Tag Archives: “Christian” Left

Faux-lifers and loving your neighbor

One of the easiest ways to out faux-lifers (that is, pro-abortion people who pretend to be pro-life) is to keep them talking.  They often claim the name of Christ and that they love their neighbors.  They ever-so-briefly concede the humanity of the child and say how they would never have an abortion and wish they didn’t have to happen.

But they quickly forget about their neighbor in the womb and launch into tortured rationalizations about why they vote for politicians and support groups like Planned Parenthood that fight for unrestricted abortions to the child’s first breath.  They use every sound bite that the professional pro-aborts use.

So just ask them this: If you were in the womb, would you want someone to protect you from being crushed and dismembered?  And if you were going to be destroyed that way, would you at least want to be given anesthetic first?  After all, the faux-lifers fight to keep abortion legal to the child’s first breath and without anesthetic (they know that laws requiring anesthetics would remind people that the children do suffer when being killed, and they must prop up the lie that the children aren’t “really” living until their first breath).

The pro-aborts will squirm and go through all sorts of mental gymnastics to rationalize their inconsistency.  They’ll realize their reasoning is poor, so they’ll resort to attacking you instead. But just keep pointing back to their neighbor in the womb.  If they truly love their neighbors, how can they not try to protect their lives?

I also keep this jpg file handy to share with those who repeat the pro-abortion canard that pro-lifers don’t care about children after they are born.  I find that to be the #1 pro-abortion argument on the Internet.  It lets the pro-aborts pretend to kinda-sorta oppose abortion while attacking the character of pro-lifers.  There are nine things wrong with their sound bite.  Actually more, but the font was getting too small.  Feel free to use without attribution!

Advertisements

The “Christian” Left can’t make it past the first chapter of the New Testament without rejecting essential doctrines

I say that without exaggeration.  If you were reading a book that claimed to be the word of God and the explanation for this life and for eternity and for how to be on right terms with God, yet you completely rejected two of the religion’s foundational premises in the very first chapter, wouldn’t you just give it up and find another religion?  Not the “Christian” Left.  Consider these simple passages, clearly not written as illustrations but as specific truth claims (they immediately follow the genealogy of Jesus so it would be a non sequitur to shift genres).

Matthew 1 18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. 19 And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. 20 But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

So we have two claims that the father is not human but that the conception was from the Holy Spirit.  The Left’s opposition to the virgin birth isn’t some side issue, because it goes to Jesus’ claims of deity that they typically deny.  Wolves like Mark Sandlin explicitly deny his divinity.

Then there is Jesus’ purpose for entering his creation.

21 She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” 22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet:

23  “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son,

and they shall call his name Immanuel”

(which means, God with us). 24 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, 25 but knew her not until she had given birth to a son. And he called his name Jesus.

So Jesus’ purpose was explicitly stated: To save his people from their sins.  Yes, He came for other reasons, but the opening of this Gospel focused on the main reason.  Also note the additional claim to the virgin birth.

Of course, the more you read the Bible, the worse it gets.  The “Christian” Left thinks they like the Sermon on the Mount, but they’d hate it if they understood it.  They only agree with a few parts of it because they get them wrong.

Run, don’t walk, from the “Christian” Left.  Their beliefs are indistinguishable from the world’s.

Good news for fornicators! “Christian” Left pastor says it is only a sin if you were “called” to celibacy.

I am not making this up.  “Christian” Leftist reverend Stacey Midge posted this on Twitter:

Isn’t that convenient?  If you aren’t “called” to obey God’s commands then they are optional.  And better yet, guess who decides what that vague “calling” really is and whether or not you’ve received it?  You do!  This just keeps getting better for sinners.

Of course that’s the “good news” the average person wants to hear: Just keep sinning!  No need to change!  And the “Christian” Left preaches that all day, every day — even as they are claiming that you can’t understand anything clearly in the Bible (because apparently the Holy Spirit wasn’t involved . . .).

Of course she couldn’t answer the simplest questions about this, such as how she knows that about God or whether she tells her congregation each week how she is just making stuff up (because the Bible isn’t clear enough for her to interpret it for you).

She also couldn’t provide examples of where she tries to silence “Christian” Leftists who think the Bible is plenty clear when justifying abortion to the child’s 1st breath, or advocating for socialism, open borders, LGBTQX perversions, etc.

I used to feel sorry for people in “Christian” Left churches, but anyone follow this lady obviously loves the world more than God.

Run, don’t walk, from the “Christian” Left.  Repent and believe in the true Jesus.

A dialog with a professional child-killer

I’ve taught pro-life reasoning for over 10 years and debated countless people online, but had never dialogued directly with an abortionist until now.  Professional child-killer Willie Parker is not just an abortionist, which would be bad enough, but he claims to be a Christian and that his work is for the Lord.  As an introduction, this Newsweek interview with him has the usual pro-abort rationalizations.

  • He thinks of himself as heroic by aborting the child of an incest victim, as if killing her child solved her problems.  The abortion industry routinely protects sex traffickers, rapists and those who commit incest.  Not only does killing the child not undo the crimes, these abortionists send the victims back to their abusers!
  • He refers to “reproductive justice,” but that’s when you don’t kill the child who has already been reproduced.
  • He says he won’t do abortions for those who express race or gender differences, yet he simultaneous claims that those he kills aren’t people yet.
  • He claims to be a Christian yet says the Bible supports sexism – i.e., he admits to disagreeing with the Bible.
  • He spouts gibberish like this, which of course would justify anything anyone would ever do: “If God is in everything, and everyone, then God is as much in the woman making a decision to terminate a pregnancy as in her Bible.”
  • He says women will do unsafe abortions if he doesn’t do them, ignoring that many women do unsafe abortions even when legal, that making them legal increases abortion rates, and that one is never obligated to make it safer for someone to have her child killed.
  • He gladly performs abortions like these: “women in poverty and women of color. He has seen patients from a recently divorced mother of three, with a 1-year-old at home, to a 21-year-old middle-distance runner trying to trim seconds off her 800-meter time to qualify for the Rio Olympics.”
  • In the Newsweek article he denied that life began at conception, but he admitted it during the Twitter exchange.

So that’s a little about Willie.  Someone reTweeted him so I commented and he actually responded.  A few of the comments and my replies (multiple Tweets sometimes combined into one):

Dr. Willie Parker‏ — As someone who provides abortions and who witnesses the relief and gratitude of women who obtain them safely, I could say, TOLD YOU SO!, but gloating is overrated. Abortion doesn’t cause depression, but pro-birth zealots sure do. [There was a link to an article alleging that many women don’t feel guilty about having abortions.]

Note how he calls us zealots, yet later whines about alleged name-calling on my part for my precision in calling him a child-killer.  I choose my words carefully.  Some call the unborn babies, and I know why.  But it lets pro-aborts say that isn’t the correct term.  They still try that when I say children, but then I point them to the dictionary.  Same thing when they deny personhood.

eMatters‏ — Whether your conscience is so thoroughly seared that you don’t regret killing your children is irrelevant. It will always be morally wrong.

My reply was actually about whether the mothers felt guilty, but he took it personally.

Dr. Willie Parker‏ — My critics are many. Occasionally, I reply to make a point, like fetuses aren’t people, women are. My reply: If the world were as simple as you think it is, you’d be right. But since it isn’t & since I’ve never killed a child, you didn’t make a point, you stated the obvious.

eMatters‏ — You are wildly ignorant of science. Check any embryology textbook: A new human being is created at fertilization. Must have been too busy learning to kill at school What else would two humans create?! http://www.abort73.com/abortion/medical_testimony/   And see http://dictionary.com . You kill CHILDREN.  Oh, and the seared conscience comment applies to the MOTHERS as well. They should feel guilty for paying you to kill their children, but whether their consciences are seared is irrelevant. I meet lots of unrepentant murderers doing prison ministry. They were still wrong.

Dr. Willie Parker‏ –Insults don’t make your point. Fetuses are human beings, because women don’t give birth to puppies, but to be a human being is not the same as being a person. In my “scientific ignorance” I know the difference between a frog & a tadpole, and an acorn & an oak tree. Do you?

eMatters‏ –Yes, you are ignorant of science. And vocabulary. Once again, the nice folks at http://dictionary.com  can help you out: Person: a human being, whether an adult or child: a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing.  So your anti-science word games fail you again. You kill human children for a living. That’s sick.  Surely you know the logical fallacies with your acorn / oak tree illustration, right?  https://apologiabyhendrikvanderbreggen.blogspot.com/2008/10/acorns-and-oak-treesand-abortion.html

Dr. Willie Parker‏ — Women die during childbirth, but we don’t outlaw childbirth. Check any person who delivers babies.

eMatters‏ — Gracious of you, as a professional child killer, to put these fallacious sound bites out there for all to see. You’re the pro and that’s all you’ve got? Willie says women can die during childbirth, therefore it is OK to kill children to their 1st breath. Non sequitur much?  Conflating death by natural causes vs. actively killing them? Such great pro-abort logic. Most people can see the difference: A. Human being dies of natural causes (inside or outside the womb) B. Human being is deliberately killed by a 3rd party (inside or outside the womb)  The fetus in question is a human being at a particular stage of development: Human embryo ==> human fetus ==> human baby ==> human toddler ==> etc. Always human and always worthy of protection.

Dr. Willie Parker‏ — Developmentally your argument is that human conceptions are persons throughout: fetuses are babies are toddlers are college graduates. Embryo and fetus are scientific terms, baby and toddler are not. How deftly you switch from science to culture, key for embracing pseudoscience.

eMatters‏ — That’s completely false. Why do you feel the need to deceive like that? I couldn’t have been more clear. It is a human fetus. Human embryo ==> human fetus ==> human baby ==> human toddler ==> etc. Same human being at different stages of development.

Dr. Willie Parker‏ — Given that your thinking is linear, your arguments circular and legalistic, and your reference materials are Webster’s dictionary and live action news, you get to have the last word, insults and all. I’ll keep honoring women’s decisions, and you can judge them and call me names.

eMatters‏ — Yeah, referring to dictionary definitions and medical textbook citations for the specific words being debated is legalistic. 🙂 Pretty lame dodge, Willie. Live Action was just quoting PP. Your attack is an example of the genetic fallacy.  If I call you a professional child killer, I am being very precise. You get paid, and by medical and standard dictionary definitions, you kill human children. Killing the children when mothers pay you is a peculiar way to honor them.  And you never demonstrated any circular logic. I just pointed to scientific facts: Every fetus you have killed was a human being at a particular stage of development. You tried to weasel word you way out by calling them [non-] persons, then I showed how you were wrong.  I hope you repent and believe someday – and soon, before you kill too many more children. We are all sinners in need of a Savior. If you don’t, you’ll have eternity to be punished for your countless crimes against God.

And it was just as creepy seeing all his fans calling him a hero and such for being so caring.

P.S. And of course, I got the usual pro-aborts chiming in with fallacies about how we don’t help the poor after they are born.  I usually post this when I get those comments.  

 

 

 

 

Another blasphemous book by Rachel Held Evans

Mrs. Evans has made a career out of being an “ex-evangelical.” (sort of like Bart Ehrman, except he’s a bit more honest than her).  She mocks the word of God for profit and once again insists that the Bible’s authors were blasphemous liars and that the text did not turn out as God wanted it to.  After all, if the Holy Spirit had been involved then she wouldn’t have to edit it.

The world loves her messages because she poses as a Christian who tells them just what they want to hear, namely that the Bible is a silly book that they do not need to read or take seriously.  And of course she fights for legalized abortion to the child’s 1st breath (and without anesthetic, of course, because compassion), is wildly pro-LGBTQX, etc.  Her primary self-description is “doubt-filled believer,” but she has no doubts that her conscience trumps (heh) the Bible and that Jesus agrees with all of her Leftist politics.  This is the “Christian” who demands that her conscience be the guide as to what is really from God.

Here’s a sample from her latest book.

Got that?  Your conscience is God, and it sits in judgment of the Bible.  What could go wrong?  It is classic “Christian” Left rationalizing and creating a god in her own image. The real Jesus doesn’t fit her sensibilities, so He must be wrong. Uh, sure.

Her followers will think it is so poetic blah blah blah but it is the same old rebellion.  She can’t possibly see how God just might understand something better than her.

Isaiah 55:8–9 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Also see the end of Job. Did he get to understand everything about God’s ways?  (Ironically, she appeals to the story of Job for why she gets to demand answers from God.  Did she read the beginning or ending of Job?  Not sure that will turn out for her like she planned . . .)

She blasphemously claims the following:

It [the Bible] fails massively at getting to the point.

That is spoken like a non-Christian. Here’s a simple example: The Bible teaches over 100 times that Jesus is the only way to salvation (it isn’t just John 14:6, though that would be enough). What could be more clear? But a spiritually blind wolf like Evans can’t see that — and obviously doesn’t believe it.

And she is wildly pro-LGBTQX perversions, even though the Bible couldn’t be more clear and consistent about God’s views on sex.  Consider the following truths and how Evans’ perversion-affirming god teaches the opposite:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referencing God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

Even two out of three types of pro–gay theologians* concede those points, yet the “doubt-filled” Evans has zero doubts about affirming every sexual perversion in the LTBTQX spectrum.

And note how she insists that her sitting in judgment of the Bible is what it truly prescribes, as if we should all trust our consciences.

Matthew 15:19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander.

Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?

Here’s more:

Non-Christian Mrs. Evans quotes non-Christian Thomas Paine to attack the Bible. Seems about right.  No, wait, at least Paine was honest about his beliefs. I’d take Richard Dawkins over Evans any day – at least you know where he really stands.

This isn’t a nuanced debate on a meaning of a Hebrew word. We all agree that the text says God said to clear out the Promised Land, among other things. But Evans’ sleight of hand is to conflate her conscientious objections with the fact that there are some legitimate debates on some Bible passages.  But the net of it is that she claims those are blasphemous lies that don’t belong in the text.  And we aren’t talking about a couple verses, but literally many hundreds of verses tied to the prediction, execution and references back to the taking of the Promised Land.

So once again Mrs. Evans claims that the Holy Spirit did not inspire the writings and that the human authors were blasphemous liars. That’s her prerogative. We even have a precise theological term for people like her: Non-Christian.

Jesus affirmed the Old Testament and authorized the New Testament. You can agree with him or with Mrs. Evans and the “Christian” Left. Choose carefully.

Mrs. Evans et al are such transparent wolves.  They must have gotten too warm, because they took off the sheep’s clothing long ago.  Their followers are getting what they deserve.

At least that’s why my God-given conscience tells me, so I must be right!


*Pro-gay theology tends to fall into one of three categories. They are all wrong, but for varying reasons. Sometimes they overlap categories.

  1. The Bible is either not the Word of God, or most parts of it aren’t. This view claims that we can ignore the prohibitions against homosexual behavior because they were written by homophobic Jews.
  2. The Bible is the Word of God, but it doesn’t really say homosexual behavior is wrong. This view holds that people just aren’t reading the Bible properly, and that God’s Word is actually affirming of gay relationships.
  3. The Bible is the Word of God and does clearly and emphatically describe gay behavior as sinful. However, the Holy Spirit has given additional revelations such that this behavior is now acceptable. This view holds that God has changed his mind on this moral issue and not only is it now acceptable, but it is sinful if you don’t affirm this behavior and same-sex relationships.

Fact: Illegal aliens steal jobs and suppress the wages of remaining jobs

And they destroy the communities they are poured into — which, of course, aren’t the communities of the elitist virtue-signaling whites who push for open borders.

The title is such a Captain Obvious kind of economic statement, founded on the simple and timeless impact of the law of supply and demand, that it should go without saying.  But because Leftists literally fail at basic economic concepts and throw low economic status minorities under the bus to pander to illegal aliens,  it needs to be repeated over and over.

The Left pretends that the only jobs that illegal aliens take are those of picking crops and such (as if that would justify them breaking the law).  But here’s a recent example that I heard about in detail from an accounting executive of a company in the U.S. (I’m not being overly specific here because of confidentiality issues).

  • A couple hundred illegal aliens who performed semi-skilled labor walked off the job at a U.S.  manufacturing company because they heard that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was going to do a raid.  (It wasn’t clear whether the company knew they were illegal aliens or not.)
  • The company was understandably desperate to fulfill their customer orders, so they went to the market to replace the employees.  When they did so they realized that they had to pay fifty percent more in wages.  Fifty percent!
  • The remaining employees who were citizens got a huge raise.
  • The new employees got market wages.
  • These jobs were ideal for those without college educations or formal training.  They require some skill, but it can be learned on the job.

Simple and valuable lessons:

  • Illegal aliens took jobs of U.S. citizens, because they were willing to work for so much less.
  • Illegal aliens significantly suppressed the wages of the remaining jobs, because they were willing to work for so much less.
  • Law enforcement works!  What a concept, eh?  We still need a wall and/or much better border control, like any sane country would have.  But in the mean time merely enforcing some of our existing laws has a huge benefit for our citizens.  If companies know they’ll get caught and fined they won’t hire illegal alien labor to begin with.  And the honest companies won’t be at a competitive disadvantage for doing the right thing.
  • Getting citizens off unemployment / welfare reduces the burden on society and has more people paying into the system.
  • The Left — including the “Christian” Left — pretends to care about low income blacks while acting against their best interests 24×7.  They pander to illegals to get votes so they can stay in power and reap the benefits of crony capitalism, but that means the low income minorities stay on the Democrats’ plantation.
  • Obama & Co. pretended to care about blacks, but what did they have to show for it after 8 years besides higher unemployment, destroyed towns like Ferguson and the worst race relations in half a century?  The Left has to constantly play the race card on Trump because he is actually helping blacks get jobs.
  • This doesn’t even include the huge tax burden of millions of illegal aliens consuming educational, welfare and other resources.
  • It doesn’t include how many jobs are now unattainable for blacks because they require bi-lingual skills.
  • When the “Christian” Left tries to claim that Jesus was an illegal alien, remind them that their claim is historically false, we don’t live in an Israelite theocracy, and people who repeat that nonsense to promote open borders just for the U.S. are some combination of ignorance, malice and treason.

The working poor – which have a disproportionate amount of minorities – are already benefiting by the reduction of illegal aliens entering the country.

And, ironically, they have President Trump to thank for it.

Want to help race relations? Get involved in prison or pregnancy center ministries.

                  

Race had nothing to do with why I got involved in those ministries.  I’ll share the Gospel with anyone, whether you are a black convicted murderer or the best-behaved white pagan in the free world.  And I want to help save unborn children from murder regardless of their skin color.

But the nature of these ministries is such that it is mostly whites serving mostly minorities.  And as a fantastic by-product of sharing the love and truth of Christ with these folks it does marvelous things for race relations.  It pushes a giant reset button on those who have been wounded because of their race and/or steeped in their own racism.

It has changed countless prison environments, where skinheads and Black Panther-types have become friends and led their respective gangs to change.

I’ve seen countless inmates and even volunteers note how the ministries radically changed how they view others, and how they repented of their racism.

Here’s the story of a guy I know from prison ministry who was in the Aryan Brotherhood.   I saw him in action many times as a leader of the Christian groups inside prison and in the ways he is giving back now that he’s out of prison.  Let’s just say that he wasn’t transformed by the power of virtue-signaling social media posts.   

I realize that the race-baiting professionals of the Left — including the “Christian” Left — want to improve race relations as much as McDonald’s wants to sell less hamburgers.  If your movement demands tax-funded abortions to the child’s 1st breath that kill blacks at a rate three times that of whites and Hispanics at twice the rate, then you’ll have a tough time convincing me you really care about them.  But authentic Christians really do want to see improvements.   And ministries like these make it happen.

It is remarkably safe to say “Nazis are bad!” on Facebook in 2017 in the U.S.  If you really want to do something about race relations — and more importantly, the Gospel — try something more substantial.  Look into your local pregnancy resource center or prison ministries, or anything similar that shares the love and truth of Christ with minorities.