Netanyahu: Muslims responsible for Holocaust.

BedellBrave said:
I don't actually think we are seeing terrible declines in Evangelical churches. Declines in some, stagnation in some, but growth in many others. The predominate losses have been in liberal (mainline) churches - and I understand that theologically, and as a historically orthodox Christian, that doesn't really bother me all that much. Nor will I be saddened much by the decline of mega-churches with vacuous messages and materialistic excesses.
Click to expand...

It bothers me at this time. But you are a pastor and you are exuberant and positive thinking. When Libs are in charge it is always negative, always looking for an angle to either control you or punish you if you don't like their edict.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
I think your Uncle has at least most of it pretty close to right. Of course it's a general statement and shouldn't be meant to include 100% of any church or group, but I think he's pretty darn close. I also stand by my previous statement that religion and politics should be strictly separated, way more than any person on the other side of the aisle thinks church and state should be separated to protect the state from the church. Politics is poison, period. It's like hard drugs, everybody thinks "it's OK I can handle it" but it never works out that way, though I know many would disagree.

As for forcing churches to marry Same Sex couples I am firmly against it, as far as letting them get married, as far as legal rights, etc., goes I say why not? I've got enough to answer for come judgement day I don't need the guilt over keeping people apart who want to be together. I usually describe it as "My plate is going to look like Michael Moore's plate after he goes through a once through only trip at an all you can carry buffet line. I don't need one more chicken leg on there.

I'm not saying "it's OK" by God's rules I'm just saying I"m not going to try and stop them as long as they don't try to run over churches and ministers who don't want to marry them. That should never happen, but it will, sooner or later. As for losing tax exempt status, or any other sort of real persecution I think it would actually do the church good, or at least do Christianity good. We've gotten too comfortable (collectively) and we've placed too much faith in mammon and not enough in a being we claim created the world and can do literally anything for his people. Then look at these gigantic cathedrals all over the place, gigantic structures that make the Taj Mahal look like an army tent from the War of 1812.
Click to expand...

Bingo. Those will be hurt if they don't go along with the State's codification of a progressive morality (there's no real wall between the State and a secularist faith) - but my suspicion is that the Joel Osteen's of the world who already can hardly even mention the world sin - will conform. They'll get in line - too much to lose if tax-exempt status is yanked. The mainliners are already more and more on board, many of them actively pushing the codification of that progressive morality. Those who don't capitulate are the ones, imho, that will be forced to pony up property taxes - local municipalities will salivate over that revenue stream. Some will be able to survive that. Many won't - in present form. But again, that's okay. There will be more house churches and bi-vocational ministers and that can be a great thing - it'll just look different. And it's the latter model that actually can penetrate and reach further into urban areas that are already cost prohibitive to begin new church buildings projects. The side affect though to more and more house churches will be zoning battles. One of our churches just won a Supreme Court case, so those zoning issues are already on the table. They'll only increase.
 
BedellBrave said:
I don't actually think we are seeing terrible declines in Evangelical churches. Declines in some, stagnation in some, but growth in many others. The predominate losses have been in liberal (mainline) churches - and I understand that theologically, and as a historically orthodox Christian, that doesn't really bother me all that much. Nor will I be saddened much by the decline of mega-churches with vacuous messages and materialistic excesses.
Click to expand...

Oh, the Southern Black Baptist church, I don't think will ever change, heck even in Illinois the pastors are still against gay marriage. Obama did not like that and made a deal to have them acknowledge it. They don't have to allow it but acknowledge it.

All my pastoral uncles and cousins are against it, but sadly vote Democrat because they still believe in 1965 and that Republicans are evil and want to keep us in chains.
 
AerchAngel said:
It bothers me at this time. But you are a pastor and you are exuberant and positive thinking. When Libs are in charge it is always negative, always looking for an angle to either control you or punish you if you don't like their edict.
Click to expand...

I just look outside the West where the Church is booming and vibrant and a joyful - and I don't seen mega-church complexes and Western materialism. And I think, you know, the Lord loves, dearly, truly, loves his Church - so much that all this in my own country that is concerning, will ultimately be for the Church's good here. I've read what I think is the end of the story, and it's beautiful Hard to be a "Debbie Downer" you know?!

Thanks for letting me "preach" a little bit.
 
BedellBrave said:
Bingo. Those will be hurt if they don't go along with the State's codification of a progressive morality (there's no real wall between the State and a secularist faith) - but my suspicion is that the Joel Ostend's of the world who already can hardly even mention the world sin - will conform. They'll get in line - too much to lose if tax-exempt status is yanked. The mainliners are already more and more on board, many of them actively pushing the codification of that progressive morality. Those who don't capitulate are the ones, imho, that will be forced to pony up property taxes - local municipalities will salivate over that revenue stream. Some will be able to survive that. Many won't - in present form. But again, that's okay. There will be more house churches and bi-vocational ministers and that can be a great thing - it'll just look different. And it's the latter model that actually can penetrate and reach further into urban areas that are already cost prohibitive to begin new church buildings projects. The side affect though to more and more house churches will be zoning battles. One of our churches just won a Supreme Court case, so those zoning issues are already on the table. They'll only increase.
Click to expand...

Whoa, what?

Nice that you see the evils of TV Evangelism. Steve Martin's movie nails this and then some. They are no better than Trump and Clinton, using position for power and money.
 
BedellBrave said:
I just look outside the West where the Church is booming and vibrant and a joyful - and I don't seen mega-church complexes and Western materialism. And I think, you know, the Lord loves, dearly, truly, loves his Church - so much that all this in my own country that is concerning, will ultimately be for the Church's good here. I've read what I think is the end of the story, and it's beautiful Hard to be a "Debbie Downer" you know?!

Thanks for letting me "preach" a little bit.
Click to expand...

I always enjoy your preaching. I just wish I could see it in person. You are a good man.

I am of this world for 47 years, been kicked out of churches, belittled priest, got in fights with Imans. I am as a true Christian, a person to reckon with. If you don't know your schit I am going to challenge you. You've known me for 13 or 14 years and you know I don't play around and you know why I don't choose a religion or a message. As Mark Henry from the WWE is say "That is who I am". I am hated at home, hate by blacks, hated by Dems, hated by Republicans, I am just hated and hated by as you mainline Christians, but you know what I don't care, "That is who I am". You see my post, Sav sees my post, Dalyn see my post, I don't care. Because of respect of my dad and him saying don't piss everyone off, I do not trash Liberals in Christians views and I love Dalyn a lot so I won't disrespect him either if I did.

He is an atheist, so is 57 and probably Zito, Dan is not Cool, Runnin, but if they feel that way I respect it. This is why I am not even worse than I am now. I love all of them even if they don't like my views.

The difference between me and them, I love them, as humans, but they don't respect my views and that is why I am harsh, bitter and mean, they like to silence. On other boards which I am a moderator, they absolutely HATE me, not because I can delete their post, but hate my views, but they notice I don't delete it and they hate that even worse because they can't scream at management. I just do what I do here. Acknowledge and move on and make my views known. Management is like, they have issues you don't.

'
 
BedellBrave said:
So you think tax-exempt status will remain even for those who won't publicly accommodate what is deemed to be now a fundamental human right? Again, you've got more faith than I do. Hope you are right, but in my mind losing tax-exempt status isn't that bad of a thing.
Click to expand...

I doubt anyone would touch it. To me, the thing that ensures religious freedom in this country is that if one side or the other overreaches, the pubic (churchgoing and otherwise) push back. I know it doesn't seem that way to the various sides right now, but we've always found a balance--uncomfortable that it may be--in this country. I agree that tax-exempt status may or may not be necessary (or good), but it's a third rail. If you get rid of tax exempt status, it would affect all denominations and sects across the spectrum of belief and practice, so it would include everything from mainline to narrow (and sometimes odd). I see it as a non-starter.
 
50PoundHead said:
I doubt anyone would touch it. To me, the thing that ensures religious freedom in this country is that if one side or the other overreaches, the pubic (churchgoing and otherwise) push back. I know it doesn't seem that way to the various sides right now, but we've always found a balance--uncomfortable that it may be--in this country. I agree that tax-exempt status may or may not be necessary (or good), but it's a third rail. If you get rid of tax exempt status, it would affect all denominations and sects across the spectrum of belief and practice, so it would include everything from mainline to narrow (and sometimes odd). I see it as a non-starter.
Click to expand...

And you can't really enforce it. It is not like the church is providing a service, they are not, so it can't be taxed because of CONTRIBUTIONS. Every church in this nation would get money back because of what they give back in the community. I am sorry Democrats do not like helping at food pantries, giving money to wives that are beaten, those who are homeless, they expect the rich to do it and some do. Churches take care of those who Democrats refuse to because it is not a person's responsibility but the rich. Church by proxy is the rich in doing these services and if they are taxed, they cannot provide a critical function in society.
 
50PoundHead said:
I doubt anyone would touch it. To me, the thing that ensures religious freedom in this country is that if one side or the other overreaches, the pubic (churchgoing and otherwise) push back. I know it doesn't seem that way to the various sides right now, but we've always found a balance--uncomfortable that it may be--in this country. I agree that tax-exempt status may or may not be necessary (or good), but it's a third rail. If you get rid of tax exempt status, it would affect all denominations and sects across the spectrum of belief and practice, so it would include everything from mainline to narrow (and sometimes odd). I see it as a non-starter.
Click to expand...

I don't think you're younger Ds do.
 
There is an issue with tax-exempt status, its' one that has to be looked at. But there's always gonna be an important question. What is a religion? If I start a religion called Bradyism, and it's dedicated to the worship of Tom Brady, does that mean I should be tax exempt?

I think a more serious example is Scientology. It was invented as a tax dodge. What about hate group religious groups like WBC? Could go on of course.
 
BedellBrave said:
I don't think you're younger Ds do.
Click to expand...

They will never be a majority.

If you look at post-WW II, the religious v. non-religious impulse has flipped back and forth. Right after Post-WW II, we saw mainline denominations grow because of (1) folks came out of the war, moved to the suburbs, put down roots, raised families, and the organized church was a bigger part of that than it had been pre-WW II and (2) the Red Scare. Reaction in the late-1950s with the school prayer case (and a lot of other religion in the public square cases) pushed back against that consensus. Then came the 1970s in the wake of the liberal push of the 1960s and you saw the Moral Majority spring up. That brand has really hung on pretty much until now and we are witnessing the inevitable push-back from some quarters on the left. I think the struggle is just more visible now and with the intellectual tribalism that is facilitated by mass media and enhanced communication methods, both sides have become more strident.
 
50PoundHead said:
They will never be a majority.

If you look at post-WW II, the religious v. non-religious impulse has flipped back and forth. Right after Post-WW II, we saw mainline denominations grow because of (1) folks came out of the war, moved to the suburbs, put down roots, raised families, and the organized church was a bigger part of that than it had been pre-WW II and (2) the Red Scare. Reaction in the late-1950s with the school prayer case (and a lot of other religion in the public square cases) pushed back against that consensus. Then came the 1970s in the wake of the liberal push of the 1960s and you saw the Moral Majority spring up. That brand has really hung on pretty much until now and we are witnessing the inevitable push-back from some quarters on the left. I think the struggle is just more visible now and with the intellectual tribalism that is facilitated by mass media and enhanced communication methods, both sides have become more strident.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I probably shouldn't let this board taint my impression of the yutes too much.

I still don't have the faith in your tribe that you do.
 
BedellBrave said:
Yeah, I probably shouldn't let this board taint my impression of the yutes too much.

I still don't have the faith in your tribe that you do.
Click to expand...

I can't remember the exact book, but Shailer Matthews wrote several books in the early-20th century that contended the church mirrors society in its organization. I read parts of one of his books and I wish I could remember the title. His basic contention was in the feudal era, the church structure mirrored that of the economic/political structure. The Reformation comes along (which was fueled at least in part by changes in the political and economic landscape and the rise of the bourgeois). And on it goes.

Matthews died in 1941, so he wasn't around to see post-WW II America, but I think the church in that era really took on the look of corporate America. The movement was to build churches, make them big, and have your pastor be a CEO as much as a spiritual leader. Patterns in community growth helped fuel that. I'm not saying the 1950s were anti-democratic, but they were built on a solid normative consensus that left a lot of folks on the edge of--if not out of--the circle. Then comes the 1960s and the consensus starts to fray and the church starts to look different in its organization, largely due to the changing demands of the people in the pews. I just think we are in an era of somewhat wild democratic (with a small "d") impulses and that spills into church structure. People vote with their feet and the mainline denominations have suffered defections from both ends of the political spectrum. I could go on, but that's my two cents. As long as Joel Osteen is filling his arena, I don't think the church is in danger of losing any tax-exempt status.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top