Christian Dominionism-The Real Threat to Our Secular Republic

Conservative xenophobes and conspiracy neurotics are wringing their hands, and lamenting the rise of Islam in our country, which they claim will bring about the implementation of Sharia law.

However, whether out of ignorance or the belief that religious freedom and the first amendment does not apply equally to all religions, they fail to focus on the real threat to secularism.

We are talking about Christian Dominionism.

While there is no reason to believe that the few Muslims in our government harbor a desire to usurp secularism, there are appointed and elected Christians in our government right now – or are aspiring to high office-who have openly expressed the belief that the bible is superior to the constitution and cavorting with those who are like minded.

Barton is also the long time chairman of the Texas Republican Party

Here is more:

And guess who else is in bed with the Dominionists?

So, you say that Trump and the others did not seek out this type of support and do not actually believe this drivel ? Well he seeks them out!

/
And then there is …….

 

Excerpt:


The term “Dominionism” was popularized in the 1990s by scholars and journalists, who applied it to conservative Christians seeking political power. It derives from the Book of Genesis, in which God tells Adam and Eve to have “dominion” over the Earth and its animals. “Dominionism” generally describes the belief that Christians are biblically mandated to control all earthly institutions until the second coming of Jesus.

Experts identify two main schools of Dominionism: Christian Reconstructionists, who believe biblical law, including stoning as punishment for adultery and other transgressions, should replace secular law; and the New Apostolic Reformation, which advocates for Christians to “reclaim the seven mountains of culture”: government, religion, media, family, business, education, and arts and entertainment.


Who are “Dominionists”?

Very few Christians identify themselves as “Dominionists.” But experts say the New Apostolic Reformation has gained traction among charismatic Christians and Pentecostals under the influence of C. Peter Wagner, a church-growth guru and prolific author. Prominent “apostles” in the NAR include Lou Engle, co-founder of TheCall assemblies and Mike Bickle, director of the International House of Prayer in Kansas City, Mo.


Where are Dominionists?

Experts say the New Apostolic Reformation has chapters of “prayer warriors” in all 50 states and in foreign countries where Pentecostalism and charismatic Christianity are popular. Membership numbers are difficult to ascertain, however, since adherents are not required to officially join any church, seminary or ministry.

Some experts say Dominionism is more a school of thought than a social group. Its influence can be seen in textbooks that portray the Founding Fathers as devout evangelicals, in an anti-gay bill in Uganda and in the home-schooling movement, they say. Evangelical experts, however, say they see no evidence of Dominionist thought among conservative Christian elites.


When did Dominionism arise?

Christian Reconstructionism is the brainchild of the R.J. Rushdoony, a Calvinist theologian who died in 2001, leaving behind several dense tomes and a small band of followers. The New Apostolic Reformation traces its roots to several Pentecostal movements that proliferated in the second half of the 20th century.


Why are people talking about Dominionism now?

The topic has bobbed up almost every four years since evangelical broadcaster Pat Robertson, who has espoused Dominionist ideas, ran for president in 1988. During the 2008 election, for instance, a video surfaced of a pastor active in the New Apostolic Reformation praying over Sarah Palin, raising questions about her involvement with the group.

In August, several pastors affiliated with NAR helped organize and delivered speeches at Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s prayer rally in Houston. Perry is expected to need strong support from conservative Christians in his run for the presidency, as is Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, who has expressed admiration for writers accused of espousing Dominionist ideas.

Many conservative Christians dismiss the attention on Dominionism as liberal fearmongering. They wish to participate in American culture, they say, not dominate it.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/01/5-facts-about-dominionism_n_945601.html

 

Islam is a violent ideology, christianity is a benign religion.

 

Nothing to worry about. Our founders set us up with the separation of church and state, so a theocracy is not gonna happen.

Worry more about being infiltrated by radical muslims who will not distinguish between a Christian and an atheist. He just sees an infidel. And unlike the Christian, he will kill you for not being the right religion, unless of course you are a Shiite, then you get killed too.

 

This thread isn't about Islam.. Its about Christianity and US politics.

- - - Updated - - -

That's forbidden in the Koran.

 

It is about Islam. The op drew the comparison. You don't have to talk about it if you don't want to, but because the op brought it up, I am going to.

- - - Updated - - -

What does the Qur'an have to do with Christianity? You said this thread wasn't about Islam.

 

That is a gross oversimplification and I don't buy it. Both can inspire the very worst or the very best in human kind. I really don't know how you can say that Christianity is benign- open your eyes!! Think about that for a minute.

But regardless, the point of my thread is not to defend one or the other, but to warn of theocracy. Do you want a theocracy by any religion?

 

Killing infidels is forbidden in the Koran unless the Muslims are fighting a defensive war.

It is also forbidden to kill women, children, the elderly and livestock.

 

No, it's astute and don't buy it at your peril.

my eyes are far more open than yours. I live in Texas, there is a church on every block. I've never once suffered violence or revocation of liberty due to them.

That isn't even remotely possible through christianity. That's like being worried about klingons or demons.

 

Delete

- - - Updated - - -

So what you are saying is militant Islam that controls many countries in the middle east does not follow the Qur'an? Where did they get their ideology from then?

 

Are you sure ? Have you been paying attention to the Trump appointees to key positions?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Throughout history people seeking power have used religion.. That's hardly new. Religion was always political.

 

Not talking about religion, I'm talking about ideology. I never once mentioned a religion outside of Christianity.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't care if he appoints god himself. He only represents one branch of the government.

 

We will soon have a Klingon Demon in the Whitehouse.

 

He is one branch of government who's cronies will dominate the Senate, the House and the SCOTUS. Don't be so naïve. Democracy is fragile. Freedom is fragile. It can slip away before you know it. Not in an instant, but as a creeping usurpation of your rights. We are already seeing it in the form of these new Jim Crow laws as a backlash to same sex marriage. Now, with Trump appointments to SCOTUS, they are much more likely to be upheld as constitutional. Trump also wants to roll back freedom of the press. Wake up young man. I've been around a bit longer than you and I know what can happen.

 

Preferable to a regressive war monger.

 

And you think that we will have peace with Trump??

 

Stop wetting your pants. He doesn't appoint Congress members.

There are 8 judges on the Supreme Court. He will only get to appoint one to replace Scalia who was a conservative minded judge. So it won't change the balance from where it was when Obama took office.

Don't call me names because you're butthurt and can't argue your position.

What rights will be usurped?

So there are states that have made laws enforcing segregation of homosexuals? This is precisely the dishonesty that causes democrat supporters to lose their credibility. The laws made in Indiana make it illegal for a municipality to levy exorbitant fines against businesses thst don't want to cater to homosexuals. That is a far cry from laws that say they can't attend school with straight kids. Stop with the sensationalism. It's profoundly dishonest and anybody who thinks can see right through it.

There are 8 justices on the bench he only gets one unless others die or resign. The justice he picks will replace Scalia who was a conservative minded judge in the first place. He can't throw them all out.

He can want to have a shamrock shake on the moon with Ronald McDonald in September. He can't undo the consitiution.

Of you're so old and wise why do you think you can get away with that dishonesty? Why do you have no idea how our government system works?

It's okay to not like laws like the one in Indiana. It's okay to think they are wrong. And the moment we have an odd number of supreme court justices it will likely go to court. And because a conservative Supreme Court Justice is being replaced by another conservative supreme court justice the same demographic will exist that did when same sex marriage was made legal by the court.

I think most of your melting down, (saying trump is a klingon and bemoaning freedom of the press) is because you're mad that hillary lost. It's typical that every 8 years the president changes. If your age did give you wisdom you'd have seen this coming. I saw it, I predicted a Trump win in the primaries.

 

Well we were garanteed to go to war with Russia if Hillary was elected. I think we have a much better chance at peace with Russia through Trump. Hopefully he'll end all of Obama's wars in the middle east, but there will never be peace there.

So yes, we can have peace with Russia, and not start world War III, Yes I do.

And we are seeing a regressive war monger leaving office.

 

I find it hard to believe that you don't know what I mean by the new Jim Crow laws. I guess that I have to spell it out. I'm referring to the laws giving license to discriminate....to discriminate against YOU.....based on religious convictions whether real or made up.

No he doesn't appoint congress Dahhh but he has a majority in congress. He is also likely to get to appoint at least 2 SC Justices during his term.

Nothing that I have said is dishonest. You just don't want to believe it

 

I know exactly what you ment. It's just dishonest sensationalism.

That isn't what Jim Crow laws were. So your comparison was (*)(*)(*)(*).

How about instead of trying to draw parallels with the civil rights era, discuss the law on its merit. Why is it every time someone takes an opposing view point to a regressive you have to draw parallels to racism.

Further I'm a libertarian. I'm a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. I think people should be allowed to discriminate based on whatever they want. It's their ******ned business. The only time it should be addressed is when people are so discriminated against that their liberties are in danger.

So vote for some democrats. It would help to run some that adhere to the 1960s ideals where they stood for the average person insted of crony capitalists like Hilary, but by all means shoot yourselves in the heart.

Well that would balance the Supreme Court out. It has 9 justices and five were regressives. Now we'll have a couple years where there will be 5 conservative justices. In 8 years maybe even 4 we'll get to elect another person likely a democrat and they'll appoint regressive supreme Court justices if the regressive movement isn't killed that is.

Yes it was and this defensive crybaby crap just furthers your dishonesty.

Every five seconds some piece of crap regressive is squawking RACIST, ISLAMOPHOBIC, HOMOPHOBIC! And thay is all you have done rather less directly with this (*)(*)(*)(*) poor Jim Crow comparison you fumbled and then double downed on.

The more people are accused of being racist by regressive elites the less likely you'll convince people to vote for the Democrat party. It would behoove you to distance yourselves from that.

 

Why don't you just compare it to the Nazis, I know you think that. It's your inability to discern the difference that makes me not trust you. And you're abject need to compare everybody you don't agree with to racists. This behavior is extremely narrow minded. That harms your credibility too.

 

As we can see this thread was turned into how bad people who disagree with the self-righteous are.

There is no threat from christianity. This is just Daddy rage. By which i mean rage against what they majority or authority is. It's existential angst in action.

It seems to be the exact same behavior of those who the OP calls out.

 

Please calm down. You are becoming tedious .Comparing gay rights to racial equality is very appropriate. Civil rights are civil rights. Racial minorities do not have exclusive rights to the issue of civil rights. Not only am I comfortable in making that analogy but I will also compare a gay man who is OK with discrimination against gays to an uncle Tom

 

I'm more concerned about the fear mongers on the left who apply these nasty labels and wring their hands about the Christian right. Seems to me we could be heading for a Christen raus! pogrom, especially now that we have a controversial electoral outcome. All that fear and hatred can be tapped into and used to bring clever manipulators to power.