How do others view such Christian religions? The Evangelicals, the Pentecostals, and the older fundamentalist Christians. Are they simply "happy clappers", with the odd ball door knockers, more an inconvenience for most, rather than a problem. These religions are not new in Australia, evangelicalism kicked off in the 1920's, the Jehovah's Witnesses (International Bible Students Association) in 1914. All have their roots in the United States, and all have a commonality that the Bible is the first and last word on everything. While the mainstream Christian denominations have seen a decline in numbers, with an ever ageing congregation, my wife's local Anglican Church would have an average age of 70+. Not so the above, growing rich on a young cashed up congregation of under 40's, offering a rock style of religion that promises so much, one group can even boast of having the current PM as a devotee. Are these "new" fundo Christians nothing more than a benign group of happy clappers rockn' an rolln' to an upbeat version of 'Kum Ba Yah'.

Given a recent family experience, where a niece, and initially her partner, both in their 30's with 3 small children, fell in with one of these revivalist style churches. Once the novelty wore off for him, she become more and more involved and it has now lead to their long standing relationship breaking down. The niece has gone to the extreme of cutting off all family contact, even changing her mobile phone number to one known only to trusted people. To me there is more to the happy clappers than meets the eye, bigotry, control, stc.

Hi Paul,

I've not had any really bad experiences like
your niece has had with any religious group.
I feel sorry for your niece and your family.
I hope things will end well for all concerned.

I've had the door-knockers - but they've always
been polite and I've never turned down their
literature. I prefer the old traditional
church services and I have to admit I do miss
the Latin mass even though I didn't understand
most of the words. Still there was something
special about them.

Whether there is a danger in these religions?
I guess like anything it depends on the people
running them. You get people who are motivated
by different things - not all of them are good.
That's human nature. Not religion to use religion
for their own selfish, greedy and immoral means.
Even the traditional religions have often erred.

We need to keep our eyes open before we fall for any
of the hokum being preached.

The worst fundamentalist threat to Australian comes from the Greens, whose nutbag leader, with the ONLY lower house seat the Greens have, declaring a list of SHADOW MINISTERS! This nutter thinks that his nutty party is the Opposition! He is probably so sure of Labor’s reliance on the Greens that a coalition might be formed with a cranky Labor leader who hasn't learnt the climate change lesson from his predecessor's big-time loss at the last election; he will need all help the Greens and their delusional supporters can give him - particularly now that Morrison is dumping the dud subs and putting us into the AUKUS defence camp.

The only person with any brains on the Green Labor side is Joel Fitzgibbon who has the sense to jump ship at the next election.

Of course there's a danger! Indeed the danger is arguably greatest to evangelical Christians, as it causes them to miss the point of what's in the Bible. Although IMO the danger is actually greatest to those who view Christianity as hostile because of that.

However whether the JWs belong in that category is debatable - they have their own agenda which, though a Biblical justification for it has been contrived, is set by the leaders of their organization and has very little to do with Jesus. Christians widely regard JWs as a cult.

Who are fundamental Christians in Australia?

What evidence is there that these people, if they exist, are a threat to Australia?

Hi Foxy,

Just on the niece, what I knew of her before she got "religion", and I knew her well, was that of a vivacious young woman, fun loving and a little bit outrageous. Her outgoing personality would make her the life of the party, great to have around. Despite the party persona she was a good mother devoted to her children, and a loving partner. I did, as did her favourite Aunty, notice subtle changes to her personality before we left Sydney three years ago. Becoming very defensive of her new religion, and surprisingly judgemental of others who she believed were on the wrong path, like her Dad and sister, I can only imagine what she thought of this atheist, although to respectful to say. Her partner blames the Church and some within, for the break up, as it and they become more important in her life than anything else, with the possible exception of the children.

She is actually our grandniece, being the granddaughter of my wife's oldest sister and her husband, now deceased. In Maori culture that makes her a mokopuna of ours, and her welfare is seen as our responsibility.

Dear Paul,

It sounds like she's involved in a sect and I would
be very concerned. Is there any way that you could
get professional help for her? She needs it by the
sound of things. I would not wait too long.

Come on Paul. Who are they and what threat are they to anyone except people who voluntarily get mixed up with them (if there is any real threat at all). You have form as an anti religionists, particularly the Christian religion, and the burr under your saddle this time is a personal one. Nobody is dragooned into joining these oldball outfits, and sensible people have nothing to do with them. There is no danger unless you go looking for it. This sort of rot crops up from time to time, and there has been never been cause for action. There is no legislating for fools.

Ignorant oafs who rubbish Christianity wouldn't have heard of a scholar named William Tyndale who fled from England to translate the Bible into English, for which act of rebellion he was executed in 1536. The result was the Geneva Bible, and then the King James Bible, which brought the truth of Christianity to all (previously the word was available only in Latin, and that enabled rulers to keep masses ignorant and more easily controlled). The subsequent blossoming of knowledge gave rise to the Judeo - Christian culture we enjoy today.

There might be abuses and weird sects. But, without Christianity, whether we practice it or not as individuals, Western culture would never have risen above the barbarism and lack of freedoms and rights experienced by other cultures. We have the right to make our own decisions, and the education to help us to avoid being taken in by shonks who might be posing as Christians. Unfortunately, not everyone has availed themselves of Christianity, and God helps those who help themselves

ttbn,
The claim "God helps those who help themselves" is widely believed by the fundos. Unfortunately they don't take much notice of what Jesus said about helping others.

Fundamentalism of any kind is bad. Fundamentalist Christianity should be an oxymoron, as Christianity is fundamentally antifundamentalist. Yet human nature (often combined with bad teaching) has resulted in some Christians being fundamentalists and many more having some fundamentalist tendencies..

So is it a threat to Australia? I'd regard their judgementalism as a moral threat, but probably no worse on average than conservative atheists. More worrying is the anti science attitude they use to maintain the cognitive dissonance their creationist beliefs require.

Hi Foxy,

No the niece is not involved in a sect, a Pentecostal denomination one of the largest in Sydney. I don't completely blame the Church for the situation that has came about because of her involvement. Only from what has been said, as she dose not communicate with the family, which seems to be her choosing, and possibly the advice of friends within the Church which have influenced her to take the position she has. My concern here is that a religion can become so important in ones life that everything and everyone else becomes secondary and unimportant. Values and perceptions change for a person to the extent that they are no longer recognisable as the person they once were, a kind of addiction. Religion is about the only thing in general society that can do that to people. The wife's concern is more for the children, but she does worry about her niece's well being and would like to talk with her if given the opportunity.

p/s According to her partner the last straw came when she, without asking him, moved a male friend from the Church into their house, on the grounds that "he has nowhere else to go".

Hi ttbn,

Nothing like an old sucker! Just because you joined the sect of the "Holy Banana" and believed Corny was the new messiah who was going to lead the faithful like you into the promised land of conservatism, ha ha. The fact Corny led you up the garden path to the top of the high mountain and then pushed you off, relieving you of your aged welfare at the same time, forcing you onto bread and dripping, doesn't mean you have to have a go at me about religion.

BTW I probably do more for the wife's church than you do for any church, which would be nothing.

Paul,

You really are a gormless oaf. Most people, including me, have forgotten Bernardi, but you still can't come up with something else to have a go at me with. You lack imagination as well as intelligence. And nobody cares about your personal experiences or those of your great niece 96 times removed. Poor judgement and silliness apparently runs in the family.

Dear Paul,

Thank You for sharing the information about your niece.
I am relieved to learn that it is not a sect that she's
involved with but a well established religious
denomination. Not knowing her and the circumstances of
why she was drawn to the church (perhaps seeking for
answers and support because of personal problems) I can
only try to guess and advise - but that would be wrong.

I think in your case all you can really do is be there for
her and let her know you're there if she needs you. I would
not judge her - we all have our demons and we can't really
judge fully until we've walked in someone else's shoes.

I don't mean to preach. I do wish you well. Surely someone
from the Church could help? Does anyone within the Church
know the concern all this is causing for your and her family?
Perhaps a direct approach with the Church may help?

Not usre what to advise or suggest.

ttbn,

Only responding to your attacks on me, "nobody cares about your personal experiences or those of your great niece 96 times removed", except YOU who keeps replying to my posts. The banana exercise only goes to show what a silly old fool you really are, but you don't see that.

ttbn,

The sect of the holy banana is more commonly known as the greens.

As for the niece, I think her fruitiness has more to do with her bloodline than the church.

Dear Paul1405,

Well no, your niece is indeed involved in a sect.

"A sect is a subgroup of a religious, political, or philosophical belief system, usually an offshoot of a larger group. Although the term was originally a classification for religious separated groups, it can now refer to any organization that breaks away from a larger one to follow a different set of rules and principles. Sects are usually created due to perception of heresy by the subgroup and/or the larger group."
Wikipedia

Pentecostals and the like do not regard the predominate Christian faith as Christians at all. The Catholics are very much heretics in their eyes.

The fact that we have a happy clapper as a PM, an expansive school chaplaincy network is looking to be expanded, allowed support for Israel to enter unseemly bounds, dragging the heels on same sex marriage for so long and a whole host of other instances should reveal just how pervasive an destructive their influence is becoming.

That your niece feels the need to disassociate from family and friends in order to more properly serve her faith and church is a very good indication of a sect at work.

Hi Steele,

Thanks for joining in, Christianity was a sect within a religion Judaism to begin with. I didn't start the discussion to simply highlight a nieces involvement in a sect/church, my wife is far more concerned about that, than I am, I'm sure there's two sides to every story. What does concern me is the iniquitous behind the scenes behaviour of these American type revililoust groups whilst outwardly projecting an image of pearly white wholesomeness. These groups very much target the under 40's promising so much, but under that thin veneer what motivates these people.

Coincidently '60 Minutes' have something on 'Hillsong' this Sunday, when I put this topic up I wasn't aware of that, but I'll be watching with interest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYnGcNACca0&ab_channel=60MinutesAustralia

tbbn,
For your info, the King James Bible is not an actual translation but a reinterpretation intended to reinforce "the Divine Right of Kings" and protect both his kingdom of the church itself and has several differences from its predecessors. The flowery language was deliberate and the work of hired wordsmiths for that purpose.

Any fundamentalist religion or cult is potentially dangerous. One just has to look at the crazies controlling the government in the USA - another type of Taliban.

Hi reche,

My Old Man always said; "Be ware of the bloke who believes God is on his side, he also believes he can do no wrong." True.

Sect. Scam. Only idiots get caught up in such things. Only idiots publicise the fact that they or someone in their family was idiotic enough to get caught. People never learn. They are a constant source of material for outraged, breathless presenters on Chanel 7, or that sanctimonious baggage on Nine's Current Affair. And a jolly good laugh is had by all. We cannot legislate for fools; and who doesn't like a good laugh. What we have is free entertainment that people used to pay for to watch mental defectives confined in England's Bedlam asylum.

ttbn, is that a reference to your time in the Corny Banana sect?

You just don't get anything, you poor fool. The Greens rely on idiots for membership, as you constantly demonstrate. Your banging on about Bernadi, a has been, shows how bereft of new ideas you are. Still, what can one expect from a Bandt follower.

Paul I would say she is being influenced by some immature friends. Genuine Christians care for others especially family. The husband has probably been alerted to some irrational excesses of her behaviour and the behaviour of her friends. I would think it would be up to the husband to stand by her and allow her irrational behaviour till she comes to her sense for the family. She will not keep it up for ever. Pray for her and wisdom for her husband.

Dear Paul,

I agree with Josephus. Her husband hopefully can
influence her. At least he should stand by her
during these difficult times and show her that he
does care. If the entire family supports her and
let her know they're there for her - hopefully with
time she will come around. Fingers-crossed that this
is just a passing phase of some sort.

Always dangerous when you guys get talking about religion. So many misconceptions. For example I saw someone say that Pentecostals think they are the only true Christians. In fact Pentecostalism is a movement across congregations and denominations, and it doesn't make any such claims to exclusivity. It's actually the Roman Catholic Church that does.

I know a few Pentecostals, and they are all lovely people. They believe some odd things, in my view, but then they think some of my views are odd too. They believe in the inerrancy of Scripture, which is a bit problematic. While all Christians believe that the Bible is God's word, most of us think he sometimes talks in riddles, and half the fun in a really good sermon is teasing those riddles and contradictions out.

But they spend a lot of time thinking about what it is to be a good person, and they socialise with a community that does the same thing, and supports each other in striving to be good. Their fundamentalism lies in them trying to get back to a proper reading of the Bible, particularly the New Testament. So that makes them less dangerous than many other organisations.

It is not fair to compare them to fundamentalists in other religions without looking at the fundamentals of those other religions. I don't hold the same optimistic view of Islamic fundamentalism because the Koran is quite different from the New Testament (although not so different to the Old Testament).

I find the hysteria about Christianity, particularly fundamentalist Christianity, from the militant Atheists hard to understand. They want to replace an organised system of thought and practice dedicated to doing good and personal salvation with what exactly? And how will this be better than what they've replaced? I think some of them are the fundamentalists we should be concerned about.

Foxy, I'm not sure crossing your fingers is more than superstition. However having deep concern expressed in private does work.

Josephus,

Crossing my fingers is merely an expression. It was not
meant to be taken literally. And as you'll notice
I did stress that active support would help.

Foxy, I appreciate your agreement. however I have learned that to say what you mean and mean what you say is closer to how you really think.
I would have to agree with Graham Y as I come from a large family two sisters married to Baptist ministers, two brothers in Penticostal Churches, and nephews and neices Orthodox Jews including a Rabbi.I would say the charismatic sections of the Denominations are doing great work in third world Countries in education and health.

One thing I'll give you ttbn, is at least you had a go, which is more than most can say.

Most Churches as I view them are a positive influence. My wife's Anglican Church does a surprising amount for the community. This local church is neither domineering or controlling, its rather benign. What concerns me is the growing fringe groups within Christianity that outwardly appear as positive, but often are secretive, controlling and will take over the everyday functions of peoples lives. This is a well established fact for fundo churches like the JW's who go beyond preaching into the precinct of life control. These churches like extreme political ideology's demand total allegiance without question, from the brethren at the exclusion of all others. Taken to the extreme the result can be disastrous for the individual or the group as a whole, who can forget the Branch Devidian's which grew out of the somewhat mainstream Seven Day Adventists in the 1930's. The end result was the tragedy at Waco Texas, or who can forget the over 900 dead at the hands of Jim Jones Peoples Temple, at Jamestown Guyana. These are extreme examples of runaway Christianity, but they did happen, and can happen again.

"Jones’s idiosyncratic blend of evangelical Christianity, New Age spirituality and radical social justice attracted an enthusiastic following. He called his burgeoning church the Peoples Temple." Sound familiar, the ingredients are there, it only requires the catalysts to create the disaster.

Josephus,

I do mean what I say and I take full responsibility for
that. However none of us should be held responsible
if some people misinterpret and misunderstand what is said.
We can't be held responsible for the comprehension skills
of others.

I don't as a rule like making judgements or labelling
people. And religion to me is a personal matter. It's
internal not external. I have no wish to convert any
body or to force my beliefs onto any body else. I
respect the beliefs of other people as long as they
don't harm others.

My father was raised by the Jesuits - and I was brought
up in the Catholic faith. I'm probably not a very good
Catholic - I'm a work in progress. But I would find
it difficult not to have God in my life.

An example of the recent influence of fundies on society in the USA can be seen in Texas where they have sought to bypass Roe Vs Wade by implementing legal vigilantism within the population - enabling and encouraging individuals to sue anybody involved in abortions.

The religious anti-abortion stance only started in the 70s as a way to unify and politicise church members in order for the fundies make their move into direct government representation rather than work from the sidelines.

Religion generally and Christianity in particular tries to claim social progress and morality is due to its own work when in fact it's the other way around.

We didn't stop unbroken centuries of slavery and burning witches due to some sort of religious enlightenment but because people decided it was no longer desirable and religion fell into line, although there are many sects who resist. Morality doesn't magically come from "on high" but from the mood and circumstances of the population at any time and is constantly changing.

When it comes to committing atrocities or evil behaviour generally, religion is seldom used as the reason but usually as an excuse and that's where the danger of establishing a theocratic state (as the fundies want) lies.

rache, your views are certainly unfounded annd rash. Abortion is a human evil denying human responsibility to the unborn and the worship of sex as the god of humanity. Currently you can buy aborted human body parts in America from the Planned Parenthood. These practises are pactised by atheists not Christians. Christians care about their children.

Josephus,

You may think that Christians are exempt from evil
deeds. However, history tells us differently.

Look at the Inquisition, the Crusaders, and other
examples, who killed and murdered in the name of
Christianity. After all as humans we all have the
good and the bad within us. And we are or should
not be in any position to judge others. That
should be left to a higher authority.

Foxy, rache's claim "The religious anti-abortion stance ONLY STARTED in the 70s as a way to unify and politicise church members in order for the fundies make their move into direct government representation rather than work from the sidelines." is FALSE

Abortion became legal in the 1970's and the Church objected to it as it has done since it's beginnings [see Germanies sacrifice of children and the coin in the winter pudding] and Israel before that [read of sacrifice of children to Molech Lev 18 - 20]. The Church has always preached chastity before Marriage and loyalty and responsibility within marriage. America is yet to face its downfall as it has no conscience or morality.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/03/catholic-priest-goes-off-joe-biden-viral-rant-video/

http://www.lifenews.com/2020/10/19/catholic-priest-denounces-joe-biden-he-is-unabashedly-pro-abortion/

Dear GrahamY,

Yes that someone is me. Funny.

Given that my wider family contains Pentecostals of a few different stripes, and given the last big family gathering over 100 (pre covid) contained 2/3rds Pentecostals, I think I have a fair idea of the thinking of many of them.

If you to go up to a Hillsong version believer and ask if they consider Catholics to be proper Christians the answer is usually very guarded and if you really bore down you will often get them to admit that no, they do not consider Catholics as true Christians. This is despite the pronouncements of its leader Houston.

Former GOP front runner Michelle Bachmann was part of a church which held:

"Doctrinal Statement on the Antichrist": 
“Since Scripture teaches that the Antichrist would be revealed and gives the marks by which the Antichrist is to be recognized, and since this prophecy has been clearly fulfilled in the history and development of the Roman Papacy, it is Scripture which reveals that the Papacy is the Antichrist.”
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/07/michele-bachmanns-church-says-the-pope-is-the-antichrist/241909/

Trump supporter and State representative was quite forthcoming “"The Pope is the anti-Christ.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/pope-francis-anti-christ-219614

The problem is that someone like Trump, who incidentally oozes anti-Christ qualities, was being supported by these hardcore evangelistic Pentecostals in particular. So no they are not nice people.

And for the record, Pentecostals do not really believe in the inerrency of the Bible, only their version of it.

Finally on the face of it they are lovely people as I can attest having spent many a bible study meeting with them, but I know how dark their hearts can be and it is quite frightening.

I find Penticostals are like most people in society with all sorts of beliefs, however there are Penticostal Churches with leaders more influencial than others. The range of opinion of our ONLINE OPINION posters would be similar to persons attending Penticostal Churches. Some with radical opinions, educated opinions, and run of the mill uncommitted opinions all attending. I can say most have a closed view of scripture, which I differ with. However i would be more concerned with JW's as they are exclusive and divide families.

Dear Steele,

I think that very few of us really know many
religious nutters. I've met a few in
the past but I tend to walk away from them.
I find it too disturbing when their unqualified
assertions, falsehoods, and sweeping generalizations
are expressed. Religion should not be perverted,
corrupted, or overtaken by fanaticism or extremism.
Unfortunately it does happen.

We have had examples of anti-abortion violence here in
Melbourne when a man wanted to burn a
clinic down and everyone in it. We've had the Holocaust,
the Ku Klux Clan, Anders Breivik, the Christ Church Mosque
shooting, and many others.

We should be able to live peacefully on this planet that
we all share.

Did anyone watch '60 Minutes' and its piece on the 'Hillsong Church'? Given what was revealed, its not a church but an insidious phony money grabbing organisation. I can say now, its the "church" that our granddaughter is involved with. I hope she wakes up one day and sees the organisation for what it is.

Dear Paul,

I did watch 60 Minutes last night and I found
it very disturbing to say the least. I would
like to see a response from the Church and an
explanation.

I would like to hear what they have
to say and how they can excuse the sexual abuse
that happened and why their students and church
members were not protected from predators within
their ranks. Why the Church did nothing and tried
to cover up the abuse.

Hi Foxy,

Typical church doctrine, cover up, say nothing, protect the guilty. Sounds familiar, Catholic Church, JW's, now this mob, phony as a 3 dollar bill. Look at Morrison and the mob he's in with, spin is their middle name.

Abortion was nationally decriminalised in the USA in 1973 but was already legal in several States.

It was certainly not "an issue" to the wider church until the late 70's and even people like Billy Graham were on the side of freedom of choice and if you care to delve into the historical background of various christian movements it was indeed chosen as a deliberate political strategy at the time, despite any warm and cuddly or Disney-fied delusions to the contrary.
Previous ways of presenting a united campaign front such as "creation science" had fallen flat.

Now abortion is little more than a tool where the "right to life" ends at birth and from that point the church walks away from all responsibility for the possible outcomes they may have inflicted on the lives of complete strangers and in all circumstances.

Considering that the Christian churches in total represent at some level about 2bn people, that there will be some bad apples is inevitable. Most of the atrocities weren't committed by Christian fundamentalists but by white supremacists.

Christians are also by far the greatest supporters of charities compared to most other religions incl atheists.

The greens with their conga line of paedophiles thieves etc should be ashamed of themselves.

Shadow Minister said - Most of the atrocities weren't committed by Christian fundamentalists but by white supremacists.

Answer- It's interesting that some would like to say that people that are against too much immigration- are the same as people that drag other ethnicities or ideologies behind cars- or people that engage in mass ethnic cleansing- are all supremacists. Though some that engage in ethnic or ideological cleansing seem to believe in "get them before they get you". Perhaps ethnic and ideological cleansing is more common and with more ethnic and ideological groups than is commonly attributed. This would imply that perhaps we should stay on our own side of the fence. But some such as the industrialists want to use these disparate sources of human resources in one monolithic machine- addicted and chained to perpetual growth- Taylor style- ironically Taylor had some good points.

But there are too many people in the world.

You can only look after things in your own sphere- but when other spheres are forced upon you- you can only expect chaos.

Some prefer it- beware of these people.

In the US ethnic tensions have been linked to "slavery".

Interestingly

The classic Gone With The Wind depicts that in the 1860s Afro-American's ransacked White homes in The South after the Civil War.

http://slate.com/human-interest/2018/02/what-reconstruction-and-its-end-meant-for-black-americans-who-had-fought-for-the-right-to-keep-and-bear-arms.html

Some have claimed that this led to the KKK movement of the early to mid 1900's.

There are claims that western countries are responsible for the slave trade but my understanding is that the net of responsibility is somewhat broader. In fact in some cases white ethnicities were also enslaved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Africa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_slavery

When it comes to atrocities the history of most religions are in soaked in blood.

People blame the Holocaust entirely on Hitler but the killings were done by average people, not to mention those in various European countries who eagerly turned in their Jewish neighbours. Various other countries also turned away boatloads of Jewish refugees so Hitler didn't stand alone.

Since then the attempted ethnic cleansing in Rwanda saw many members of the Catholic clergy gaoled for condoning and participating in the slaughter by turning in those who sought refuge in their churches and actively supporting the Hutu.

Then there was the attempted ethnic cleansing of Muslims in in Srebrenica and the more recent events in Myanmar against the Rohingya by Buddhists.

911 is also the 164th anniversary of the Mountain Meadows Massacre which saw the mass murder of about 120 men,women and children over 7 by Mormons.

The treatment of almost all indigenous populations in all countries by occupying forces include atrocities and not just in Western civilisation.

The current backlash against the BLM movement has been distorted from a clumsy attempt at a recognition for equality into some sort of conspiracy that somehow threatens everybody.
Somehow the ruling majority always portrays itself as the victim and in the background, extremists are always fanning the flames of discontent. That's how politics feeds and justifies itself, especially on the Right and by Fundamentalists who definitely have an agenda.

That's just a few examples but not all the people involved in such events can be classed as extremists.

Thankfully there are many (hopefully enough) who resist but ordinary people can easily be made to do extreme things.

There is no justification for an organisation like the Ku Klux Klan, although some racists whites will attempt to justify its existence as necessary to protect white Christians and their values from the decadent inferior black mass, and others who they believe are attempting to take over white society.

rache and Paul, what a lot of racist nonsense. We ought to be building a unified society and you guys are identifying whiteness as the world's problem. Listen to Jacinta Price on race theory, you ought to be colour blind and encourage a unified society rather than amplify hate of white skin.

Proud Boy Jose'

Would you like to give your justification for the KKK. The KKK is not racists and comprised of haters in your opinion? The organisation cloaks itself in Christianity, with a belief it represents the value of white Christians. In fact its symbol is the burning cross.

Yes it's interesting that the Communists usually frame or oversimplify things in terms of Class Warfare. The Capitalist or Monarchist Elite vs the Masses. Remember Marx from memory talking about the different ages of society. James Burnham said that Communism wasn't inevitable despite the Communist/ Socialist/ Social Democrat claims.

Jordan Peterson says values create hierarchy create inequality and elites- based on this argument class warfare will always occur.

However a shareholder in a company can still make money even though the Chairman and CEO have more power within the company- a shareholder also has to do less work- so he has more time to do other things- such as spend time with the family.

Some say that Yoko Ono split the Beatles due to the Communist influences in Japan after WWII and their views about racist wars. My understanding perhaps incorrect is that Japanese involvement in WWII was an extension of the Sino-Japanese War. So in a sense one racist war was stopped by another racist war- perhaps the Communist archetypism of the racist war is contrived to fit their ideology or projection.

As with many principles there are often the strong and weak forms- something perhaps lost on ideologues. This also applies to aggression. Perhaps also Communists advocate non-aggression to opposition forces for the purpose of strategic advantage.

George Hageman is probably nominal communist but has created an interesting blog of military history including a two part essay on the Philosophy's of War.

Mao considered war and violence as an extension of politics- seemingly from a "war is necessary" perspective. He believed that the killing of 10's of millions in China was a necessary process to create Communist equality- and those killed were misguided souls that he was leading to the holy light of Communism.

That is not to say that war or conflict can always be avoided or should be.

I'm not sure that it is very objective to label someone as an extremist- seemingly reflect the views of the commentator- in this case someone with Communist principles. Communists would see most of the population as extremist.

Paul, you have no ideas of a unified society, by presuming I support division by skin colour. Those that identify skin colure are racist, instead of by character. Unless you are Michael Jackson you cannot change your skin colour, but you can certainly change your behaviours. Read the code of Hammarabbi and you will find racist wars fought on the colour of skin. We are a mixed society where the racists still want to fight wars on skin colour instead of believing we are all one human family.

Communists are supposedly atheists and between China and Russia, the body count of countrymen killed nears 100 million.

It seems the Mao Communists in China were just as bloodthirsty as the Chin Dynasty the first Emperor of China. Xi now has more power than Deng.

Added to the millions killed by the Communists, is another 100 million killed by the Capitalists powers you then have 200 million killed, plus millions more killed by those with no real ideology except greed and power. A sad world indeed.

Proud Boy Jose'

You avoid any comment on the Ku Klux Klan, why is that? Could it be they are people of your ilk.

Pauliar,

These 100m people killed were people killed by their own communist governments in just the USSR and China.

As for the 100m killed by Capitalist powers coming from you is once again a lie plucked from your backside as usual.

Posted by Paul1405- "Proud Boy Jose' You avoid any comment on the Ku Klux Klan, why is that? Could it be they are people of your ilk."

Answer- Good on you Yoko

Next level.

"Be not deceived dear friends, at the growing multitudes that follow him on the internet and in person, for there is great cause for concern as you will see in this video that will clearly be revealed of the wrong judgment and heretical doctrines that proceeds from the mouth of Martyn Iles and the movement of the Australian Christian Lobby."

http://www.thecompromisedchristianityofacl.com/burdens/martyn-iles/

SHONKYSINISTER,

Do you know, every American President from George Washington to Joe Biden, that's 46 men, during their reign of terror (time in office), has been responsible for the deaths of millions of innocent people. Everyone from Native Americans, Blacks, Asians, Mexicans, Arabs, even white people such as Spanish, British, other Americans etc. Some of the biggest mass murders and war criminals include Truman, Johnson and Nixon in recent times, previously there was Jackson and Lincoln along with all others. Some put the figure at over 150 million, what's your number?

Steel R, The videoes you gave have no authentic foundation in truth just the speakers impressions from his point of view. He hates denominations which could define him as J Witness or Mormon who hate denominations. Steel I would think that you would not accept this fellows views either. Just an opportunity to knock Martyn Iles who holds an audicence because he represents values closer to the Scripture that make for a wholesome society.

So you hold to the values presented in the videoes? It a laugh!

Dear Josephus,

Mate you really are descending into gibberish nowadays.

Of course I don't subscribe to these views nor those of the ACL. I have more morals than that I hope.

However your dismissal of these people is more than a little disingenuous.

This lady presents her “Testimony of a Formerly Devout Member of the ACL” and it is pretty well spelt out.

http://www.thecompromisedchristianityofacl.com/burdens/acl/

Why isn't she the one who has seen the true light?

Steel R, It is a pity you do not accept her testimony, she is a puritan similar from a background that I came from. However she has been taught to have no contact with unrighteousness, which many of the denominations condone idolitary and other sins. However Martyn Ilise is a prophet across denominations standing for issues; she is a puritan for her own life.

Dear Josephus,

Oh but I do accept her testimony and her reflections of the actions of the ACL principally because she was on all accounts deeply embedded within the organisation.

Her reading of the Bible has it plainly stating that homosexuality is a sin regardless of whether it is acted upon.

Iles takes a different position, that homosexuality is not a sin. This woman claims this is incorrect from a biblical view and in this instance rightly calls him out, something I have no disagreement with.

Your Puritan guff is a deflection. So I ask again: "Why isn't she the one who has seen the true light?"

Steel R, She has an extreme puritan view, not even to mix with persons like Catholics who worship the virgin and pray to saints, which I also agree with her on. However I do mix with persons of diverse theological beliefs as does Martyn, but agreed on moral issues.

Even in her group there are persons that have liberal views and will watch TV and vote in politics, if not dobbed in to the elders. A view that upholds "Come ye out from among them and be ye seperate Saith the Lord". Which sounds like Exclusive Brethren that do not listen to radio, watch TV, visit Clubs and Pubs or are involved in sport. All very puritan values, and I'm sure you you would not value these views. The Exclusive Brethren are usually very wealthy and contribute to ACL and other Christian lobby groups, of which I have also been in.

Dear Josephus,

Oh dear, it seems you need to be asked a black and white question if we are to have any semblance of an answer.

How about this.

Is homosexuality itself deemed a sin within the bible and if it is why isn't it this woman who speaks the truth on this particular issue not Iles?

Steel R, She sees the person who has a desire for same sex attraction as the sinner, Martyn see the person who engages in same sex relationships as the sinner. However homosexual thoughts are not the only sins identified by both, as harbouring hate in the heart toward another is equal to actually murdering the person. She sees the temptation as equal to the sin, but in a real world we are all tempted by somthing but we do not act upon it. However we need to seek cleansing of heart and mind otherwise it can develop into action of sin. She is looking at her personal life, Martyn is looking at society.

Dear Josephus,

I'm not sure I could have been much clearer with my question and still you haven't it. How about having a crack mate.

Steele R I see your comprehension skills are poor as I have answered three times and you cannot get it. Both points of view are correct, learn the context.

Dear Josephus,

Lol.

Mate are you really going to try a type of trinity answer to a simple question?

Again: "Is homosexuality itself deemed a sin within the bible?"

I'm not asking what you deem their perspective are but what is yours? It really couldn't be more simple.

Jesus was gay!

Paul, is that why he had women as close friends, whose home he visited regularly?

Steele R, In my personal life I have no thoughts or desires for sex with other men or boys, if I did that would be a need for repentance - A SIN. However I often am tempted to admire a beautiful woman, for which I must seek a boundary and be able to admire without lust after her. Lust is SIN. Learn how SIN is defined in the teaching of Jesus - what you are harbouring in your mind and desires that are not blessing others is SIN.

Hi Jose'

My gay friends visit female homes also, but they are still gay. I sus a bit of lust there Jose' on your part. What's the go on masturbation? Is it a sin? The Pope said "Stop it or you will go blind!" There were lots of blind Popes.

Paul, learn what sexual purity is, as Jesus taught, learn to love without lust. People married younger during the time of Jesus and the marriage relationship provided for sex. However there was strong adultery laws in place.

So far you have not identified the danger in evangelical Christianity.

So far American atheist Planned Parenhood has taken the lives of 4 million babies mainly from young African American young women. One Thousand each day since Roe V Wade and full term human fetesus being sold to companies for experimentation.

The danger we have in society is not true christianity; it is blatent unrestrained atheism.

Hi Jose'

Anyone who tries to impose their ways through intolerant fanaticism is a danger, be it political or religious. I find the majority of Christians benign not evil in their beliefs, but holding to a faith in a God that is theirs personally. The religious coming together in fellowship with the like minded is reasonable and of no concern to me. Its only a small minority that go beyond the boundaries of fellowship and into the wider community preaching a message of hate and intolerance that should be of concern to us all.

On abortion, I have a view that is not the one held by most of the progressive left, but its also not the intractable view that is held by hard right conservative Christians, there is a middle ground to this complex issue, and that's where my view lies. I believe abortion to be a last resort when no alternative option is available in the interest of the mother and unborn child. If inconvenience is the only consideration then I don't agree with "abortion on demand" as such.

Dear Josephus,

While hardly a direct answer I take it from what you have written that you believe Katherine Sester is correct in taking the position that homosexuality is a sin in and of its self.

This is at odds with what Iles is putting. Therefore there is a case to be stating as they do that:

"While on the surface level appearance, it would seem as though this is a godly movement that is taking righteous stands against sin in a heathen nation. However, if you have a tender conscience towards the Word of God, as you take a much closer look you will soon see that this movement is riddled with many utterly detestable abominations in the sight of a Holy God; it is "bringing together" many very heretical and wicked denominations that God is NOT seeking to bring together (2 Cor. 6:14-18)! This movement, which is being headed up by Martyn Iles as the main spokesperson is very ecumenical, bringing together Catholics, The Orthodox Church, and many other very heretical and ungodly supposed "Christian denominations" to try to promote Christian morality in the public sphere... But dear reader, this is being done IN THE FLESH (2 Cor. 10:3-6)! These are scripturally forbidden idolatrous yokings and alliances that the Lord Jesus Christ CANNOT BLESS (Eph. 5:11-14)!"

www.thecompromisedchristianityofacl.com

Why then are you so determined to yoke yourself to the ACL when there appear to be greater seekers of the 'truth' out there?

Steele R, In my personal life I to am a puritan, but I have a social life that i might join in with friends at dinner at the local Club, of which I am a member. I do not join in the gambolling, alcohol or any of the shows that are smutty.

I live in a retirement over 55 village where we have our own licenced resturant. I do not drink alcohol, but use the bar for n/a drinks with friends. There are residents that mix at the Club house whom I speak too but I cannot consider them my friends, though there are others here in the village who are retired pastors, whom I consider friends.

I as a puritan live in the World but do not hold the same values as the world including some persons calling themselves Christian. Though the tide of public opinion is changing - currently only the radical left is heard; but the critical thinking are awake to a moral conscience that humanity is in a pit of evil - murder and violence is considered entertainment.

Kudos Josephus.