Rod Dreher has an excellent find today.
This is an excerpt from a Mark Galli article on Substack. Galli used to run Christianity Today which is a top evangelical magazine that was founded by Billy Graham.
Remember, this is my controversial take on the Christian Question:
1. Christianity is immersed in time and history like everything else in the world.
2. The church is just another institution which is full of people who are immersed in their own time and culture. Thus, it is capable of being corrupted by outside influences like any other institution.
3. Christianity used to be our dominant culture, but now it is a sub culture. It no longer has a grip on the imagination of America’s elites. It lost its grip over European elites even further back in the 19th century. Christianity hasn’t been our dominant culture for a century or more.
4. The dominant elite and culture is secular. It is the “mainstream” culture. It is Madonna flashing her ass on Jimmy Kimmel’s show or Lil Nas X pole dancing for Satan. It is celebrating PRIDE Month.
5. The “mainstream” culture is created by the so-called “creative class.” Cultural power is concentrated in the hands of a handful of news, entertainment and tech corporations. It is also transmitted through the public schools and the universities. Ever since the development of radio, film and television in the early 20th century (and mass public education), the dominant culture has played out on a grand stage in the air, so to speak, as it is beamed out from New York and Los Angeles to the rest of the country and across the world. Whereas previously culture used to be transmitted locally and passed down through tradition, the vast majority of the population now passively consumes the “mainstream” culture which is controlled by a handful of gatekeepers at large corporations. Many of these gatekeepers are Jewish.
6. In the 21st century, Christian elites are in a position of weakness. They don’t command the culture like they used to centuries ago. And so, they are submissive and go long with and endorse trends and fads which get started in the mainstream secular culture, and what’s worse is that they adapt their theology to those fads and trends in order to legitimize them. They lag behind, absorb and reflect the trends in the dominant secular culture of their own times. They are not leading the culture. Case in point, the Southern Baptist Convention discovered that “racism” was a sin in the 1990s.
7. Christian elites will then say that Christianity “has always been” antiracist or opposed to “anti-Semitism” or “trans” or “woke” or supports “liberal democracy” and “human rights” or whatever is currently fashionable among the dominant secular elites even though this is preposterous.
These people have repeatedly bent the knee and echoed trends that unquestionably arise and come out of America’s dominant secular culture while denying this is what they are doing. They also laughably accuse and judge people who don’t embrace the latest fads of being bad Christians.
“Elite evangelicalism (represented by CT, IVPress, World Vision, Fuller Seminary, and a host of other establishment organizations) is too often “a form of cultural accommodation dressed as convictional religion.” These evangelicals want to appear respectable to the elite of American culture. This has been a temptation since the emergence of contemporary evangelicalism in the late 1940s, the founding of Christianity Today being one example. Letters between first editor Carl Henry and founder Billy Graham suggest the desire to be in essence an acceptable fundamentalism: Grounded in conservative theology while gaining the respect of secular academics and other cultural leaders. …”
This is exactly what I have been saying.
For a long time, I looked at this and associated it with “Christianity.” Now, I look at it and what I see are Christian elites reflecting back the dominant “mainstream” culture of their own times. They want to fit in with the world around them. They want the status of being “respectable” in our culture. What is called “Christianity” in our culture is more like Americanity.
“Indeed, effective evangelism has been one motive, and in some ways it has proved to be an effective strategy. But I don’t know that evangelicals have been sufficiently self-reflective to admit their basic and personal insecurities. It’s just no fun being an outsider to mainstream culture. We all just want to be loved, and if not loved, at least liked and respected. Elite evangelicals are not just savvy evangelists but also a people striving for acceptance.
I saw this often when I was at CT. For the longest time, a thrill went through the office when Christianity Today or evangelicalism in general was mentioned in a positive vein by The New York Times or The Atlantic or other such leading, mainstream publications. The feeling in the air was, “We made it. We’re respected.” This irritated me, because I naturally believed that CT’s outlook was superior (since it was grounded in the truth of the gospel and not secularism), so I often commented that we had things backward: The New York Times ought to be thrilled when it gets a positive mention in Christianity Today.
This tendency has only gotten worse, as now the mark of a successful evangelical writer is to get published regularly in the Times, Atlantic, and so forth. What’s interesting about such pieces is that (a) such writers make a point that affirms the view of the secular publication (on topics like environmental care, racial injustice, sexual abuse, etc.) and (b) they preach in such pieces that evangelicals should take the same point of view. However, their writing doesn’t reach the masses of evangelicals who take a contrary view and don’t give a damn what The New York Times says. If these writers are really interested in getting those evangelicals to change their minds, the last place they should be is in the mainstream press. Better to try to get such a column published in the most popular Pentecostal outlet, Charisma. Ah, but that would do nothing to enhance the prestige of evangelicals among the culture’s elite.
Evangelical columns in large part merely bolster the reputation of secular outlets, as these publications can now pat themselves on the back and say, “See, even religious people agree with us.” Rarely if ever will you see an evangelical by-line in such outlets that argues to protect life in womb or affirms traditional marriage.
We see an ancient dynamic here: When you seek to win the favor of the powerful, you will likely be used by them to enhance their own status. And along the way, many of your convictions will be sidelined. We’ve seen this happen on the religious right in the political nightmare of the last few years. But it happens on the left just as often. …”
We can put a face on the aspiring successful evangelical writer who is published in Time magazine and the New York Times and who gets pats on the head for being a submissive and respectable Christian voice who knows his place because he sucks up to and defends the establishment.
Note: As many have pointed out, Frenchism isn’t based on any “principles.” It is a sensibility. It is tailoring your “Christianity” and “principles” to people who you think can enhance your status and career prospects. It is knowing who has the wealth and power in the room and who doesn’t.
I’m of three minds about this column:
1) CT has been known as ‘Christianity Astray’ by the Reformed for at least thirty years. In other words, the ‘Failure of American Baptist Culture’ was noted and dismissed by serious protestant theologians, since the mid-1980’s. – http://biblicalhorizons.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Christianity-and-Civilization_1_The-Failure-of-the-American-Baptist-culture.pdf
2) Galli becoming a papist (yes, with all the negative connotations that word implies) is merely trading his birthright for yet another ‘mess of potage’- in that RC’ism today, is merely Methodism with fancier dress, and just as many gays. In other words, a corrupt, graceless, godless mess masquerading as the Church of Jesus Christ.
3) What does this serve, if only to point out the reality of what I have said on this site, time and time again- that only an ethnocentric, Whites-only Conservative Orthodox Western Rite, willing to anathematize the current godless state, is our only choice. We cannot take filioquism and ‘reform’ it, as the CR folk thought to do, in the 1980’s. We cannot take the augustinian milquetoast Lutheranism of the last 50 years, and think that if it didn’t work for John Montgomery then, it will suddenly work for us, now?!?
We need to either be willing to be martyrs for the faith, or start stoning the evil among us… or both, at the same time. For ‘the blood of the martyrs, is the seed of the Church.’
We need another series of Wars of Religion. Or we submit ourselves to conciliar Orthodoxy. There is no alternative. Rome is done. Protestantism is done.
Religion serving trends fostered by the powerful, seems to be an ancient story.
Tying in to Hunter’s big themes – Seems that even ‘modernism’ is not new, but trends like it were known in the ancient world, such as in the decline of the Roman Empire
Someone commenting here mentioned the 1934 book by Oxford scholar J D Unwin, ‘Sex and Culture’, which talks about this … it’s free online to read, pretty impressive
A key notion is that the fundamental mistake leading to all the rest, is feminism … surprising to many, things like women’s rights, alimony etc were known in the ancient world too … and every time it always ended the same, feminism to forms of modernism / progressivism and then societal collapse
Our ‘modernism’ started in France, where aristocratic women became the first ‘feminists’, de-anchoring the family … males respond to family dissolution, by becoming ‘modernists’ seeking liberation … France was the first country to widely practice birth control, in its pre-pill forms
Similarly in USA … once you had women’s lib and women voting a century ago … then you had the leading male ‘Losties’ detach and lead the modernist cultural charge, themselves being the ‘alpha chads’ reacting to the family destruction, and who could enjoy the sexual libertinism, which always ultimately leaves the average guy behind, today’s ‘incels’ … Jewish people riding and escalating this wave, just like they did in France, the Revolution and Napoleon giving them ‘equal rights’ and then the rest
As Anglin said just today, boomers got sucked in to the ‘sexual freedom’ 60s stuff and hypnotised by that let everything go to complete shite
If the USA splits up, all you might have is something akin to Eastern Europe in its 90%-plus white culture … old commie countries were in the ‘refrigerator’ so in those countries it is circa 1980 in many ways, tho with smartphones … but you can see the feminist trend underway there … slowly to maybe end up the same like in the rest of the West … So splitting up the USA might only get a delay in things, tho that is still something
If only the Taliban had that accommodating mentality a la Frenchism – just think where they’d be now!
The reason things are like they are in Protestantism, is that no one wants to get involved, and no one wants to reduce little old ladies, and harmless old men to tears! Not to mention driving the preacher to kicking his dog or worse.
Since most of the audience seems to be made up of fairly recent Roman Catholic immigrants, a few lines to explain Protestant Church governence. Protestant churches are run from the congregation up, the Congregation makes the decisions, not the Priest, Bishop or Pope. Every 6 weeks or so a district body meets to discuss policy. Generally these are ad hoc meetings or whoever shows up. Then there are staewide and national decision making bodies. It is a very open and fluid process, anyone can get involved.
Many of you are familar with what happened to James Edwards. In my opinion Edwards was attacked by crypto Catholics who were charging him with heresy, because of his traditional Southern Baptist views. I encouraged Edwards to call his tormentors exactly what they are, Roman Catholics. Whoever heard of a Protestant heretic??? Or a Protestant being charged by another Protestant with being a heretic. That’s Catholic stuff! That’s crazy.
“Whoever heard of a Protestant heretic??? Or a Protestant being charged by another Protestant with being a heretic”:
Well, the John Cohen-ists (Calvinists) did a lot of that, starting with Michael Servetus burned at the stake for heresy. Quakers and other peaceful nonconformists were killed before Catholics. Bloodthirsty Calvinists also tried to out-do Catholics in killing the most “witches.” Et cetera.
Krafty I usually agree with your comments. No doubt you were generalizing and didn’t think about the Calvinists. But all organized religions especially with state connections end up killing people.
Sounds like you have read too much Catholic propaganda about John Calvin. Calvin’s ideas were opposed to the Roman Catholic idea that you could work your way into heaven, and, Calvin preached that there was no guarantee of Heaven/Salvation for anyone under any conditions. For some reason this formulation of Calvin drove Catholics up a wall.
Consistent, “five-point” total-predestinarian Calvinism does guarantee salvation to the elect, unconditionally. Those who are not chosen to be saved cannot be saved, and those who are chosen cannot avoid being saved. Full (predestinarian) Calvinists look for (and try to create) “signs of their election” to indicate that they are some of the chosen, such as financial prosperity and business success, while being constantly poor and unsuccessful in business are signs of being damned.
Re: “the Roman Catholic idea that you could work your way into heaven”:
The many requirements (works) of Papism are not all the same “love and good works” that Scripture says accompany genuine salvation. The fourth-century “Welsh orthodox” monk Morwen (“Pelagius”) had the correct understanding of salvation being “not without” works. (Note that Pelagius was convicted of heresy by Rome and demonized by Calvin, but he was cleared and exonerated by orthodoxy in the East.) The Roman emperor and wealthy elites who were offended and threatened by Pelagius’ egalitarian preaching, supported Augustin’s teaching of “original sin” that justified their exploitation of the masses.
https://pelagiuswasright.blogspot.com/2014/02/mortal-sin-another-deadly-mistake-by.html
And neither Calvin nor Rome are the caricatures that this past series of comments give it to be. What y’all are talking about is the HEIRS of both, mucking things up, in their attempts to ‘define’ both [sic] Science AND [sic-ker] Faith. And all of it is due to the perversion of the Augustinian ordo theologiae. Confusing Persons and Essence. Calvin was more of a Catholic that most Catholics today. And Catholics did not believe they could ‘work their way into heaven.’ The Church that gave the Protestants their bibles, still has Galatians and Ephesians in it. What this is, is nothing less than “Romeaphobia.”
The hatred that someone else (wiser, older, and holier than thou) should tell thee what to do. ‘Fathers in the faith,” as it were….And in that desire to remain spiritual adolescents, y’all are consummate rebels. And just as damned. [I Sam 15:23]
“Protestant churches are run from the congregation up, the Congregation makes the decisions, not the Priest, Bishop or Pope.”
Uh, no Rabbi. Only “Congregational” churches and maybe some Baptist churches were like that. Congregational churches are Puritan churches and the sect predated Martin Luther by many years. All Protestant churches based on the teachings Martin Luther or John Calvin have always had church hierarchies.
This absurdly counter factual post should disabuse anyone of the notion that the troll KW/Tom Watson is actually a Protestant. This is a troll, probably either a secular liberal or Jew, pretending to be some kind of 19th Century Protestant “bigot.”
The Puritans in Massachusetts executed people who were accused of being Quakers or Presbyterians. Calvinists and Baptists executed other Christians too.
BTW, I was raised in a “Bible Believing” Evangelical church and went to church more than once a week growing up. I had relatives who were hardcore Fundamentalist Christian Zionists. I have been to more than one Billy Graham crusade. There is zero chance that KW/Tom Watson is from a practicing American Protestant background. Everything he says is based on ludicrously outdated liberal stereotypes about how “Protestant WASP bigots” are supposed to behave. He has never used any language or concepts that actual conservative American Protestants use. Everything he says is straight from liberal historical accounts.
I can’t believe anyone would be dumb enough to think this a real person. Why is he here? He thinks a Southern Nationalist blog is a place where he can freely push division between Protestants and Catholics and he is right about that. He’s been at it for many years under various handles.
@ATBOTL Hey Schlomo, what do you know about Protestantism? What they taught you in Catholic school? I thought you were a Hitler/Mussolini/ the Pope Roman Catholic. LOL. Next, you will tell us you are a Joe Stalin Orthodox Catholic. Keep your story straight.
I’m sure you consider yourself a Judeo-Christian too, or just as likely an Evangelical as seen in the “New York Times”. LOL.
Ok, Smart guy what Protestant Church has a heirarchy of Priest, Bishop, Pope? The Presbyterians, the Methodists, the Baptists, the Lutherans, the I don’t think so. The Brand X “Evangelicals” have no heirarchy. Did you ever hear the old Protestant saying, “every man his own Priest”? Luther set up no heirarchy. Calvin set up no heirarchy, Zwingli certainly set up no heirarchy. None of the Protestant Reformers set up a heirarchy.
What about the C of E, Olde Dutch?
Krappy Wurker of sedition, hell, and lies.
why should YOU care at all about ‘organized religion.’ You’ve made it clear you despise JC and the Church (only one) that He founded.
Pot calling kettle, come in kettle.
Prov. 26:4
ATBOTL, good summary.
Re: “Luther set up no heirarchy. Calvin set up no heirarchy, Zwingli certainly set up no heirarchy. None of the Protestant Reformers set up a heirarchy”:
Well, there was SOME hierarchy, especially in Anglicanism mimicking some of the Roman hierachy minus a Pope. But again Krafty has the correct view, regardless of whether or not he fails to use “the language or concepts that actual conservative American Protestants use” – which I don’t either. So what. And the historically malign influence of Rome on the southern states, and the world, is still a legitimate concern, very much relevant to discussion on a “Southern Nationalist blog” or any other kind of ethnonationalist blog.
@anonymous Yes, minus a Pope, and, how much authority an Anglican Bishop has is an open discussion question too? Personally, I don’t believe in Bishops, and they are at best for ornamental purposes only.
The Roman Catholic faction here wouldn’t know an educated Southern Protestant if they fell over him. LOL.
Krusty Wanker,
An Aussie Anglo who attends some traditional Catholic church that is a member of a Telegram channel that I administer wrote that only the Catholic church was created by “The Son of God,” whereas all the other sects of Christianity were created by men.
FYI, I too think the papacy is outdated and ridiculous, especially when it’s been as corrupted as it’s been for untold centuries.
You should keep in mind that outside of French Catholic masons, it was both Anglos and jews that drove the stake through Western civilization’s heart in both World Wars that directly led to jewish homogeny in the decadent and degenerate West.
ATBOTL,
Good comments. Your last paragraph is especially telling. No legitimately pro white person on this website stokes religious troubles/antagonisms. That can only hurt. It is also suspicious.
@Christina You better prove to Brad that you are old enough to be here, and are not underage. I wouldn’t want to see Brad or anyone else get into trouble with an underage female. It wouldn’t look good. Even if you are a setup.
James Edwards gave some good advice on this subject.
Krafty,
I have been on this site more than 2 years. Seems like a long time to wait to spring a trap. My favors are not available to anyone on this website. I have mentioned that again and again.
All Mr. Wallace has to do is give out what minimum age is allowed by him on this website. If I am not that age them I am gone.
And then there will be no Catholics on this website as a semi-regular. I mean surely no one could be as dumb as me to be on this site which is against my race and religion.
” I mean surely no one could be as dumb as me to be on this site which is against my race and religion.”
Against your race? You’ve always claimed to be a white Mexican of Iberian extraction.if my memory of your commenting history is correct.
Flax,
I still am socially/culturally/nationally part of the Mexican group of people. When I write race in this respect it includes Mexicans who are mixed as well. Mexicans frequently call themselves a race when of course there is no such thing as a Mexican race.
I am not going to turn my back on Mexicans who are mixed. I am pro white but it is interwoven with other loyalties as well–ethnic/cultural/religious etc.
Some of my relatives are mixed yet they are family and Mexican.
Flax,
I forgot to add that the ultimate test on racial affiliation is who one marries and goes to bed with. Well I would marry an Anglo protestant long before I would marry a Mexican Catholic indio and it is not even close.
That is my definitive view on race.
Flaxen,
With all kindness and respect I have given out way too much information on this site. No further personal information will be given out publicly to anyone.
We have voters meetings at our Lutheran church. The voters affirmed that women could not be voters.
@anonymous Yeah, that’s the more modern version of “Tulip” Calvinism, the Ligoneer school of reformed theology, that you are describing? I’ve read a couple of Ligoneer’s books, and they were worthwhile.
I think the English church historian and theologian Charles Freeman is an interesting read, but, I don’t buy everything he says either.
Nah, Krusty, evangelical protestant Pastor Hagee didn’t want any of you and your kind moving away from your Cyrus Scofield bibles.
As I recall, you were crowing about the most philosemetic POTUS in American history, none other than the “king of Israel himself as one of your own. A protestant that Marc Levin proclaimed the “first jewish American president.”
Your motherland already has had many philosemetic royals and prime ministers. Ffs, y’all even had a genuine Sephardic jew as head of state in Benjamin Disraeli.
@November No, I’m strictly a KJV or NIV user. The NIV is more terse, and maybe a little harsher on Jews. The only words you Roman Catholics know is Scofield and Hagee, and you would know those if we Protestants didn’t criticize them. Maybe your Pope will adopt them? LOL. Holy Pelosi.
The situation was/is SO BAD that those not disposed to vote for Satanic Communists put their faith in the Jew Trumpster because he was the only alternative. Problem is that the Trumpster is a slave of the Jews,
and he pulled off the greatest scam ever in the USA. NO ONE on the national level is on the side of
American Christian gentiles. NO ONE. The US Congress has not even ONE patriotic American.
http://www.chuckmaultsby.net/id55.html
>3. … Christianity hasn’t been our dominant culture for a century or more
I suppose one could debate to what extent in the past ‘separation of church and state’ was operational rather than (only) theoretical — but re secularism, Christian morality still underpinned western culture until perhaps the middle of the 20th century — growing up Catholic in the 1960s, the church still frowned on divorce; a married couple could not divorce and remain in the church — so to be specific, abandoning traditional Christian morality, especially sexual morality, as the underpinning of civil society was what started the cultural decline — and even today I do not see how traditional Christian morality is absolutely incompatible with an operationally secular society.
While organised religion is inherently corrupt and hypocritical, Christianity AS SUCH – pure, primitive, authentic Christianity which is un-organised, name-less and money-less – does not worship money and power, and is immune to “cultural” influence of wealthy elites. It is a life of humble, selfless service to others, with absolute moral self-discipline, and absolute honesty, which is the antithesis (and worst enemy) of the “culture” of universal usury (capitalism) and pursuit of personal pleasure and fame. One “road” leads to (or promises) carnal rewards in this life, before eternal judgment, while the other, more difficult, narrow road leads to peace in eternity. These roads are not parallel but go in opposite directions.
Speaking of travel and roads, this is interesting (though off topic) on Telesur today: “Inverse Caravan” demonstration says that de-colonization (end of U.S. imperialism) is what is needed for foreign peoples to remain in their native lands and not join the caravans moving to the imperial “homeland”: https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Salvadorans-Take-Part-in-The-Inverse-Caravan–20211011-0005.html The U.S.-installed Neoliberal regime running El Salvador supports the Western banks and corporations and makes it difficult for people to stay rooted in place.
Personal pleasure and fame in this life sound a lot more appealing than an eternity of boredom.
There are some natural pleasures, that are not sought but happen, and don’t impoverish or otherwise harm others, or embarrass others.
“pure, primitive, authentic Christianity which is un-organised, name-less and money-less ”
Sorry. Your wet dream of a non-dogmatic ‘faith’ is belied by the letters of Paul, in which MONEY COLLECTIONS were taken up for the ‘saints’ in other churches. In other words, organized charity only to the ‘in-group’- foundational hierarchies, already in place.
They were also called Christians in the Book of Acts, before teh Canon closed. No name? Again, wrong.
Lastly, the Didache is the oldest extant LITURGICAL MANUAL for the correct worship of the Church, written sometime between 50- 100 A.D. In other words, in the memory of all those who both knew Christ and the Temple worship that is the core of Christian worship. Otherwise, the verse in Hebrews 13:10 makes no sense: “We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle.”
But, if you understand that the Catholic Faith is the continuation and culmination of OT Judaism, with its own Altars, Priesthood, and SACRIFICE (ALL OF WHICH ARE TRUE AND VALID) you have no leg to stand on- no Protestant does.
At least the Lutherans and Anglicans recognized that fact, and therefore, are still catholic Christians, as they do not depart too far from the Faith ‘once given to the saints.’
Schismatic Prots, Baptists COG, CofC, etc.? Playing church, and nothing more.
“the Catholic Faith is the continuation and culmination of OT Judaism, with its own Altars, Priesthood, and SACRIFICE”:
It sure is.
“Otherwise, the verse in Hebrews 13:10 makes no sense”:
No. It makes sense when taken as it was meant: figuratively!
I’m familiar with the Didache, etc. This is what George Fox said about the Catholic “continuation and culmination” of Judaism (as you so accurately called it): https://www.hallvworthington.com/FoxDoctrineBooks/Book6Part10.html#10
I do agree that evangelical Christianity in the 20th century has been nothing but one long process of liberalization and surrender to the cultural left. Hunter was quite perceptive here when he noted that: “What is called “Christianity” in our culture is more like Americanity”.
Last summer in my little book *The Twilight of Our People?* in one chapter I contrasted the Reformed and Evangelical worldviews on race, and the correlation between evangelicalism and Americanism. In part, I stated that: “I sometimes ponder if the American experiment naturally gave rise to evangelical Christianity, or if it is the other way around. The two go together quite well”. I hold that free will theology in the church is connected to the rise of egalitarianism and democracy in the state. My book is still available on Amazon at the link below,
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08CWM9VYQ/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i0
Evangelicalism is a direct outgrowth of the Puritan movement that originated in 1400’s England. The very first Puritan preachers were essentially liberals in the modern sense. Puritans glommed onto Protestantism and Calvinism later, in part to conceal what they were since Puritans had gotten a very bad reputation.
How the Puritans Banned Christmas
In 1659 the Puritans banned Christmas in Massachusetts. But why?
https://newengland.com/today/living/new-england-history/how-the-puritans-banned-christmas/
Jesus said we’re not to conform to the world. He fearlessly spoke the truth and never tried to ingratiate Himself with Establishment of His day. He said that a mark of His followers would be hatred from the world, just as He was hated. He said “woe unto you when all men speak well of you.”
David French needs to be Moshiached so bad, he needs to be Moshiached like he has never been Moshiached before, he needs to be Moshiached until it is coming out of his ears. Seriously, David French needs it bad.
David French looks like he is growing tits under that blue shirt. Is that Big Cuck taking hormone pills or something, perhaps a future sex change operation he is prepping for? After buying himself a niglet why not go the last mile down the road he is travelling then he can write another book for National Review:
“The Conservative Case for becoming a Tranny”, with an introduction by Mr. & Mr. Pete Buttplug.
I doubt he needs any pills or injections. His already low testo is probably dropping hourly.
@12AX7,
Your last paragraph made me laugh really hard.
Thank you.
Those goofy boomers with the baseball caps.
There are now some conservative Evangelicals who have some new alt-lite flavored group that is trying to do what the alt-lite “Catlicks” are doing, going against cucks and liberalism. Don’t have the link and can’t remember the name of the group.
They will always side with Israel. I don’t know how any of them can go up against Israel if they honor the bible.
According to the NT only jewish believers in Christ are deserving of respect from Christian gentiles. The black-hearted villainous jews who reject him are to be treated with contempt.
Verse?
You might find this interesting
http://oneinjesus.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Smith-Moralistic.pdf
Modern religion:
link — For all the right’s supposed attachment to religion, only the left understands the motivating power of myth. They routinely turn drug-addled cop killers into martyrs; the right can’t even do the same w/ Ashli Babbitt, an unarmed veteran executed on camera by a federal gun thug.
link — Even the federal gun thug became part of their legends.
Look at the foto:
Twitter/Viceroy — Christianity is pure cringe, change my mind.