4 ways the culture is brainwashing Christians

[ladiesbballcoach]

Enjoy!!!

 

http://fireinmybones.com/index.php?col=011409%7EFour%20Ways%20Our%20Culture%20Is%20Brainwashing%20Us

 

1. Hell does not exist. Jesus preached about hell more than anyone in the Bible. His words dripped with love, but He didn’t soft-pedal when addressing the eternal consequences of sin. When He began His ministry, he read from the book of Isaiah, announcing that He had come not only to “proclaim the favorable year of the Lord” but also “the day of vengeance of our God” (Is. 61:2, NASB).

 

 

The real gospel is a double-edged sword that offers both the “kindness and severity of God” (Rom. 11:22, emphasis added). That’s why hell is one four-letter word we should use more often—not to condemn people in mean-spirited judgment but to warn them that mercy has a time limit.

 

The world rejects the concept of hell because it’s too exclusive. Our Oprah-ized culture insists that everyone deserves a warm and fuzzy life free of consequences. “How can a loving God send anyone to hell?” people ask. If we truly love them we will explain that hell is not a metaphor—it is a real place of dreadful separation from God that sinners choose when they reject Him. We must start preaching about hell again instead of worrying about who might leave our church or how our unpopular message might affect our TV ratings.

 

2. God didn’t create the world. 2009 is the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species, so you can be sure the scientific community will bombard us this year with more “proof” of this sketchy theory. The mainstream media and academia insist that evolution is pure fact. Anyone who dares to challenge it is considered a religious idiot.

 

What people don’t realize is that Darwinism, besides being laughably lacking in scientific basis, has roots in spiritualism. Welsh naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace shared many of Darwin’s beliefs and encouraged him to publish his book. Wallace believed in spirit guides, participated in séances and was intrigued by all things paranormal. He promoted the “science” of evolution because it supported his anti-God views. Is it any wonder, then, that this doctrine he and Darwin propagated has been used to undermine Christianity ever since?

 

The world does not want to believe in a Creator because if He is real, then He has ultimate authority over His creation. On the flip side, man has no moral responsibility if he crawled out of a primordial soup, grew fins, then legs, and then became a talking ape. Evolution is not really about science at all—it is about rebellion against God’s rule over us.

 

3. All religions lead to God. This isn’t a new lie, but it is enjoying a revival today. President Bush has obviously flirted with the idea, since he has told reporters that Muslims and Christians worship the same God. Barack Obama attended a church for 20 years that teaches that Jesus is not the only way to salvation—and he has publicly acknowledged that he believes this.

 

The doctrine of universalism—which states that all people will ultimately gain salvation and enjoy heaven—has become the religion of the masses. Even some charismatic and Pentecostal preachers such as Carlton Pearson of Oklahoma and D.E. Paulk of Atlanta have abandoned biblical orthodoxy to embrace this heresy. They are now on a crusade to rewrite Christian theology—and they have allies in some mainline denominations (such as the Episcopal Church) where the authority of Scripture is denied.

 

Christians who embrace universalism are like the prophets of Baal in Jezebel’s court who had been neutered. They preach a powerless message that cannot change anyone. We must arise in the spirit of Elijah to confront this deception and prove to the world that the one true God answers by fire.

 

4. Man can redefine morality. This is perhaps the most deadly lie of all. Everywhere we look today, leaders in media, politics, education and entertainment are plotting the virtual overthrow of conventional morals. They want a hedonistic world with no rules and no guilt. This was most obvious last month when Newsweek published a cover story brazenly claiming that the Bible approves of same-sex marriage.

 

 

A lying spirit has invaded many mainline churches and is convincing weak Christians to change their views about homosexuality, abortion and fornication. Evil is called good while those who stand for the biblical values of purity and traditional marriage are labeled bigots.

[cch5432]

Can't disagree that our culture and even many Christian Churches do not reflect Jesus's teachings......but how is it wrong to say that Muslims and Christians worship the same God?

 

 

Maybe I'm just brainwashed.....

[Clyde]

Who actually defines morality?

[cch5432]

Who actually defines morality?

 

Most objectivists (which is what most Christians are/should be?) would say that morality exists outside of human interpretation- in a way, God is the ultimate standard of perfection, and morality is just the actions that we take to reach that standard.

 

Relativists would say that morality lies more in the context, affected by many things, and changes in culture affect morality.

 

I think what that part/sentence of the article is trying to get across is that our society implies that our culture can change morality, whereas Christians (believe/should believe) that morality exists outside of us.

[UKMustangFan]

Most religions do lead to God....How is that not accurate?

[Clyde]

Most objectivists (which is what most Christians are/should be?) would say that morality exists outside of human interpretation- in a way, God is the ultimate standard of perfection, and morality is just the actions that we take to reach that standard.

 

Relativists would say that morality lies more in the context, affected by many things, and changes in culture affect morality.

 

I think what that part/sentence of the article is trying to get across is that our society implies that our culture can change morality, whereas Christians (believe/should believe) that morality exists outside of us.

 

Do we look at a person dancing and decide if the dance itself is moral or immoral? Do we listen to lyrics and make that decision? Do we watch a movie and make that decision?

[Fastbreak]

According to prominent atheist Richard Dawkins, faith − belief not based on evidence − is one of the world's great evils.

 

The Apostle Paul teaches us that "without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him." Hebrews 11:6 NIV

 

I trust Paul more than Richard Dawkins... and this clear dichotomy does help illustrate what we're up against.

[Slemac90]

Most religions do lead to God....How is that not accurate?

 

Most religions lead to a "god", not The God. Big difference. Judaism and Christianity lead to the same god, but Hinduism leads to Buddha.

 

Now, Muslims and Christians do share the same God. But that's where similarities end. The Muslim religion, or Islam, is defined in Wikipedia as:

 

Islam is a monotheistic, Abrahamic religion originating with the teachings of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, a 7th century Arab religious and political figure.

 

Finally, Jesus is The Way, The Truth and The Life, no man get to the Father, or heaven, but through him. Unless you believe in Jesus, (belief is more than saying yes, there was a Jesus - but believing that he is the Son of God) you will go to hell!

[Covercorner]

Enjoy!!!

 

 

2. God didn’t create the world. 2009 is the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species, so you can be sure the scientific community will bombard us this year with more “proof” of this sketchy theory. The mainstream media and academia insist that evolution is pure fact. Anyone who dares to challenge it is considered a religious idiot.

 

What people don’t realize is that Darwinism, besides being laughably lacking in scientific basis, has roots in spiritualism. Welsh naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace shared many of Darwin’s beliefs and encouraged him to publish his book. Wallace believed in spirit guides, participated in séances and was intrigued by all things paranormal. He promoted the “science” of evolution because it supported his anti-God views. Is it any wonder, then, that this doctrine he and Darwin propagated has been used to undermine Christianity ever since?

 

The world does not want to believe in a Creator because if He is real, then He has ultimate authority over His creation. On the flip side, man has no moral responsibility if he crawled out of a primordial soup, grew fins, then legs, and then became a talking ape. Evolution is not really about science at all—it is about rebellion against God’s rule over us.

 

 

One can belive in God as the Creator and the Theory of Evolution. I do.

[Habib]

One can belive in God as the Creator and the Theory of Evolution. I do.

 

:thumb:

[PureFan]

Most religions lead to a "god", not The God. Big difference. Judaism and Christianity lead to the same god, but Hinduism leads to Buddha.

 

Now, Muslims and Christians do share the same God. But that's where similarities end. The Muslim religion, or Islam, is defined in Wikipedia as:

 

Islam is a monotheistic, Abrahamic religion originating with the teachings of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, a 7th century Arab religious and political figure.

Finally, Jesus is The Way, The Truth and The Life, no man get to the Father, or heaven, but through him. Unless you believe in Jesus, (belief is more than saying yes, there was a Jesus - but believing that he is the Son of God) you will go to hell!

 

Christianity is a monotheistic religion also! Wikepedia also goes on to say: "Muslims believe that God revealed the Qur'an to Muhammad, God's final prophet, through the angel Gabriel, and regard the Qur'an and the Sunnah (words and deeds of Muhammad) as the fundamental sources of Islam.[5] They do not regard Muhammad as the founder of a new religion, but as the restorer of the original monotheistic faith of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and other prophets."

 

I consider myself a Christian, but also believe that God has made paths for other people.

[Hatz]

Enjoy!!!

 

http://fireinmybones.com/index.php?col=011409%7EFour%20Ways%20Our%20Culture%20Is%20Brainwashing%20Us

 

1. Hell does not exist. Jesus preached about hell more than anyone in the Bible. His words dripped with love, but He didn’t soft-pedal when addressing the eternal consequences of sin. When He began His ministry, he read from the book of Isaiah, announcing that He had come not only to “proclaim the favorable year of the Lord” but also “the day of vengeance of our God” (Is. 61:2, NASB).

 

 

 

The bolded is interesting. Whereas that is part of the verse (Isaiah 61:2) in the Old Testament, the Lukan passage does not record that Jesus said that. It merely states in Luke 5:19 that Jesus said, "To proclaim the favorable year of the Lord."

 

Now if he wants to infer that Jesus must have quoted the whole text, fine. But I find it ironic that this kind of writer probably also bashes everybody who would "read something into the literal Word of God" when it doesn't suit him. The text does not say Jesus quoted the rest of the Isaiah verse.

 

His points are valid for discussion but making that one statement made me feel he was pushing his agenda as much as discussing the important issues he wanted to raise.

[Fastbreak]

One can belive in God as the Creator and the Theory of Evolution. I do.

It is also entirely possible for one to acknowledge the gaping holes in Mr. Darwin's theory and the very clear evidence for design and a designer without professing a specific belief in who that designer might be.

 

Unfortunately, many secular scientists are as faithful ( exclusionary ) to their materialistic ideology as the religious fundamentalists they scorn.

 

This results in a very hindering effect on actual learning and knowledge. There is no reason religion/philosophy and science cannot cohabit the same space. They are not oil and water… but two poles on the same magnet.

 

Jesus said, “You will know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”

 

How can anyone know the whole truth by casting half the evidence aside in favor of the evidence one finds more comforting, or more in line with with one's prejudices?

 

This is foolish and immature… and yet that is where we are in the year 2009.

[cch5432]

Do we look at a person dancing and decide if the dance itself is moral or immoral? Do we listen to lyrics and make that decision? Do we watch a movie and make that decision?

To me, your post was unclear in what it was asking. I was just pointing out that, from an objectivist point of view, morality exists outside of our interpretations of it.

 

Now, of course, the only way to find what is moral is through our interpretations of it. What I was trying to point out is that our society, IMO, influences us to believe that our specific culture's specific standards can affect a moral action. So, if society deems that putting half-naked women on billboards, magazines, etc. is OK, then that must be factored into our decision of whether or not it is a moral act (from a relativist standpoint).

 

As for the above, being mere humans, it is impossible to say for sure. All we can do is gather the present information and make our best decision.

[cch5432]

It is also entirely possible for one to acknowledge the gaping holes in Mr. Darwin's theory and the very clear evidence for design and a designer without professing a specific belief in who that designer might be.

 

Unfortunately, many secular scientists are as faithful ( exclusionary ) to their materialistic ideology as the religious fundamentalists they scorn.

 

This results in a very hindering effect on actual learning and knowledge. There is no reason religion/philosophy and science cannot cohabit the same space. They are not oil and water… but two poles on the same magnet.

 

Jesus said, “You will know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”

 

How can anyone know the whole truth by casting half the evidence aside in favor of the evidence one finds more comforting, or more in line with with one's prejudices?

 

This is foolish and immature… and yet that is where we are in the year 2009.

Pretty good post, especially the bolded. I'm reading a book that deals with Dawkin's faith (although he wouldn't admit it) in the anti-God of chance.

 

Personally, I feel like evolution is an entirely likely scenario, but unfathomably unlikely without a Creator behind it. Among other things, it took the universe approximately 9 billion of its 13.5 billion years just for conditions to become possible for life to exist. Speaking specifically of conditions on Earth to be able sustain life, it has only been 3.8 billion years. The miracle is as soon as conditions were there, life began nearly immediately.

 

Considering that DNA is made up of 4 nitrogenous bases- A, G, C and T- even for a DNA strand of 100 bases (smaller than found in any cell on Earth), the odds of getting a particular lucky combination are 4^100th, which is 1,600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1. Granted that this does not even take into account proteins and hundreds of other conditions necessary for the creation of one cell, I find any theory of evolution relying on blind chance to be, once again, unfathomably unlikely.

 

Source: Answering the New Atheism by Scott Hahn and Benjamin Wiker

 

On the other hand, I don't find a theory of evolution with God's hand to be impossible. However, it is the viewpoint of many Fundamentalists that, since the Bible does not spell it out word-for-word, God is not capable of doing so, or at least that is the way that there position appears.