It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Christian Supremacy

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 01:18 AM
Can I get some commentary on this article? I found it disturbing and would like to start some discussion on the issue.

The Despoiling of America

posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 01:36 AM
I didn't read it all.....couldn't read it all.
It makes one sick to heart to read that men and women think in this manner. Especially the men and women who garner our votes on election day.

It is truly, a sad day for America.

posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 04:08 AM
I feel this accurately depicts the climate of the US. It nauseates me, but the majority of the time when I raise constitutional issues offline, I'm greeted with some derisive comments about having to "read a bible once", or not being Christian enough to label myself a Christian. I'm not saying the variety of comments causes me to shut up
but it does make it difficult to get a point across. This country is truly in "polarized" mode; fear of a higher power's wrath, fear of terrorists ... fear of our own government (tyranny), fear of stepping forward and helping a neighbor in trouble. It's no wonder we're viewed so pathetically by other countries.

posted on Aug, 21 2005 @ 03:11 PM
I just got finished reading the article and what it says is scary but IT'S TRUE!

Kenneth Copeland asked, “If a woman is raped should she be forced to carry the fetus to term?” Spitz said, “Yes.”

“What if the pregnancy will kill the mother?” Spitz replied that under no circumstances could “the baby be killed.” When Spitz was asked, “Why haven’t you gone out and killed an abortionist?” he replied calmly, “God hasn’t told me to do the killing.”

“Why haven’t you gone out and killed an abortionist?” he replied calmly, “God hasn’t told me to do the killing.”

From the way it sounds to me, I believe that not only should the preacher accused of killing the doctor was tried and convicted, I believe that Mister Spitz should be tried on the very same charges. True followers of the teachings of the Christ know that this is a false teaching. The Ten Commandments even state that "Thou Shall Not Kill." So why are the teachings of Christ being twisted by supposed Christians?

posted on Aug, 22 2005 @ 01:19 AM
Thanks for these responses. I'm glad to see I wasn't the only one to feel this way. I was beginning to think I might have been losing my mind. I had been having suspicions that this was the case for a while now, but when I stumbled over this essay, it startled and scared me. After reading this article, many events of the past four or five years or so that I had brushed off as ignorance before reading it, began to seem much more connected and planned afterwards.

I'm wondering if a plot this thick could ever be proven before it's too late. I think everything in the article rings true to me. Even if it's not true, it seems to be something that should be seriously guarded against.

Garyo- The thing I find sad in America today is the two general attitudes on government that I hear from most people I talk to. One is that they hold a certain belief, whatever that belief might be, and no kind of logic or common sense will shake that belief. The other attitude, and maybe the more frightening, is the attitude that, if something doesn't happen within an arm's-reach of that person, then they don't care at all.

Star- I was raised as a Christian and I believe that I have a pretty good handle on who Jesus Christ was and what he stood for. I'm not sure from the sound of it that you are dealing with what I consider Christians. I've taken to calling that kind of person a Christian Supremacist. I think this type of person is characterized by an attitude that they have been saved and are now somehow better than other people. It also seems to give them a sense that they have a right or an obligation to impose their beliefs, wills and lifestyles on others. I'm not sure where this type of attitude comes from. In everything I've read about Jesus, I have never become aware of him acting in this manner.

I have a number of canned responses I like to use when talking to these types of people. One is, "Who would Jesus have bombed?" One is, "I'm sorry, but God has no rights under the US Constitution." Other than calling on these people to reevaluate how they have chosen to follow Christ or to compare their attitudes with the attidudes and efforts that Christ demonstrated. I can't think of any better ways to handle those conversations.

I hope you won't let your fear rule you or prevent you from becoming involved. My brother used to have a saying. The worse they can do is kill you and eat you.

Gimme- Anyone who has read about the life of Christ sees that he dealt with the issue of execution on at least two different occassions. On the first occassion, he intervened and stopped the execution. On the second occassion he gave his life. Even a sociopath understands that violence and killing is wrong even if he can't stop himself or feel guilt over it. With the way I was raised, it is difficult for me also to understand why people twist the teachings of Christ. I guess, if I had to pick reasons, I would say greed, ignorance or an evil agenda of some sort.

I've never looked at the Book of Revelation much as a prophecy, but rather as a warning. Christ commanded his followers to love and even if it were the case that he wasn't the Son of God, he was a brilliant man. I'm worried that if everyone doesn't put their greed and hate behind and start loving each other, the human race won't survive. It's sad that after 5 million years of backbreaking toil to survive that we'd have to go out like this.

BTW, when Christ used the word love, he intended it as an action verb.

posted on Aug, 22 2005 @ 05:32 AM
Good comebacks Thus! Thank you
I will certainly be borrowing them

I agree with you Thus about Revelations being a warning, but then I feel the Bible as a whole is a timeless handbook for living. If the Bible weren't abridged, then I might feel some of the prophetic stuff could be taken literally.

I cringe seeing Christian attached to the word Supremacy lol When I look at the path this country has followed in the past 40 years, I see very little, if anything, Christian about it. I don't remember Christ using aggression to push people around. He certainly could have if He'd wanted to. In my belief system He was the super power back then. I remember Him as being a teacher through words and His own behavior.

If there is something Christian about how this country is running, I'm missing it.

posted on Aug, 22 2005 @ 07:50 AM
Aside from the graphic which would keep most from taking the article seriously, it's a pretty scholarly read and well documents the rise of DOMINIONISM (aka CHRISTIAN RECONSTRUCTIONISM, DOMINION THEOLOGY, AND THEONOMY) in this country (as it happened to rise in parallel with radical Islam).

"Christian Supremacists" is an interesting take as well, but I think most "regular people" (that happen to be Christians) just think anyone else labeled Christian-anything must be on their side.

This has been part of the Dominists success in wresting control of mainstream political parties and public debates despite actually being a mere fringe minority. They claim an unchallengable label: Christianity (indeed they claim to speak for all of faith). And to be anti- these terrorists renders one on the butt end of a "Justice Sunday" or labeled as "anti-Christian" which couldn't be further from the truth.

Mere tyrants labeling themselves "Christian" and "Jesus Freaks" so that being "anti-tyranny" becomes "anti-Christian" and "anti-Jesus."

Worked for the Roman Empire I suppose.

posted on Aug, 22 2005 @ 08:26 AM
People needs to understand that the agenda was and has always been to take over the Republican party under the umbrella of "conservationism"

It doesn't surprise me, they are already in the Republican party, do not trust the "Extremist conservative" they are nothing more that christian fundamentalist.

posted on Aug, 23 2005 @ 02:39 AM
Star- You're quite welcome to use those, but I have to warn you, don't expect logic and reason to have much effect on the irrational type of people we're talking about.

I also am distressed by any form of supremacy mainly because people ignore the concept of all of us sharing in equality as laid down in the Declaration of Independence. This document is the foundation of law in the US, not the bible as some mistakenly believe. It states that we all have natural rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and we have these rights simply by the fact that we exist as human entities. The US Constitution was then framed to protect these rights by placing limits on the powers of the federal government. These rights have constantly been threatened by those who see themselves as superior to others, but the Constitution has generally been very effective in protecting these rights and as a tool to recover these rights for people who had been left out at the beginning. In the past five years, I have seen the stripping of these rights from citizens, not by the destruction of the Constitution, but by the ability of the current regime to get away with ignoring it.

I try to avoid taking anything in the Bible literally unless it is a direct statement from Jesus. I see the bulk of the Bible as allegorical in nature. I think the tendency toward a literal interpretation of the Bible may be what is causing most of these troubles. Besides, trying to see the future will take your eyes off what needs to be done in the present.

You are right that the Son of God would have the power to force people to act the way he wanted, but then what would be the point of God's gift of free will? For God to exist as a perfect being, he would have to have perfect logic. The only logic I can see behind free will is that we are being tested in the face of uncertainty. Forcing someone to believe or act in a certain way destroys that whole plan. I see the protection of human rights by the US Declaration of Independence and Constitution as a perfect compliment to that plan and anything counter must be of Satan.

Rant- I kind of like the graphic. I'm thinking of putting it on a t-shirt with the "Who would Jesus bomb?" slogan.

Thank you for that link on the history of dominionism. I'll have to print it out and take it home with me.

I think anyone with any intelligence will easily recognize the negative connotations of being labeled any type of supremacist. There's nothing wrong with being white, but we all know how vile a white supremacist is. I happen to think it's the perfect label for those who it fits and as soon as I heard it, I thought it was perfect.

You are exactly correct that these people have begun renaming repugnant things with pretty names to give them a better spin. I was outraged recently while watching CSPAN and saw someone from the American Enterprise Institute rename torture to "rough session". It's insanity.

It's interesting that you mention the Roman Empire. I see some parallels in the fall of that empire and some of the things currently happening in the US. Some major factors in the fall of Rome were the outnumbering of citizens by slaves, the failure of the economy by lack of exports and overdependence on imports, and invasion by masses of barbarian hordes.

Marg- The Republican party has always seemed to be the favorite of fascists in America. I'd be interested in any ideas why people think that is. But there are people in the Republican party that I like, such as Senator John McCain, and people who terrify me, such as Senator Rick Santorum. I've never seen any type of extremism or fundamentalism as a good thing.

posted on Aug, 23 2005 @ 09:12 AM
Thanks for this thread!

I fear that we are becoming the very thing we claim to be fighting. Car bombs and IEDs are the tools of those who do not have their own newspapers, talk shows, and news channels, I suppose.

Never has there been a message more easily sold than that of "you are chosen by God and therefore inately superior to all others - God is on your side!".

No, we don't (yet) hear the public advocacy of killing or enslaving the infidels in the USA. We are hearing the infancy of this message - take control of all branches of government at all levels for Christ. And, that is how it starts. In fact, throughout the history of civilization, it is the only way it has ever started, right?

posted on Aug, 23 2005 @ 11:48 AM
You want to see more christian supremacy?

Turn to Pat and the 700 club, there you can not find anymore christian supremacy in all his glory.

posted on Aug, 23 2005 @ 03:32 PM

Originally posted by marg6043
You want to see more christian supremacy?

Turn to Pat and the 700 club, there you can not find anymore christian supremacy in all his glory.

ROFLMAO!!!!!!! So true!


I'm love synchronicity
This link was emailed to me by a young client the morning after I posted that I felt there was nothing Christian about this country. So, I'm posting it here so younger posters can read it and get those wheels turning in their heads, possibly motivate them to read a bit on the constitution. It's easy to understand, and there's contact info on the bottom if anyone wants to contact them and discuss the blurring of the lines between church and state.

The young gal that emailed to me the above link called me last night to discuss it a little rather than having me email back my comments on it. She is not Christian by label, but has been drawn closer that direction. We were talking about the different responses we receive when we question the "this is a Christian country" statements. I passed on the one "Who would Jesus bomb?" and I didn't think she'd stop laughing lmao Education through humor is very effective as well. She's going to borrow that one from
You and I are very much in accord on this issue. I really can't add anything that you haven't expressed..and you've expressed it so much better than I could.
Rant: Great link! I'm passing it on
Thank you

posted on Aug, 23 2005 @ 11:35 PM
Administration Distances Itself From Pat Robertson
Televangelist Says U.S. Should Assassinate Venezuelan Leader

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, left, met with Fidel Castro, right, on Sunday during an official state visit to Cuba.


CARACAS, Venezuela (Aug. 23) - Pat Robertson 's call for American agents to assassinate President Hugo Chavez is a "terrorist" statement that needs to be investigated by U.S. authorities, Venezuela said Tuesday. The Bush administration quickly distanced itself from the religious broadcaster.

Robertson 's suggestion Monday that the United States "take out" Chavez to stop Venezuela from becoming a "launching pad for communist influence and Muslim extremism" appeared likely to aggravate tensions between the United States and the world's fifth-largest oil exporting country.

Chavez, who was democratically elected, has emerged as one of the most outspoken critics of President Bush, accusing the United States of conspiring to topple his government and possibly backing plots to assassinate him. The United States is the top buyer of Venezuelan oil, but Chavez has made it clear he wants to decrease the country's dependence on the U.S. market by finding other buyers.

Winding up a visit to Cuba, Chavez said in response to questions from reporters at Havana's airport that he did not have information about Robertson 's comments.

"I haven't read anything. We haven't heard anything about him," Chavez said. "I don't even know who that person is."

But Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel said the U.S. response to Robertson would be a test of its anti-terrorist policy and that Venezuela was studying its legal options.

"The ball is in the U.S. court, after this criminal statement by a citizen of that country," Rangel said. "It's a huge hypocrisy to maintain this discourse against terrorism and at the same time, in the heart of that country, there are entirely terrorist statements like those."

Rangel called Robertson "a man who seems to have quite a bit of influence in that country," adding sarcastically that his words were "very Christian." He said the comments "reveal that religious fundamentalism is one of the great problems facing humanity in these times."

At the Pentagon, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld said when asked about Robertson 's comments: "Our department doesn't do that kind of thing. It's against the law. He's a private citizen. Private citizens say all kinds of things all the time."

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack called Robertson 's remarks "inappropriate."

I found this article very disturbing. I c/p the entire article in case some cannot load AOL news. It is an AP story. Below the story there are more comments by Robertson that are disturbing as well.

posted on Aug, 24 2005 @ 03:19 AM
Al- You're welcome and thank you for joining in the discussion.

I think you're right that there are parallels in what we are fighting, radical Islam, and what we seem to be becoming, radical Christians. I would say that in Iraq there is now freedom of expression and there are more than 100 newspapers in print there. So it's not the lack of freedom of expression. Guerilla warfare is simply the option of a small, ill-equipped force fighting a large force with superior firepower. Sabotage and harassment are the tools of guerillas.

People have always been more likely to listen to those who are willing to stroke some egos. I don't think true Christianity makes the claim that anyone who has accepted Christ is superior. In fact, I think in the early days of Christianity, one of the things most people found so attractive about it was the leveling of the status field, even to women, who at the time were considered to be property.

I agree that we are on a slippery slope and great care needs to be taken to stop this from developing further, great effort needs to be expended to awaken Americans from their stupor and an intolerance of intolerance needs to be instilled in all Americans.

Marg- I prefer not to waste my mental efforts in watching propaganda from these blathering idiots. I'm disturbed that these people seem to have so much money to buy so much air time. They truely have bilked more than their fair share of grandma's retirement checks haven't they?

Star- Blurring of the lines is right. It has started as "We are being oppressed because we can't have the Ten Commandment statues in courthouses and nativity scenes on public school lawns." and will end with "Lynch those queers and darkies!" if we aren't careful.

I've been watching this situation with Venezuela develop for a while. I first became aware that they were taking steps to protect themselves from the US six months or so ago when I read a clip from Jane's security newsbriefs. Jane's is like an intelligence service for those of us who don't receive tax revenues.

Those "holy rollers" seem bent on starting Armageddon, don't they?

posted on Aug, 24 2005 @ 04:18 AM

Originally posted by RANT
Mere tyrants labeling themselves "Christian" and "Jesus Freaks" so that being "anti-tyranny" becomes "anti-Christian" and "anti-Jesus."

Wouldn't that depend on what these "anti-tyranny" folks aim for in their protests? If they do not protest against the religious parts, but just the tyranny parts, I don't see how anyone could call them anti-Christian and anti-Jesus.
As a christian myself, what I see mostly is how christians disagree with eachother, almost to the level where there is more disagreeing within christianity itself, than between christians and non-christians.

A tyrant is a tyrant, and a crazy person is a crazy person.
Because of the large amount of (self declared) christians on this earth it is only common sense to realize that in this group there are tyrants and crazy people, just like in any other group.

Anti religious people should stop looking for tyrants and crazy people who are christian just to show how wrong christianity is in their opinion, they should focuss on the actual situation; what is making this person wrong?
Religion? Or interpretation?

[edit on 24-8-2005 by Jakko]

posted on Aug, 24 2005 @ 08:14 AM
I can't disagree with what people say in the defense of many very fine Christian people. The important thing to remember here is the context - we are discussing in the PTS/Religion and Government Issues section of this board.

So, for clarity, I want to say that my comments are strictly in referrence to the influence and actions of the the political operatives and their minions of the evangelical Christian right (the Christian Coalition being only one example).

I am greatly encouraged by seeing a few Christians begin speaking out against this radical movement amongst their fellow Christians. I skate on thin ice when I say this but, my reaction is the same as when I see the few Muslims begin speaking out against the Islamic terrorists. We all have to guard against tyranny and violence and injustice from both within and without.

Yes, there is a strong perception and a heightened sensitivity towards "guilt by association" these days - it happens to all powerful and well-publicized groups and it happens at every level. Self-policing is always preferrable. Perhaps another major schism is pending among Christians - perhaps it is overdue.

I don't understand how the evangelical Christians have allowed themselves to become stooges for the Republican party any more than I understand how African-Americans have done the same with the Democratic party. Neither the bible/NT nor a person's skin color or ethnicity should have any bearing on their political persuasion. But, it does. I know. In both of these cases, the puppets can quickly become the puppeteers. No matter which end of the strings you are on, it is not a healthy or sustainable relationship.

posted on Aug, 24 2005 @ 08:46 AM
What we need to understand is that fundamentalist Christianity is part of our “Christian nation” just like Jesus is bases of worship among Christians.

You can separate yourself from fundamentalist but you can not give away your faith because of them.

Now remember fundamentalist or extremist Christians are a group on their own, their supremacy lies in the fact that they consider themselves apart from any other Christian denomination in their radical views.

Pat and his Christian Coalition are a good example of how fundamentalism has taken root in our Christian society.

He and his followers are the “ reconstructions” of our country, infirtrating the government specially the Republican party promoting their brand of religious rights, this movement started in the 80’s it went dormant publicly during the 90’s and now they are reborn with Mr. Bush Christian open nature.

They are well organized, well funded and in a mission and that is to bring their own twisted brand of Christianity to everybody in American you wanted or not.

This quote from Pat tells you more of how he feels about other denominations of Christians in our country.

The 700 Club, January 14, 1991; "You say you're supposed to be nice to the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians and the Methodists and this, that, and the other thing. Nonsense. I don't have to be nice to the spirit of the Antichrist. I can love the people who hold false opinions but I don't have to be nice to them"

The “Christian Supremacy” is not a joke or something we should just take it lightly they are a movement and they are aiming to the educational system and the government and so far they has manage to influence the state laws with their groups of well prepared and finance lawyers.

This is another quote from Mr. Pat on how his campaign to regain American for Christ will go.

"Pat Robertson's Perspective," April - May 1992; "The strategy against the American radical left should be the same as General Douglas MacArthur employed against the Japanese in the Pacific . . . bypass their strongholds, then surround them, isolate them bombard them, then blast the individuals out of their power bunkers with hand-to-hand combat. The battle for Iwo Jima was not pleasant, but our troops won it. The battle to regain the soul of America won't be pleasant either, but we will win it."

Be prepared American because the Army of the rightous is ready to stricke.

posted on Aug, 24 2005 @ 01:39 PM
You're posting your constitutionally protected opinion, and at the beginning and end of your post you feel the need to post a disclaimer about whom you're referring to in a thread labeled "Christian Supremacy". Without the "disclaimer", your post would have been no less respectful. The title of the thread leaves no doubt in anyone's mind that this subject is regarding supremacists only. Yet, there is that underlying fear of stepping on the toes of someone/getting in trouble for respectfully speaking your piece. If someone is not a supremacist, would they object to the words spoken in this thread; in your post?

The conditioning of political correctness has become a silent censor. We're so accustomed to censoring our own words now, that we rarely say what we really mean! We started with 4 letter words, then we looked at simple cuss words, then we looked at people's skin color, religion, clothing, eye color, hair color... on and on and on. If we don't start speaking clearly, and honestly; saying what we really mean and meaning what we say, we're not going to be using ANY relevant words to convey a message, or begin any real movements toward change. (Speaking of censoring..sorry for the runon sentence lmao) Words carry their own power, along with our personal expression, spurring people into action. By continually adding words to the list of "unspeakables", we do nothing but weaken and cripple ourselves. Do we have a chance of getting back to the "land of the free" if we can't speak about how to get back there?

Thanks for letting me use your post to pick on something that most of us

Originally posted by Al Davison
I can't disagree with what people say in the defense of many very fine Christian people. The important thing to remember here is the context - we are discussing in the PTS/Religion and Government Issues section of this board.

So, for clarity, I want to say that my comments are strictly in referrence to the influence and actions of the the political operatives and their minions of the evangelical Christian right (the Christian Coalition being only one example).

posted on Aug, 25 2005 @ 12:47 AM
This is slightly off topic... but...

Congress sneaks Mark of the Beast legislation through on appropriations bill.

SHAMELESSLY PLAGERIZED- While not expressly defined in the text of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has stated that the right to travel is a "privilege and immunity of national citizenship under the Constitution," as well as a "part of the 'liberty' of which the citizens cannot be deprived without due process of law." The Court has declared that the constitutional right to travel consists of three different components: first, it protects the right of a citizen of one state to enter and to leave another state; second, it protects the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than an unfriendly alien when temporarily present in the second state; and third, for those travelers who elect to become permanent residents, it protects the right to be treated like other citizens of that state. -END SHAMELESS PLAGERIZATION

posted on Aug, 25 2005 @ 01:58 AM
Jakko- That's the point. The religious right seems to be using any dissent to their policy as a direct attack on their religion. Also, they seem to be abusing religious freedom to break down the bastion between church and state.

Al- My belief in the teachings of Christ and my innate sense of what is right and wrong are exactly what have led me to become a Libertarian.

Marg- Exactly. I used to just view these televangelists as your run-of-the-mill hucksters and charlatans. But I think I underestimated their capability to prey on the ignorance and fear of the masses. Many people I speak to these days believe that if it's done in Jesus' name, it must be right. The sad thing is that none of these people have any real understanding of who Jesus was or what He stood for and that is being taken advantage of.

Star- A true Christian knows exactly what we are talking about here and there is no need for anyone to apologize for their comments. They just have to keep in mind that this isn't the place for baiting and flaming and as long as everyone maintains a respectable level of decorum, there is no reason this subject can't be discussed intelligently.

I've never had much use for political correctness as much as politeness and common courtesy.

BTW... new idea for a t-shirt. A picture of Pat Robertson with crosshairs over the forehead and the slogan, "Who would Jesus have assassinated?"

new topics

top topics


log in