Rick Perry and Sarah Palin allegedly have close ties to a radical Christian movement known as the New Apostolic Reformation that practices exorcism of demons and practices “spiritual warfare” against other religions. The belief of this group are far more extreme than the evangelicalism epoused by George W. Bush. It is scary to think that either Palin or Perry could be elected President of the US given their extreme views. The movement’s agenda is to achieve “dominion” over the arts, business, education, family, government, media, and religion.
Watch out, the boogey man will get ya.
Perhaps this would be better suited in SS or Rant?
Well I disagree obviously. Do you agree with this stuff Liten? I mean stuff like driving stakes into the ground of mosques and Masonic temples? Are you a dominionist? I wouldn’t think so from the usual tenor of your posts. You are too open minded. These folks apparently believe that other religions are ruled by demonic or evil angelic “principalities and powers.” Do you believe that? I don’t think this deserves to be considered a rant. I have supported my premises with evidence. Are my references factually incorrect?
What, precisely, is your objection to their aggressive approach to Islam and Masonry? I can probably thin of a couple of reasons, such as that perhaps you think it is nonsense, and imposing. But you have not explained yourself why you think that this movement is a bad thing. To me it is not at all obvious that it is bad, given that the USA is widely known as the most fiercely Christian nation in the world.
PS I think that this topic is clearly pertinent to religion. No reason to see it as a rant, and no reason to think that it is better suited to social science. The subject is religion is it not?
-
These folks do not believe in religious freedom which is guaranteed by the United States constitution.
-
They believe in superstitious nonsense like exorcizing demons.
-
They are trespassing on the land of people with whom they disagree.
-
The believe we are in a clash of civilization with Islam. This kind of thinking is likely to get us involved in more unnecessary wars.
Do you have sources that corroborate this? Preference of one religion over the other does not indicate the will to abolish freedom of religion.
Ok, well, so do I.
That’s a valid objection.
I don’t believe that this is nonsense per se either. Regarding the wars, Ron Paul is a hard line Christian disapproving of Islam who thinks that the US should withdraw its troops from other nations. I don’t think one follows from the other, but then again I cant say that I think Perry and Palin are as sensible as Paul is in my eyes.
I am not for demonizing people with perceived notions of how they conduct themselves. As far as I am concerned God is the final judge on a person’s heart. I am open minded enough to give people the benefit of the doubt. Why don’t we let God take care of alledged heresy and let the devil do the demonizing?
Jesus removed a legion of demons from an afflicted man and caused them to go into a herd of swine wherein they ran into the sea to drown.
Hello felix,
Look, I would normally agree with you, but these folks have made some valid points. Sure they are a danger to America, but they are protected by the very values they disagree with.
-
These folks do not believe in religious freedom which is guaranteed by the United States constitution.
O- Christian do not believe in religious freedom. They believe only in the freedom to err and to then be corrected by them. But this is the belief of even the most benign forms of Christianity. Jesus said that he is the ONLY way- not that he was one amongst many others. This absolutism and intolerance is there in the words of the man that most of western society admires, if not all. -
They believe in superstitious nonsense like exorcizing demons.
O- Again, so did Jesus. Is it supertitious? Sure but not any more than psycho-analysis or the belief in freedom of choice. The point is that if we turned our sharp sceptical eye to everything, rather than just religious fundamentalist, you find that myths abound that we would not want to do away with. -
They are trespassing on the land of people with whom they disagree.
O- Let them call the cops. But really I don’t believe that to be the case. They are probably more justified to say the same about you or some other critic. -
The believe we are in a clash of civilization with Islam. This kind of thinking is likely to get us involved in more unnecessary wars.
O- There are actual reasons why we wage perpetual wars for the illusion of perpetual peace. But W. Bush, a real religious hero, did not sell america into a war in Afghanistan and Iraq thru the spectre of a clash with Islam (which is how they islamicist see it). I am less worried about a Rick Perry than I am of a bussiness man like Romney. Any good suit will know that war is good for bussiness. Major Barbara is less likely to be heard by a Romney than her father Andrew Undershaft.
Wikipedia : …Christian Reconstructionism’s founder, Rousas John Rushdoony, wrote in his magnum opus, The Institutes of Biblical Law: “The heresy of democracy has since then worked havoc in church and state … Christianity and democracy are inevitably enemies.” He elsewhere said that "Christianity is completely and radically anti-democratic; it is committed to spiritual aristocracy," and characterized democracy as “the great love of the failures and cowards of life.” [11] In the book, he proposed that Old Testament law should be applied to modern society and that there should be a Christian theonomy, a concept developed in his colleague Greg Bahnsen’s controversial tome Theonomy and Christian Ethics, which Rushdoony heartily endorsed. In the Institutes of Biblical Law, Rushdoony supported the reinstatement of the Mosaic law’s penal sanctions. Under such a system, the list of civil crimes which carried a death sentence would include homosexuality, adultery, incest, lying about one’s virginity, bestiality, witchcraft, idolatry or apostasy, public blasphemy, false prophesying, kidnapping, rape, and bearing false witness in a capital case. [12] In short, he sought to cast a vision for the reconstruction of society based on Christian principles and represents the more traditionally understood approach to Reconstructionism.
Are you advocating that we roll back the clock and adopt the pre-scientific literal explanation of psychopathology and medicine as understood by the writers of the Gospels around 1950 years ago?
That’s a fallacy of overgeneralization. Some Christians believe in religious freedom some don’t. I suspect most Christians in America do. christiannewswire.com/news/634577170.html
See my response to Litenbolt above.
They should call the cops. I don’t go on temple or mosque property and drive stakes. What are you talking about?
I don’t support perpetual war. I don’t think Bush is a hero. The new apostolic reformation is going beyond the Bush agenda. My impression is that compared to the Dominion movement, Romney is a mainstream moderate traditional Republican.
No, I believe with God all things are possible when invoked through Jesus Christ.
Believing that God is omnipotent doesn’t necessarily entail believing in demons. Nor does believing in demons necessitate believing in God’s omnipotence. So it isn’t clear how your response is relevant to my question. It seems you are dodging the question.
If all the dominionist line of thinking was reserved for church and home, they would simply be another batshitcrazy bunch of delusionists. But they, as with most of the religious right, are attempting to become THE political force in this country. If America is to survive, government must remain a secular enterprise. Religion can certainly be part of an individual’s personal belief, but it stops when introduced into the public sphere. That we have people running for the presidency who wish to establish a theocracy is a great danger, not only to our form of governance, but to ALL religions.
I think it is amazing that we look at Iran’s theocratic government and shudder, and yet sit placidly by and watch Perry, Bachmannn, Palin, et al. attempt to drive us into the same sort of system.
I agree. I’m just finding out about the New Apostolic Reformation, and I find what I’m reading alarming.
The argument in here seems to be:
Given that the USA is widely known as the most fiercely Christian nation in the world…
The aggressive approach to Islam is warranted.
Please explain why being of a certain religion warrants aggressiveness to another religion. It’s a non sequitor as far as I can tell.
Also, do you believe it is moral to take an aggressive stance against people whom you think have taken an aggressive stance against you (Islam, it seems)? If so, I should take an aggressive stance against you if I am a Muslim, correct? This would be OK to do because I would be doing what you believe in.
I haven’t dodged anything…you asked:
Then I answered:
No, I believe with God all things are possible when invoked through Jesus Christ.
litenin,
That’s all well and good, but it doesn’t seem like these dominionists are listening to any message brought by Jesus. They aren’t reading the bible, they’re hiding a hate-filled agenda behind it.
They aren’t hiding it, they’re invoking it.
Well tent, as I told felix, I am not qualified to judge people’s hearts with this quote I had earlier:
As far as I’m concerned, that will be God’s job. If anyone else would like to do so, that will be their affair. I won’t be going on any witch hunts where people’s intent is suspect.