only thing I heard preached in the last 3 years I belonged was politics, chiefly homosexual politics.

Again, Jesus said to render unto Caesar those things that are Caesar's and unto God those things that are God's. I suspect He would be overturning more than moneychangers' tables these days -- he might send some pulpits flying too.

Mark in LA| 7.29.11 @ 12:22PM

When it comes to immigration, the Catholic Church is no different. They also want the Mexicans in.

Appleby| 7.29.11 @ 1:38PM

But they don't preach it from the pulpit.

Margie| 7.29.11 @ 2:01PM

They preach false doctrine though, which should be rejected by anyone who is truly a Christian.

Southern_Comment| 7.29.11 @ 6:14PM

How do they preach false doctrine?

Mister Grady| 7.29.11 @ 11:48PM

Where to begin?

Clint| 7.31.11 @ 2:56PM

Begin Victor Bigot .

Vlady| 7.29.11 @ 7:26PM

Where's there bigotry
There will lovely
Ms. Margie be.

I knew I could count on it! Now it will be complete once we find Dr. Mengele. I mean Dr. Right. Let's get those Catholicks!

Mister Grady| 7.30.11 @ 12:18AM

Catholics can't defend their unbiblical practices, so they play the victim card combined with ad hominem nonsense when confronted with someone who unapologetically stands for the Truth of God's Word instead of the manmade teachings of the Roman church.

Peter was not the first pope. The papacy emerged gradually after Constantine's false conversion. Peter, as the Bible states, was an apostle to the circumcised, while Paul, not Peter, was the apostle to the gentiles. Plus which, Paul wrote about two-thirds of the NT. Christ was the cornerstone. Not Peter. Peter was humble and would never have allowed people to exalt him like Catholics exalt the pope, and Bible provides zero evidence that he was in any way a pope. Sorry. You lose.

The Roman church emerged over several hundred years as a poisonous offshoot within the original Christian church - a poison of false teaching which the NT writers repeatedly warned about.

Pope worship. Mary worship. Saints worship. Intercessory prayer with intercessors other than Christ. Penance. Purgatory. Indulgences. Rosary beads. Holy water. Idols and graven images. Religious trinkets. Canned prayers, canned rituals and phony religiosity. Last rites. Confession to a priest, followed by Hail Marys. Excommunication. Transubstantiation. Calling a priest "father". Calling the pope "the holy father". Supposed vicars of Christ who ordered the cold blooded murder of Jews and real Christians.

Sheesh, it can be exhausting trying to address the disgusting godlessness of the Roman church. Problem is, you can't really talk to Catholics about it because they always want to tell you what "the Church" teaches, and you can't make them understand that the word of man is as good as dirt on the bottom of your shoe when it is in contradiction to God's Holy Writ.

And for those Catholics who like to make a big show of being offended, as if that matters, I'll quote Paul.

Galatians 1:10

For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.
____________________

Catholics should worry a lot less about whether they are offended, and much more about whether God is offended. Once you do that, you'll be well on your way to repenting of Romanism.

Harry Russell| 7.30.11 @ 10:59AM

Mr. Grady, you are correct and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Good report on church history. Amen.

Micha Elyi| 7.30.11 @ 5:18PM

"Catholics can't defend their unbiblical practices..."

So? Your real gripes are with their BIBLICAL practices. And what you claim are Catholic practices that aren't (Pope worship, Mary worship - just two examples of your many errors). Your supposed 'history' of the one, holy and apostolic Catholic church is error-riddled too.

By the way, the Bible is a Catholic book. You only have it because the Catholic Church compiled it and then preserved it through the centuries. Where is your authority to throw out any portion of it? (That's why the bibles of protestants are slimmer; they reject the parts that contradict their unbiblical man-made dogmas.)

"He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me." Luke 10:16.

Margie| 7.30.11 @ 7:06PM

"Your supposed 'history' of the one, holy and apostolic Catholic church is error-riddled too."

Really?

Here it is, all spelled out for you how Catholicism isn't Christianity, or Biblical:

http://www.biblebelievers.com/.....ences.html

Margie| 7.30.11 @ 7:20PM

"By the way, the Bible is a Catholic book. You only have it because the Catholic Church compiled it and then preserved it through the centuries."

That's funny. History says otherwise:

"Roman Catholics often say that it was their church that gave us the Bible. They sometimes claim this when defending their "Sacred Tradition" so that they might support extra-biblical teachings such as purgatory, penance, indulgences, and Mary worship. They often say the only way the Christian church knew what books are to be included in the Canon of Scripture was because it was revealed by word-of-mouth in the early church; that is, by the tradition of the Catholic Church."

http://carm.org/did-roman-cath.....-our-bible

Nick| 7.31.11 @ 7:37AM

Margie,

I'm sorry, but the author of this essay (he does not identify himself) is almost as bad as Mr. Job, whom you linked to some weeks ago.

Did you catch this line? "First of all, the Roman Catholic Church was not really in effect as an organization in the first couple hundred years of the Christian Church." You don't believe this, do you?

And, history does indeed say otherwise. I guess the author has never read the writings of Pope Clement I of Rome (A.D. 80-99):

"Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate [bishop]. For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect fore-knowledge of this, they appointed those [ministers] already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep [i.e., died], other approved men should succeed them in their ministry."
- Pope Clement I, Letter to the Corinthians, Chapter 44

Saint Clement of Rome taught Apostolic succession. In the first century A.D.! Most likely while Saint John the Apostle was still alive.

Or, how about this gem:

"The Jews knew what was inspired of God and they recognized what God had inspired. That is what those who are of God do."

Would these be the same first century Jews who rejected Christ? And rejected the Apostles? And called them liars? And rejected every book of the New Testament? These Jews knew the inspired Word of God? (No offence, Occam, if you happen to read this! Just making a point.)

This one is the best of all: "There wasn't any real issue of whether or not they were authentic. [The Apostles'] writings did not need to be deemed worthy of inclusion in the Canon of Scripture by a later group of men in the so-called Roman Catholic Church."

Really? Hasn't this author ever heard of the Gnostics? What about the real apocryphal books, e.g. The Gospel of Peter, Book of Jubilees, Acts of Paul, etc. Many of which were circulating in the second century A.D., by the way.

There was a very good reason to list which books belonged in the Canon of Sacred Scripture. There were many uninspired books floating around.

And, thanks to the protection of the Holy Spirit, the Catholic Church has kept, protected, and copied faithfully, ALL of God's inspired Word for almost 2,000 years.
God Bless!

Margie| 7.31.11 @ 5:28PM

Nick,

Your post is so full of crap, to put it bluntly.

First of all, God is against Popery.
Nowhere in the Bible does God mention anything about, and indeed does not want this type of Kingship and hierarchy that your false Religion teaches.

So, "Pope" Clement wasn't a "Pope" by any will of God!

And his letter isn't in the Bible, so he's not to be listened to. In fact, he's a liar since he created "the Popery."

Since "Apostolic succession" isn't biblical, it makes the man an utter fraud.

The perversion of the Word of God began very early on, as you have just revealed, so thanks for that.

Secondly~ you MOCK the fact that the Jews knew the Word of God, or that they recognized it?
Why wouldn't they, Nick?
They were His chosen people, after all.

You said:

"Would these be the same first century Jews who rejected Christ? And rejected the Apostles? And called them liars? And rejected every book of the New Testament? These Jews knew the inspired Word of God?"

How disgusting! You know FULL well that not ALL the Jews rejected Christ, and that not ALL the Jews rejected the Apostles, and that not ALL of the Jews rejected every book of the Bible.

What a hypocrite!

And what about the "Apochrypha"? It wasn't Scriptural, that's why it was rejected.
That's such an easy one.

The "Gnostics"?
That's real easy too:

"he name "Christian gnostics" came to represent a segment of the Early Christian community that believed that salvation lay not in merely worshipping Christ, but in psychic or pneumatic souls learning to free themselves from the material world via the revelation."

'Nuff said.

Nick| 8.1.11 @ 1:19AM

Margie,

My sister in Christ. You can try to hurt me, but, it won't work. Sorry.

"First of all, God is against Popery."

This is not an argument. And, I already know your views on Pope Clement I. So, why did you link to a site that says the Catholic Church wasn't formed until the time of Constantine? You beef is with your own link, not me. I'm just the messenger.

"Secondly~ you MOCK the fact that the Jews knew the Word of God, or that they recognized it?"

I did no such thing. And, I never wrote, "ALL the Jews rejected Christ." Why are misrepresenting what I wrote?

Again, the site to which you provided a link, trying to prove your point, appealed NOT to the authority of Word of God (Sole Scriptura,) but, to the authority of a group of men, who were Jewish Pharisees, who rejected Christ, the Apostles, and the whole New Testament. This is historic fact.

When it comes to the Old Testament, why do you stand with the Pharisees, who were enemies of Christ?

"It wasn't Scriptural, that's why it was rejected."

The apocryphal books weren't rejected until the Catholic Church listed which books were inspired, in the late 4th century A.D. Apocryphal books were being used in some churches, already in the first century A.D.

This is why a canon had to be declared definitively. Because people were being lead astray. I can provide some links, if you would like to know the history of how the Bible was formed?

Also, the Gnostics not only used some of these apocryphal books, they probably wrote many of them. Another reason the Church had to declare which books were truly the inspired Word of God.

Why do provide links, in attempts to prove your points, that you, yourself, disagree with? This is a strange way to try to persuade someone.
God Bless!

Mister Grady| 7.30.11 @ 8:52PM

Micha, you are ignorant. Please pay attention.

The RCC taking credit for the Bible is an appalling lie, but par for the course for the father of lies.

Firstly, the OT:
It, alone, comprises about 75% of the entire Christian Bible. It was, as it so happens, written by Jews (I bet that really sets your teeth on edge) as, of course, inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Secondly, the NT:
It was, as it turns out, written by ethnic Jews who became born again Christians (ouch, again!), as, of course, inspired by the Holy Spirit.

The RCC did not come into existence until a few hundred years after the last of these texts had been written.

The early assembly of the books which included the apocrypha came about just a little bit after Constantine made Christianity the state religion - thereby intermingling pagan practices with Christianity, creating the pseudo-Christian Romanized pagan cult that is the RCC.

Because of this, that early assembly unfortunately became officially set in stone by the new state religion. But the apocrypha was never authoritative. Scholarship supports this. The reason the apocrypha was in the Bible (always in Latin, of course) for so long is because of the brutal, dictatorial dominance of the RCC for all of those dark centuries.

After the first few hundred years of Christianity, once Satan saw that Roman persecution of Christians was not doing any good, he changed his tactic. He had to get clever. He had to get subtle. He had to get on the inside, unawares. So instead of fighting Christianity face to face from without, he hijacked and subverted it from within - creating a false version of Christianity, with Constantine as his change agent.

The RCC is no less than a major strategy of Baal's against the true Gospel of Christ, and trying to take credit for God's Holy Word is right up Baal's alley.

It is GOD'S WORD. Not the RCC's. Do not lie about God's Word.

Margie| 7.30.11 @ 11:30PM

Excellent post!!

Nick| 7.31.11 @ 5:42AM

Mister Grady,

First, thank you for not sugar coating what you really think! Ha-ha! And, you can't offend this Roman Catholic. I love all my brothers and sisters in Christ.

Now, let me begin.

"Secondly, the NT:
It was, as it turns out, written by ethnic Jews [...]."

Luke was a Jew? Ouch!
Also, who wrote the Gospels, and the Letter to the Hebrews, according to the Bible?

"The RCC did not come into existence until a few hundred years after the last of these texts had been written."

Then why do the early Church Fathers' writings contain so many Catholic doctrines?

"But the apocrypha was never authoritative."

The Septuagint was quoted by Christ and the Apostles. In fact, approximately 2/3 of the Old Testament quotes found in the New Testament are from the Septuagint. Why would Christ quote from a translation of the Old Testament that contained books that were not inspired, i.e., the Dueterocanonicals?

"So instead of fighting Christianity face to face from without, [Satan] hijacked and subverted it from within - creating a false version of Christianity, with Constantine as his change agent."

Really?

"That you are Peter [i.e., Rock, Kephas in Aramaic]; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

"Going therefore, teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world."
- Matthew 16:18; 28: 19-20 (Emphasis mine.)

I'm confused. Was Christ wrong, or, did He fail? How else could Satan have "hijacked" Christianity?

I look forward to your answers.
God Bless!

Clint| 7.31.11 @ 3:21PM

Catholics Have Repeatedly Defended Against Your Slandering Lies On American Spectator, Victor-Margie Grady.

That's Why You Hide Behind This Poseur Moniker.

Occam's Tool| 7.30.11 @ 1:46AM

Clint (Vlady):

Some more info on the terror that you support---
2011.07.29 (Nahr-e-Saraj, Afghanistan) - Women and children are among nineteen torn to shreds by a Taliban bomb attack on their minibus.
2011.07.29 (Saryab, Pakistan) - Seven Shia pilgrims waiting at a busstop are shot like ducks in a row by determinied Sunnis.
2011.07.28 (Makhachkala, Dagestan) - An elderly couple is stabbed to death in their home by an Islamic terrorist.
2011.07.28 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Fundamentalists car bomb a liquor store, killing one.
2011.07.28 (Oruzgan, Afghanistan) - Ten children and two women are among nineteen people slaughtered during a coordinated Taliban attack.
2011.07.28 (Tikrit, Iraq) - Two suicide bombers detonate amid a line of Iraqis waiting for paychecks, killing at least fifteen.

Note--all Muslim on Muslim violence. Might I suggest that instead of focusing on the mote in your brother's eye, you intead work on the BEAM in your own?

Vlady| 7.30.11 @ 10:31AM

My dear Dr. Occam,

Clint and Vlady are not the same. I have been to (some) 0f these places, and fought the vermin you cite above.

Clint| 7.31.11 @ 3:01PM

I Got $1000.00 That Says Vlady's Posts Ain't Mine.

Put Up Or Shut Up Screwball Paranoid Israel Firster Fanatic,Tool Job.

And It's Interesting, That Occam's Tool Use A Catholic Heretic for His Moniker.

Joseph| 7.31.11 @ 9:40PM

Mr. Occam, Why do you not criticize Margie?

Micha Elyi| 7.30.11 @ 4:15PM

Your statement is false.

By the way, the Bible is a Catholic book. Protestants pick-and-choose which parts they'll believe and which they wish to throw out (that's why Protestant bibles are skinnier). The Protestant doctrine that just anybody has the authority Jesus gave to Peter, the other apostles, and through them, and their apostolic successors is a - how did you put it? - false doctrine.

Micha Elyi| 7.30.11 @ 5:28PM

The Bible is a Catholic book. Which parts do you reject, Margie? Do you reject the apostolic authority by which the Bible was compiled? Surely the authority by which the Bible was compiled cannot be lesser than the authority of Bible. Consider the words of Jesus in Luke 10:16 and fear the Lord.

Margie| 7.30.11 @ 7:21PM

See my above post for the truth.
Then, let's talk about who is rejecting what!

Mister Grady| 7.30.11 @ 9:02PM

Micha, quit with the multiple postings.

The Bible is not a Catholic book! That's such an awful lie. Jews wrote it, and all while under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Sheesh! See my post above where I address this.

If the RCC is responsible for the Bible, I sure wish I knew why it didn't include Biblical justifications for it's Romanized, paganized Christianity. If the Bible really is yours, you should've included all of your Catholic nonsense in the text.

Do facts matter? At all?!

Mark in LA| 7.29.11 @ 2:02PM

No they preach it in the newspapers like Cardinal Mahoney in Los Angeles.

Vlady| 7.30.11 @ 10:35AM

Not being a catholic nor being in LA I can't say for sure, but it seems like they just want immigrants to be treated fairly. Of course, illegals are illegals, and while we should treat them fairly, we should also return them to their country as quickly as possible.

Unless their CATHOLICK and then Margie, Mr. Grady, Quartermaster, and Dr. Mengele can have a rocking pagan Nazi bonfire and call it a Christian Conversion Experience.

Let's get them CATHOLICS! CHARGE!!!

Joseph| 7.31.11 @ 9:41PM

Mark, What do you have against Mexicans?

Ryan| 7.29.11 @ 9:32AM

You're painting with too broad a brush. You may find the conservatism you are looking for in one of several Baptist, Presbyterian (PCA), Assembly of God, or nondenominational congregation.

I'm not going as far to doubt your salvation, but you ARE running headlong into the issue that the author of Hebrews talks about:

Hebrews 10 "19 Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful; 24 and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, 25 not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.

You need the church, and the church needs you, if you are a Christian.

Claypoole| 7.29.11 @ 10:48AM

For those who are searching, a suggestion: Look for a Presbyterian church that has voted to declare itself a confessing church. These are congregations that, about 10 years ago, began to reject the actions and stated opinions of the national office (in Louisville, KY) and its leftist sycophants. These churches are Christ-centered, scripturally based, and do not engage, as churches, in politics. My sweet little rural church is a confessing church and the only reason I am still a Presbyterian.

Occam's Tool| 7.29.11 @ 7:13PM

Indeed, the Presbyterian Church USA is well known in its national office to agree with Ron Paul on foreign policy.

And speaking of Paul-Bots on foreign policy: one notorious one here noted that Egypt was going to "go secular." He was, as usual, full of crap:

" Thousands demonstrate for an Islamic state in Egypt
BEN HUBBARD
The Associated Press
Published Friday, Jul. 29, 2011 6:34AM EDT
Last updated Friday, Jul. 29, 2011 2:11PM EDT
1626 comments Email Print/License Decrease text size
Increase text size Calls for an Islamic state have taken over Cairo’s Tahrir Square as the largest demonstration since February has been mobilized by the country’s Islamist organizations. Ultraconservative Muslims turned out in force Friday as hundreds of thousands filled Cairo's central Tahrir Square in a rally marked by a growing rift in the protest movement.

More related to this story
•As Mubarak’s trial nears, Egyptians debate the role of Islam
•Egypt's Mubarak to face trial in front of large audience in Cairo
•Egyptian liberals should get election ready
Video
Protesters return to Tahrir Square
Photos
In Pictures: Thousands demonstrate in Cairo South of the capital, gunmen fired on a car carrying Christians, killing two. While the motive was unknown, similar events have sparked religious violence in the past.

In the largest crowd to fill the square since the popular uprising that ousted President Hosni Mubarak in February, Salafis chanted for the implementation of strict Islamic law — spurring accusations that they violated an agreement to keep the rally free from divisive issues.

They have come in a show of force to demand that the country’s caretaker authority, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, cease its plans to present a set of principles that will form a framework for a new constitution.

Islamist group’s such as the Muslim Brotherhood – Egypt's best organized political force – and the former terrorist organization Gamaa Islamiya along with disparate Salafist bodies argue that only God’s word is greater than a constitution and that only a parliament chosen by free election can set the terms for a constitution. These groups stayed away from recent demonstrations that sought to keep up pressure on the military council that took power after former president Hosni Mubarak's fall, leading to smaller crowds.

The groups believe that they will poll enough support to dominate such a parliament and thereby set the terms. They fear that a kind of bill of rights could close off the possibility of a state run by Islamic laws.

The secular youths who once dominated this central Cairo square are in a distinct minority these days, and especially on Friday, dominated as it is by Islamists.

Liberal parties endorse the measure in an effort to limit what they fear will be outsized Islamist influence on the new document should religious groups win a large share of the parliament. The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces has accepted the idea.

Leaders of the original secular groups such as the April 6 Movement have agreed with Islamist leaders that neither side will confront the other today.

In the past 24 hours, the secularists won agreement from the Islamists that the day would be known as the Day of Unity, rather than the Day of Sharia as called for by the Islamists.

No one, however, appears to have told the hundreds of thousands of Islamist supporters packed together in Tahrir Square in the midday sun.

Crowds of ultraconservative Salafis, however, gave a common protests chant an Islamic twist — sparking criticisms from others who said the chants violated an agreement to avoid divisive issues.

Instead of “Peaceful, peaceful,” which demonstrators have chanted during confrontations with security forces, they repeated “Islamic, Islamic.” And instead of “The people want to topple the regime” — a chant made famous in Tunisia and adopted across the region — they yelled, “The people want to implement Sharia,” or Islamic law.

Salafis are ultraconservatives, close to Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi interpretation of Islam and more radical than the Brotherhood. They seek to emulate the austerity of Islam's early days and oppose a wide range of practices like intermingling of the sexes that they view as “un-Islamic.” Many also reject all forms of Western cultural influence.

Elsewhere in Egypt, some of the Islamic protests turned violent.

Gunmen fired on a car carrying five Christians in the province of Minya south of Cairo, killing two and injuring two, a military official said. It was the second killing in two weeks in the predominantly Christian village of Roman.

Christian residents gathered in front of the hospital where the bodies were taken as the word spread, although the official said the attackers had not been captured and the reason for the shooting was not known.

In the Sinai city of al-Arish, hard-line Salafis fired rocket-propelled grenades and other heavy weapons in the air during protests, injuring a small boy, according to an intelligence official.

Both officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to brief the media.

In the southern city of Assiut, deputy police chief Yosri el-Jammasi said Salafist protesters beat up a group of protesters from the Communist party trying to join their demonstration. At one point, some in the crowd yelled back at a speaker who criticized the idea of constitutional guidelines.

The rally comes a day after Egypt's Justice Ministry said former president Hosni Mubarak, along with his two sons, his former security chief and seven others, will be tried at a Cairo convention centre.

Of the 11, Mr. Mubarak, his security chief — former Interior Minister Habib el-Adly — and six top police officers are charged with ordering the use of deadly force against protesters. If convicted, the eight could face the death penalty.

Mr. Mubarak, his sons Gamal and Alaa and businessman Hussein Salem also face corruption charges. Mr. Salem, a close friend of Mubarak's, is at large.

The announcement had little apparent effect on Friday's protest, mostly because most activists doubt Mr. Mubarak will actually stand trial Wednesday as planned.

Mr. Mubarak's lawyer and doctors treating him in the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh have repeatedly reported that the 83-year-old ousted leader's health is failing, though Egypt's health ministry said he is fit enough to stand trial. "

Bachmann and Paul are diametrically opposed on Sharia. Their domestic policy may be similar, but they don't see eye to eye at all on Foreign Policy.

Margie| 7.29.11 @ 1:27PM

What is "church"?
Well, what does the Bible (God's own Words) say?

"For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them." Mt. 18:20.

Isn't it wonderful that God doesn't require Religion in order to be faithful to him?

Any two Christians can meet together and fellowship, pray and study the Bible, and it will be pleasing to God.

So, what we really need, is each other, not "church".

Harry Russell| 7.30.11 @ 11:10AM

Ms. Margie: I appreciate your comments about the church. But please remember, Christ died for the church, (the ekklesia, called out ones). We need everyone in corporate worship. The passage you used is in conjunction with church discipline, not a general rule for a congregation of believers who need to gather for worship. The responsibility of the church is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ, not to get involved in the world. Christians as individuals need to stand up for what is right, but the church has another responsibility. However, I do understand your position and I do believe in "church". I treasure my own.

Margie| 7.30.11 @ 3:49PM

Yes, of course Christ died for His church, and church is not a building or a place of worship.

His church (Body) are those who believe in His Name, and it has nothing to do with a physical building.

A congregation is made up of people, and that is what Mt. 18:20 is referring to, and is the point I was making.

"Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made with hands; as the Prophet says,
"'Heaven is My Throne, and earth My Footstool. What house will you build for Me, says the Lord, or what is the place of My rest?
Did not my hand make all these things?'" Acts 7:48-50.

Thank you, for your comment.

Micha Elyi| 7.30.11 @ 4:45PM

And the Bible passage in which Jesus tells His apostles, "Whoever hears you, hears Me" (Luke 10:16) is also the Word of God. A genuine believer strives for obedience to all that Jesus preaches, including that which comes from Him via His apostle Peter, the rock upon which His church is built, the other apostles who are upon that rock He chose, and those you have heard them proclaim as their apostolic successors.

Read all of Luke 10:16, and fear the Lord. What you are preaching here, Margie, is false dogma. Do not remain protestant against the words of Jesus. Cease rejecting Him and His Father who sent Him. Review a Bible (a book available to you thanks to His one, holy, and apostolic Catholic church) and consider what is written there about those who knowingly reject Him, His Father, and His Holy Spirit.

Margie| 7.30.11 @ 6:46PM

Your cult teaches you to listen to the Pope, not Christ.

For example, you just quoted Luke 10:16 and it is one of the thousands of ways Catholicism perverts the Bible.

When Jesus spoke those words, who was He addressing? Surely you know.

Who is the YOU in "he who listens to YOU?

That's right! It's the Apostles. Yes, that's what Christians do, we listen to and obey the teachings of Christ, and the Apostles. It's called the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

How Catholicism twists that so horribly~ is they take it and say it is meant for you to listen to THEIR teachings.

Understand? No Christian has to listen to ANYTHING that comes from ANYONE other than Jesus, and the Words spoken by His Spirit through the men that are in the Bible.

Like:

Prayer to the dead. (an abomination).
Mary is Mother of God.

Read here:

http://www.biblebelievers.com/.....w_001.html

Jesus wants you to come to know Him.

Publius| 7.31.11 @ 7:55AM

"Understand? No Christian has to listen to ANYTHING that comes from ANYONE other than Jesus, and the Words spoken by His Spirit through the men that are in the Bible."

Well, no, I don't understand. Shall we just rip our Bibles in half and throw away the Old Testament? While we're at it, the New Testament Gospels are all we need? Or shall we assume that when Jesus refers to the Word, he meant the entireity of the Scriptures? Come on, Margie, your hate is getting the better of you.

We certainly shouldn't be listening to someone willing to be so hateful towards those with different but sincere viewpoints, should we Margie?

If you feel Catholics need enlightenment, by all means share your opinions. The hateful screeds you've been sharing may serve a supernatural being but, sadly, it's not our Father.

Margie| 7.31.11 @ 4:43PM

You obviously cannot read.
Or are you just another defender of the Cult?
I was defending the Bible.
You are twisted.

Margie| 7.31.11 @ 5:10PM

p.s. "My hate".
Right. That's what my brethren were tortured by your cult for 600 years. Because they too were accused of HATE because they stood on God's Word and rejected the false doctrines of Catholicism.

Sad to see you are now joining the Modern day Papal Inquisitors here.

I thought they threw you out or something.
Accuse away. But you're lying and will have to stand before Jesus about it.

Ryan| 8.1.11 @ 1:34PM

I was remarking on the lack of fellowship, not where it was done; though the apostles often led sizeable meetings. Every Christian should be involved with a fellowship of believers.

KyMouse| 7.29.11 @ 10:25AM

"a born again type"?

"Truly I say to you, unless a man is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God," said Jesus in John 3:3.

He's your "moral authority," and He says you must be born again "of water and of the Spirit" (v. 5).

victor| 7.29.11 @ 1:21PM

"Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

Nicode'mus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?"

Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God". Jn. 3:3-5.

Margie| 7.29.11 @ 1:29PM

(sorry, that was me, above. Forgot again to remove hubby's name from the box).
Anyhow~ I didn't see your post before I posted mine, KYMouse!
Praise God for the Truth.

Vlady| 7.29.11 @ 7:28PM

"Praise God for the Truth."

Indeed. Let's hope you find some, someday.

Michael Tomlinson| 7.29.11 @ 7:47AM

Where are the advocates of separation of church and state to chastise the United Methodists and Presbyterian Church (USA)? As for Ms Campbell how ignorant is she? Ortega's bloodthirsty Sandinistas murdered and terrorized the Miskito Indians. The reality is many Miskito Indians fled their country and joined the CONTRAS to fight against the Marxist Sandinistas that is how democracy came to Nicaragua. Campbell is an obtuse buffoon.

George S| 7.29.11 @ 8:03AM

The only way the church can impede on the state is if it uses the proceeds from the collection tray to buy political clout. Then that tray wouldn't be immune from taxes, would it? Someone may want to gently remind the good pastor.

Bob Cotten| 7.29.11 @ 8:23AM

The Alabama law was voted into existence by the will of the people. Nobody voted for the bishop so he'd just as well sit down and shut up.

neanderthal| 7.29.11 @ 9:54AM

I don't mind church members or leaders giving their opinions on political issues, but they should do it as private citizens. When they start making politcal statements "on behalf" of the members of their church, they've crossed the line.

Not so sure (about that)| 7.29.11 @ 3:16PM

To neanderthal and the others (above): So...you want pastors silent on matters of civic policy? Silent on the social issues of our day. Do you really?

Unwed women having their second and third child?

And the "State" that fosters this by benefits for single parents.

The men who sperm these children.

A corrupt NY State assembly voting to approve gay marriage in New York (despite several who stated clearly in their campaigning that they would never vote for this should the issue come to the assembly).

Gay men and lesbians in the military, at the academies, in the ROTC programs.

Elliot Spitzer. Weiner. Sanford. Clinton. Schwarzenegger. Charlie Sheen.

Military chaplains being forced to perform gay marriages in the on base chapels.

Use of taxpayer monies for abortions. Surely pastors can weave things like this into the lesson -- particularly as it relates to stewardship.

I would expect, at times, a real pastor of a flock to talk these issues. I surely would. From the pulpit. In Sunday School class. Certainly when talking to the 18 year olds heading off to college and away from home. Or when greeting new attendees who are considering church membership.

Otherwise the homilies are just useless words in the wind, are they not?

A serious mind on Sunday morning (and throughout the week) is not 'into' the abstract.

Publius| 7.31.11 @ 8:02AM

The difference, of course, is morality versus policy. When it comes to Biblical matters, have at it. Otherwise, render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.

Obviously not a clear line but one which is often transgressed by the shrinking "mainstream" denominations.

Sandra| 7.29.11 @ 10:23AM

Here in Florida illegal immigrants costs taxpayers $5.5 billion a year. Why should our tax dollars continue to be used to support persons here illegally? They are being rewarded for their crime, and the bleeding hearts of this country turn a blind eye.

rendite| 7.29.11 @ 3:19PM

And they also push up your health care costs. Bigtime. They can't pay/don't pay. You do. So we sock their expenses also to you.

Occam's Tool| 7.29.11 @ 7:22PM

Absolutely correct, Rendite.

By the way, my adopted children are legally nationalized US Citizens. Born in Guatemala as Mayan Indians, who the Mexicans harass severely if they were to cross that border.

So yeah, I really resent illegal Mexican aliens getting any benefits.

C Smith| 7.29.11 @ 10:39AM

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher [civil] powers [be they Methodists or Baptists or Episcopals or the pseudo-sacrosanct personages of the National Council of Churches, or Nero himself]. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God" (Romans 13:1).

"Whosoever therefore resisteth the power [be it Thoreau or Gandhi or Martin Luther King], resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation" (Romans 13:2).

"For he [Nero] is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil" (Romans 13:4).

Margie| 7.29.11 @ 1:42PM

Huh? What are you doing?!

Adding to His Words, and also adding "churches" when God said no such thing!

God also tells us that if someone's requiring us to do something against Him, we are to listen to God, and not man.

For example:

"And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest questioned them, saying, "We strictly charged you not to teach in this Name, yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and you intend to bring this man's blood upon us."

But Peter and the Apostles answered, "We must obey God rather than men." Acts 5:27-29.

Micha Elyi| 7.30.11 @ 4:55PM

On what authority do you, one who herself is protestant against the complete Word of God, condemn "also adding 'churches'"? And where in your slimmed-down, portions thrown out by other Protestants, Bible is there the blanket authority given to you for individual interpretation of His Word? "God said no such thing!" indeed, Margie.

He has only one Church, Margie, and in your heart you know which one it is.

Margie| 7.30.11 @ 6:51PM

First, I'm not a Protestant, I'm a Christian.

Where do I get my authority? The same exact palce ALL Christians do~ the Bible.

Have you never read about it:

"But as many as received Him, to them
He gave authority to become children of
God, to the ones believing into His name,
who were generated not of blood, nor
of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of
man, but were generated of God." Jn. 1:12 & 13.

All Christians have the authority to jump in and protest if something's unbiblical.
The standard of teaching for ALL Christians is the Bible.
And he added things that aren't there.
Got it?

Publius| 7.31.11 @ 8:04AM

Nope, don't "got it."

Earlier you said it was only Jesus' words that were significant. Now it's the entire Bible. Which is it, Margie?

Margie| 7.31.11 @ 4:45PM

No, I said Jesus' Words and those whom through He spoke, the men of the Bible.

What's your problem?

Clint| 7.31.11 @ 3:05PM

You're Neither Margie.
You're Just A Joisey White Trash Bigot, Using Christanity, As A Front, For Your Bored Anger, Attention Seeking & Bigotry.

See A Religious Counselor & A Shrink.

Margie| 7.31.11 @ 4:45PM

I'm looking at the trash.
Punk.

Appleby| 7.29.11 @ 11:02AM

Oh, and by the way, what sort of construct is "impede ON"? Is this a michegoss comprised of "imped" and "IMPACT on" [which is, of course redundant]?

Micha Elyi| 7.30.11 @ 4:59PM

Yeah, I wondered about that too.

Impedes my understanding of the author's point, it does. I supposed the phrase is supposed to be parallel to "infringe on."

Petronius| 7.29.11 @ 11:11AM

"My Kingdom is not of this world."
Christ said this to Pontius Pilate. And every cleric of every Christian denomination who abuses his office in pursuit of earthly power "to bring about social justice", should divest themselves and run for political office instead. If they want to exercise the powers of the state, they must ask us for that opportunity with the full understanding of it's Constitutional conditions and limits. Too often clerics act as if they were the Almighty. They can bellyache until the Second Coming if they want, but will accomplish nothing.
The farmers and ranchers who provide our food and the industrialists who's inventions and businesses employ many and diminish human drudgery do more than these economically illiterate preachers can, or will, to ease the human condition. There are two indisputable Facts of life in a Free society: material and social inequality, and risk. In all cases, Life Is COMPETITION. And this world is an arena, not a kindergarten for the overgrown children who didn't prepare themselves for it. And it's long past time they were forced to learn that the government is Not their support group.

Margie| 7.29.11 @ 1:47PM

I agree!
Social Justice "preachers" are nothing but wolves in sheep's clothing.

Christians as individuals, or together can volunteer to do the will of God and it is His will, to help and feed the TRULY poor.

That's what it means to go and be a missionary.
These preachers are lying thieves instead, and do not seek to glorify God!

Georgia Peach| 7.29.11 @ 11:39AM

WWJD in this instance? Tell the Methodists to STFU!

Margie| 7.29.11 @ 1:48PM

More like.. "Get thee behind me, Satan!"
LOL.

Phil Sukalewski| 7.29.11 @ 11:42AM

At our Methodist church here in Fayetteville, GA we just had a Sunday sermon on how the farmer who had received seed with some weeds (bad seeds) mixed in. He instructed he workers not to pull up the weeds because they may do too much damage to the crops.

This was extended to Georgia's new immigration law and it's unintended consequence of (supposedly) causing damage to the state's agricultural industry, and that the law is causing illegal immigrants to hide in fear of being arrested.

Needless to say, I was disheartened to see this looney liberalism in our church.

First: The arguments that the low-cost labor of illegal immigrants is needed is the same argument used to justify the need for slave labor years ago. If that argument had won the day, the cotton gin and other inventions would never have been adopted and the majority of Americans would be farmers (like they were 100 years ago); instead of less than 3% of today's population. Yet, with American ingenuity and capitalism, we produce vastly more food today & freed more of our population to use their talents in other (& often higher value) ways to benefit society. This has raised our standard of living.

For those that aren't aware, here's a link to a company that makes machines to harvest tomatoes, cucumbers, etc.
http://www.pikrite.com/content/harvesters

Second: For those that think that we should allow anyone to come to the U.S. that wants to, I offer the following Thomas Sowell column:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=13946

Big Leo| 7.29.11 @ 12:08PM

I'm a retired UMC pastor in full connection. I am more moderate than conservative, but as a member of the most liberal conference in the country I was ostracized for most of my career for standing up to the central powers of the church. The most ludicrous charge was that I was a fundamentalist. In most conferences, you either toe the line or you are marginalized or eliminated. It would be impossible today for someone of my moderate to mildly conservative ideas to be ordained most conferences in the UMC. They have chosen to become the left wing of the Democratic Party on their knees. They are not praying, by the way.

oldfart| 7.29.11 @ 12:35PM

See my previous post- after a period at independent churches (not associated with the National or World Councils I married a Catholic and went through RCIA. When I attend msss I hear the word of God. For the most part, the Bishops want the word of God presented to the people during Mass and allow the Holy Spirit to move in each individual.

rendite| 7.29.11 @ 3:29PM

Big Leo, I will take you at your word -- that you are indeed a former UMC pastor.

Does this "liberal" in oh so many ways also extend to Wesleyan schools?

Specifically I would like to ask about Virginia Wesleyan in Norfolk, Virginia.

How can the church that comes to us from the Wesley brothers -- how can it have gone so far astray?

Why dump the Gospel of Jesus Christ in favor of...? Of feel good nonsense?

Big Leo| 7.29.11 @ 6:51PM

I am not sure what you are objecting to in my post. I've fought all my career to reclaim the Wesleyan tradition and the UMC. I do not abandon my family when it goes wrong. I correct it by any means within my power.

Bill| 7.29.11 @ 12:51PM

Does Mr. Tooley mean to say "impedes" or "impinges"?

Stuart Koehl| 7.29.11 @ 12:51PM

Comparing illegal immigrants to the Holy Family fleeing into Egypt is a false analogy. Joseph wasn't taking his family from one country to another, but from one jurisdiction of the Roman Empire to another. Judaea may have been ruled by King Herod the Great, but Herod took his marching orders from Caesar Augustus. And Egypt was an Imperial province, ruled by an equestrian legate responsible directly Caesar. So, at best, one might say that the closest analogy would be leaving Puerto Rico (a Commonwealth of the United States) for the District of Columbia (a Federal District controlled by Congress, albeit with limited home rule).

In short, the stupidest attempt by liberals to coopt the Gospel since Barack Obama called the Virgin Mary an unwed mother.

Sheila| 7.29.11 @ 1:39PM

For a protestant biblical criticism of modern Christianity's multiculturalism, and a defense of ethno-nationalism, I recomend the blog "faith and heritage" (http://faithandheritage.com/).

Margie| 7.29.11 @ 1:59PM

No, White Nationalism is racist, and WRONG!

Note the will of the Lord:

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Gal. 3:28.

God is no Racist.

Occam's Tool| 7.29.11 @ 7:16PM

I don't care what color a man or woman is. I do care if he/she wants to kill my children, Sheila. I do not trust you with mine.

Occam's Tool| 7.29.11 @ 7:19PM

And I would easily trust Margie and Victor to babysit my kids. Whose mother is raising them in her faith, not mine.

Joseph| 8.1.11 @ 9:51AM

Occam' Tool,
Reading your posts, you criticize Clint but you say Margie is your friend and would babysit your kids. Makes no sense. Do you want your babysitter to tell your kids the things she say here, like a religion with one billion people is a cult, the Pope is a murderer, and Catholics have killed millions of Protestants, and the rest. She sounds crazy, don't let her near your kids.

Rob| 7.29.11 @ 2:09PM

Anabaptists oppose infant baptism, whereas the policy of the United Methodist Church favors infant baptism. Thus a United Methodist bishop cannot accurately be described as neo-Anabaptist solely due to any common beliefs on other issues, such as social teachings, any more than a Catholic bishop could be similarly described for the same reason. Liberation theology may be a more significant influence, as some Methodists have reinterpreted Wesleyan teaching on sanctification in relation to Marx-related liberation theology.

JOHN PERRY| 7.29.11 @ 2:40PM

The Methodist are a bunch of holy hypocrites, during the Vietnam war, they wanted our gov. to stop making ammunition for our boys in Vietnam, they mis interpit scripture so it fits their agenda, I speak not of the every sunday church going Methodist but the so called high archy of that denomination, they must think it does wonders for their collection baskets. I know a lot of Methodists that think their national leaders are nut cakes and totally disagree with their stand on illegal immigration

jp.

Don| 7.29.11 @ 2:59PM

I don't think these Methodist Clergy speak for the United Methodist Church and it's members any more than Satan speaks for the Pope and Catholics

Margie| 7.29.11 @ 3:13PM

"any more than Satan speaks for the Pope and Catholics."

No, but Satan does abide in the false doctrines of this Religion.

ame| 7.29.11 @ 4:11PM

If churches continue to get involved in politics then their tax-free status must be removed and if churches continue to defy the law of the USA, they should be sued in court.

Sheila| 7.29.11 @ 4:42PM

From Chuck Baldwin's column today at VDare: "In reality, the American church today, on the whole, is not even a church. It is a government corporation whose loyalty is offered first to Caesar, not to Christ, and whose message is first politically correct before it is Biblically correct."
. . . Martin Luther, the great Protestant reformer, was even more direct. He said, "If I profess with the loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the truth of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at the moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Christ. Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved. And to be steady on all the battle fields besides is merely flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point." . . .
For at least the past half-century Christian pastors and churches have been all but neutered. On the whole, they have ignored Christ’s admonition to be the "salt of the earth," and as a result, have failed to do much of anything to preserve freedom’s Biblical Natural Law principles in this great land. In fact, the average church is so sugary sweet that it is downright sickening!"

Margie| 7.29.11 @ 6:18PM

Baldwin's a smarmy Paul-bot.
Yep, the "You're no conservative" type who regularly posts here and excoriates conservatives because they want a Paul-bot government and a third party.
Nobody's as good as they are, nope!
LOL
He's a Clint/Timmypoo* and thinks America is an "Occupier" of other Nations. He like the typical Paul-bot believes America should end foreign aid to everywhere, and of course, singles out ISRAEL.

"While I do not agree with every issue Ron Paul has embraced, on the whole, he is the one man inside the Beltway who understands the importance of constitutional government, federalism, and independence. Listen to practically any Republican “conservative” politician or TV talking head and one will hear a constant regurgitation of the status quo. Name the candidate for President from either party (besides Ron Paul) who passionately excoriates the Bush preemptive war doctrine. Name the candidate for President from either party (besides Ron Paul) who is emotional about getting the US out of the UN and getting the UN out of the US. Name the candidate for President from either major party (besides Ron Paul) who has called for the elimination of the Federal Reserve, or who has passionately called for the return to sound money, or who has emotionally resisted the globalist agenda of the Council on Foreign Relations or Trilateral Commission or the Bilderbergers. Name the candidate for President from either party (besides Ron Paul) who has emotionally voiced his or her objection to US forces occupying over 100 countries and the CIA meddling with the internal political affairs of sovereign nations all over the world. Name the candidate for President from either major party (besides Ron Paul) who passionately calls for an end to ALL foreign aid, including foreign aid to Israel."

Clint| 7.31.11 @ 3:12PM

Now, Joisey White Trash BIgot Margie, Tell All American Spectator's Readers,Where You Say Practicing Jews & Muslims Go When They Die.

Then Tell American Spectator Readers, W Which Other Religions' Practitioners , You Say Go To Hell With Them.

You're Up Joisey White Trash Bigot, Margie.

Occam's Tool| 7.29.11 @ 7:17PM

Sheila, please take your third reich crap and shove it where the sun don't shine. Go play with your buddy Clint.

Clint| 7.31.11 @ 3:09PM

You're A Slandering Liar, Screwball Israel Firster Fanatic,Tool Job.

Interesting, That You Use The Name Of A Catholic Heretic For Your Moniker.

POST American| 7.29.11 @ 10:42PM

-----------------ONCE AGAIN------------------

Even beyond the outrageous, many decades
long Rockefeller 'Council of Churches' infiltration
and subversion of geniune Chrisitianity here
and throughout the world ----AND the ongoing
'espoionage' against the American people in
the guise of 'Clergy Response' ----

this recent designed designer horror in Norway
shines light on the urgent need to clean
Freemasonry out of the church --esp. among
the church 'leadership'.

At its core Freemasonry is Social Darwinism
at the service of a self-proclaimed 'elite'.

Social Darwinism runs on 'benny violence'.

Social Darwinism is God rejecting.

To serve this ideal is to deny the the
imperatives, the standards, the very reality
of God.

-------------YOU HAVE BEEN ALERTED------------

Margie| 7.29.11 @ 11:07PM

"Social Darwinism is God rejecting."

Indeed it is!

God says He CREATED everything "According to its kind. (Genesis)

Darwin, the rebel against God says~ "We evolved".
He made it up. And the blind World glommed onto it.

Who do believe? God or Darwin.
Some say both~ but no. You can't have it both ways.
Either God is telling us the truth, or He's lying.
And we all have to make the judgment.

Occam's Tool| 7.30.11 @ 1:44AM

Margie:

The last two days from the RoP in action:

2011.07.29 (Nahr-e-Saraj, Afghanistan) - Women and children are among nineteen torn to shreds by a Taliban bomb attack on their minibus.
2011.07.29 (Saryab, Pakistan) - Seven Shia pilgrims waiting at a busstop are shot like ducks in a row by determinied Sunnis.
2011.07.28 (Makhachkala, Dagestan) - An elderly couple is stabbed to death in their home by an Islamic terrorist.
2011.07.28 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Fundamentalists car bomb a liquor store, killing one.
2011.07.28 (Oruzgan, Afghanistan) - Ten children and two women are among nineteen people slaughtered during a coordinated Taliban attack.
2011.07.28 (Tikrit, Iraq) - Two suicide bombers detonate amid a line of Iraqis waiting for paychecks, killing at least fifteen.

Truly we fight Monsters. G-d Bless.

Margie| 7.30.11 @ 3:55PM

O.T.,
I think AmSpec should post these murders each day here somehow, so that we would not forget who and what we are fighting.

It is a good reminder that we need to pray for the persecuted every single day. We are so spoiled here. If any of us had to live for a day in these countries, our entire outlook would change to say the least.

Keep posting these murders here as you are doing, each time a terrorist sympathizer or Anti-American Racist speaks.

God bless you.

Mister Grady| 7.30.11 @ 12:33AM

Catholics can't defend their unbiblical practices, so they play the victim card combined with ad hominem nonsense when confronted with someone who unapologetically stands for the Truth of God's Word instead of the manmade teachings of the Roman church.

Peter was not the first pope. The papacy emerged gradually after Constantine's false conversion. Peter, as the Bible states, was an apostle to the circumcised, while Paul, not Peter, was the apostle to the gentiles. Plus which, Paul wrote about two-thirds of the NT. Christ was the cornerstone. Not Peter. Peter was humble and would never have allowed people to exalt him like Catholics exalt the pope, and Bible provides zero evidence that he was in any way a pope. Sorry. You lose.

The Roman church emerged over several hundred years as a poisonous offshoot within the original Christian church - a poison of false teaching which the NT writers repeatedly warned about.

Pope worship. Mary worship. Saints worship. Intercessory prayer with intercessors other than Christ. Penance. Purgatory. Indulgences. Rosary beads. Holy water. Idols and graven images. Religious trinkets. Canned prayers, canned rituals and phony religiosity. Last rites. Confession to a priest, followed by Hail Marys. Excommunication. Transubstantiation. Calling a priest "father". Calling the pope "the holy father". Supposed vicars of Christ who ordered the cold blooded murder of Jews and real Christians.

Sheesh, it can be exhausting trying to address the disgusting godlessness of the Roman church.

And for those Catholics who like to make a big show of being offended instead of loving God's Word, I'll quote Paul.

Galatians 1:10

For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.

Publius| 7.31.11 @ 8:09AM

Way to go, Grady. Good job encouraging your Brother and Sisters in Christ. By careful casting stones. Jesus gave the best reason for it but living in a glass house makes it a bad idea as well.

Margie| 7.31.11 @ 4:49PM

Cast stones~ you mean like you are doing when you wrongly misrepresented what I said, above?
If you don't apologize for accusing me of a lie, then you are guilty yourself, for you have wrongly accused.

Margie| 7.31.11 @ 5:04PM

p.s. What's up with you? I thought you hated the Catholic church because they basically threw you out?
Having second thoughts?
I hope not. I hope you return to Christ Himself.

Nick| 7.31.11 @ 8:29AM

Mister Grady,

Many of the subjects that you list get debated here all the time. I dealt with some of them, above, in this thread, and in the Rome v. Beijing thread. But, I'll take on one more.

"Intercessory prayer with intercessors other than Christ."

Saint Paul, in his first Letter to Timothy, states, "For there is one God: and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus [...]." - 1 Timothy 2:5

But, in the previous 4 verses, Paul says this: "I desire therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions and thanksgivings be made for all men: For kings and for all that are in high station: that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all piety and chastity. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

If Christ is to be our only intercessor, why did Paul ask Timothy, and all Christians really, to pray and intercede for others?

Paul also asks his fellow Christians to pray directly for him several times in the Scriptures:

"I beseech you therefore, brethren, through our Lord Jesus Christ and by the charity of the Holy Ghost, that you help me in your prayers for me to God [...]." - Rom. 15:30–32

"By all prayer and supplication praying at all times in the spirit: and in the same watching with all instance and supplication for all the saints: And for me, that speech may be given me, that I may open my mouth with confidence, to make known the mystery of the gospel, for which I am an ambassador in a chain: so that therein I may be bold to speak according as I ought.." - Eph. 6:18–20

"Praying for us also, that God may open unto us a door of speech to speak the mystery of Christ (for which also I am bound) [...]." - Col. 4:3

"Brethren, pray for us." - 1 Thess. 5:25

"For the rest, brethren, pray for us that the word of God may run and may be glorified, even as among you: And that we may be delivered from importunate and evil men: for all men have not faith." - 2 Thess. 3:1

If we are commanded to go straight to Christ, our only intercessor, why did Saint Paul ask others to pray for him? Why didn't Paul go straight to God with his prayers? Did Paul think Christ couldn't hear his prayers? Were Paul's prayers not good enough, therfore he needed others to pray for him? Why didn't Paul go directly to Jesus?

I await your replies.
God Bless!

Nick| 8.1.11 @ 1:23AM

Mister Grady? Hello?

Ryan| 8.1.11 @ 1:46PM

Two different words here: "intercessor" and "mediator." Two different meanings.

The first is someone going to God on our behalf. The only real debate there is whether or not deceased Saints intercede for us down here, and that interpretation is a bit of stretch upon scripture due to silence.

The second has more of a legal meaning, where Christ appeased God's wrath upon our sin.

Here's the other rub, where I really have the issue. Christ commands us to pray to the Father in the Lord's prayer.

Nick| 8.2.11 @ 2:01AM

Ryan,

The word that Mister Grady used was "intercessor." He clearly stated that Christ is to be our only intercessor. I clearly showed that he is mistaken.

I completely agree that Christ is the only Mediator between the Father and man. As it is written in the Scriptures.

Hope that helps.
God Bless!

gearjammer| 7.30.11 @ 8:40AM

Behold the rise of the secular conservative. We will save America.

Oldefarte| 7.30.11 @ 1:36PM

These/all churches have previously infiltrated and taken over by liberals, just as has our government. Liberals then use their gained power from same to propagandize/brainwash their congregations/public regarding their partisaned message [in this case, the continuance of illegal immigration]. There churches seek to morally intimidate others with their immigration agenda, but conspiratorially ignore the taxpayer cost of the governmental services provided to these illegals. If the illegals were being physically etc mistreated or abused it would be one thing, but since they are not so mistreated, the partisaned messages of these liberally infiltrated churches is only political in nature [and has nothing to do with morality, which should be their only cause]. Churches thus sticking their noses where they don't belong should be intially warned by the governmental authorities, legally prosecuted if necessary, and absolutedly have their tax exempt status removed/eliminated for their illegally issuing political statements etc!!!!!!!

Margie| 7.30.11 @ 3:58PM

The only thing that was ever spoken in the Christian fellowship I was raised in concerning things political was that yes, we should all vote.

That's it!

The responsibility is ours.

Oldefarte| 7.31.11 @ 11:28AM

Margie, as one who was raised and educated within the Catholic Church, I abondoned same upon the evolution of the disgustingly evil revelations of these pedefile priests molestations of children. These obviously homosexuals infiltrated my church in order to gain access to small children for their perverted purposes, and sadly this excrement goes back to the 1940's in this country [and Italy, Ireland etc are now uncovering the same crap]. The Episcapaleons and possibly the Methodists have had slight occurrances of liberalism demonstrated within their congregations with a scism now existing within the former I believe. I have no doubt that African-American denominations are more political organizations than they are religious ones [and should have their tax exemptions removed because of same, except that liberals controlling government operations necessary to do so would never permit same]. Religous churches have sadly gotten involved in the liberals' and Democrats' pet causes due to again being infiltrated by these liberal/Democrat operatives within their ranks/memberships. Just as they control the MSM, they also are infusing their thoughts/radical ideas with church memberships also. Its just sad that vernerable church members have been subjected to this political maneuverings by the left!!!

Clint| 7.31.11 @ 3:17PM

Do Your homework Lapsed Catholic/Anti-Catholic AgendaBoy OldeFarte.

"Despite headlines focusing on the priest pedophile problem in the Roman Catholic Church, most American churches being hit with child sexual-abuse allegations are Protestant, and most of the alleged abusers are not clergy or staff, but church volunteers.

These are findings from national surveys by Christian Ministry Resources (CMR), a tax and legal-advice publisher serving more than 75,000 congregations and 1,000 denominational agencies nationwide.

CMR's annual surveys of about 1,000 churches nationwide have asked about sexual abuse since 1993. They're a remarkable window on a problem that lurked largely in the shadows of public awareness until the Catholic scandals arose.
The surveys suggest that over the past decade, the pace of child-abuse allegations against American churches has averaged 70 a week.
Dr. Shupe suggests the 70 allegations-per-week figure actually could be higher, because underreporting is common. He discovered this in 1998 while going door to door in Dallas-Ft. Worth communities where he asked 1,607 families if they'd experienced abuse from those within their church. Nearly 4 percent said they had been victims of sexual abuse by clergy. Child sexual abuse was part of that, but not broken out, he says.

James Cobble, executive director of CMR, who oversees the survey, says the data show that child sex-abuse happens broadly across all denomination and that clergy aren't the major offenders.

"The Catholics have gotten all the attention from the media, but this problem is even greater with the Protestant churches simply because of their far larger numbers," he says."

Margie| 7.31.11 @ 5:01PM

Hello my friend (if I amy), Oldefarte:

Yes, it is truly sad. I was extremely fortunate to be raised in a non denominational Christian fellowship where the Bible was our doctrine.

If these churches were truly of God, they would tolerate and hide child predators.

Jesus knows His own, no matter where they are.
He takes care of His lambs and His sheep.
So, though it's sad, the bigger picture is that really, He's in control.

"My Father, Who has given them to Me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's Hand." Jn. 10:29.

Take heart ye Oldefarte!

"And the God of peace shall crush Satan
under your feet shortly. The grace of
our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen." Rom. 16:20.

Margie| 7.31.11 @ 5:03PM

typos. If I MAY, not if I amy.
LOL.

And they would NOT tolerate and hide.

POST American| 7.30.11 @ 9:59PM

------------------BOTTOM LINE--------------------

Understand, you've had a war on your culture
underway since WWI.

Realize, all of you, we have to clean the
Rockefeller front ops 'Council of Churches'
and the deadly scourge of FREEMASONRY
out of our churches. --ALL of it.

And clean the TV's and media out of your homes.
Get the PC's out ofg your private spaces.

----DARE to own your space.

---------------That's the start.

Connie| 8.7.11 @ 3:28PM

I think you are right in your comments.
People take a lazy attitude and do not even check to see what their kids are doing. Adults are watching degrading teevee shows at the same time. Porn is watched by millions of women too. This is the downfall of our society. The devil is having his way and laughing at us ! Liberalism also promotes the degradation of our society encouraging abortion, porn choices, same sex marriage, acceptance of perverted & unnatural sex, coveting, lying, stealing other peoples money, to name just a few.
Liberalism kills religion everyday.

john dubose| 7.31.11 @ 12:06PM

With the possible exception of the Catholic Church ( just barely ) no church heirarchy influences enough votes or money to even budge the path of the ship of state. Go find another problem.

Richard Baker| 8.1.11 @ 5:41PM

The United Methodist Church has been a long running joke. Why are we surprised that they've done this protest when compared with their foolishness in the past? It has become the living embodiment of Flip Wilson's "Church of What's Happening Now."

Betty| 8.5.11 @ 2:17PM

Why are you people attacking religion? This issue is an illegal immigration law in Alabama. So what if some of the churches object to it?? They are welcome to make contributions to the state of Alabama to offset the millions of dollars that the state spends on illegal aliens. What about crime? Where are the churches when an illegal alien murders, rapes, robs, and molests people? There is separation of church and state for a reason. They need to teach religion and stay out of politics.

Connie| 8.7.11 @ 3:24PM

Do these religious leaders seem to know that by allowing criminal illegals to have free access to our country they will be overwhelmed with homeless shelters and people needing food & clothing. Our churches cannot deal with the problems in their communities now nor will they be able to handle to influx of illegal criminals if granted amnesty?
Demanding free and open borders is just insanity!
Why can't people come here as millions in the past have - legally.
This amnesty push is a ploy by liberal/progressive/socialists to overrun our society and put us into poverty. In other words spreading misery, homelessness, hungry, unhealthy to name a few.
Dear God I pray for these so called religious leaders to have common sense. Compassion is one thing but encouraging criminal behavior is another.

nike shoes UK| 8.8.11 @ 3:25AM

is good