In my experience, long comments aren't accepted for You Tube comment sections, so I'll split the long comment into sections and see if the separate sections are accepted. if they are, the order on the page won't correspond with the order of reading, so for convenience I'll number the sections.
(2) These
are some implications of these statements and similar statements from
Christian Churches all over the country, all over the world. The list could
be extended indefinitely. According to this doctrine of redemption,
commonplace in Christian circles: All police officers are doomed to spend
eternity in hell, except for the minority of police officers who have
accepted Jesus Christ as personal lord and saviour, including police
officers killed in action. All the troops who liberated the concentration
camps and extermination camps are consigned to hell, except for the minority
of Jesus Christ accepters. All the people executed by the Nazis for saving
the lives of Jews are consigned to hell, except for that minority. Time to
mention the case of one person, Ernst Biberstein, who studied theology and
became a pastor. During the Second World War, he was the commanding officer
of Einsatktommando 6, which executed thousands of people. The
Einsatzkommandos were a sub-group of the Einsatzgruppen, mobile killing
squads, who exterminated Jews and others in the territories captured by the
German forces as they advanced Eastwards. After the war, he was tried and
sentenced to death but the sentence was commuted. He was released in 1958
and returned to the clergy. There seems reason to believe that he was a
committed Christian and qualified for salvation according to the orthodox
Christian view, or one view of the orthodox Christian view. There's every
reason to believe that virtually all the people massacred by his execution
squads and the other Einsatzgruppen were not qualified for salvation
according to the orthodox Christian view, every reason to believe that
virtually all the people killed in the Nazi gas chambers were unqualified
for salvation, according to this deranged doctrine. There may well have been
some Christian converts amongst them, but the victims were overwhelmingly
Jews, without a belief in Christ as Lord and Saviour. Loving mothers and
fathers, loving mothers and fathers who have looked after disabled children,
are all consigned to hell, unless they belong to that minority of believers.
And what of the fate of the disabled children themselves - are they saved or
damned? The Bible gives no information about an age above which young people
qualify for damnation. I know of no Christian discussions of the issue,
although there must surely be some. And this: all supporters of the New
Culture Forum and other anti-woke organs are consigned to hell according to
these doctrines, unless, again, they belong that minority of believers.
Peter Whittle of the New Culture Forum, who says that he isn't a religious
man, is certainly destined for hellfire, according to orthodox evangelical
belief and not just evangelical belief - unless he changes his mind, perhaps
as a result of a miraculous conversion. Many, many Christians pray for that
kind of thing. All the working people who have done backbreaking and
dangerous work - or backbreaking and dangerous work - are damned, including
ones killed in pit disasters, in industrial accidents, all doomed - apart
from the believing minority. The Christian Police Association also has this
belief: 'We Believe that the Bible, as originally given, is the inspired
Word of God without error and is the only complete authority in all matters
of faith and doctrine.' What are people who have this belief in the
inerrancy of the Bible to make of these Biblical texts? Just a few examples.
Psalm 137: 8-9 in the 'Good News (!)' translation: Babylon, you will be
destroyed. Happy are those who pay you back for what you have done to us -
who take your babies and smash them against a rock. Exodus 22: 18-19,
again, in the 'Good News' translation: 'Put to death any woman who
practices magic.' By the way, this is Exodus 22: 20 'Condemn to death
anyone who offers sacrifices to any god except to me, the Lord.' The
Authorized version of the Bible gives this as the translation for another
verse from a book supposedly 'without error,' Exodus 22: 18: 'Thou shalt
not suffer a witch to live.' King James - the King James of the King James
version of the Bible - believed that witches deserved death. His book on
witchcraft, 'The Demonology' gives revealing insights into his state of
mind. He was a ferocious persecutor of women he thought of as witches, and
under his jurisdiction, many women were put to death. Simon Webb of
'History Debunked' has declared his belief in 'The Lord,' so his eternal
destiny is secure, unless he loses his faith for any reason. On to other
matters in this brisk tour of Christian theological artefacts. A
fascinating/ridiculous page https://anglican.ink/2022/05/21/growth-decline-and-extinction-of-uk-churches/
gives 'Estimated Extinction Dates for UK Churches.' 'The Church of
England and Catholics should last until the second half of the century.
However, they need to take urgent action now. Stemming losses is not enough.
None of us can prevent ageing! Whatever their current denominational
emphases, they should put all aside to encourage members to make new
disciples who can replicate themselves. Praying for an outpouring of the
Holy Spirit would not go amiss either.'Sadly, the immediate future looks
bleak for the Church in Wales, Church of Scotland, Episcopalians,
Methodists, and older Welsh nonconformists. They need to seriously ask
themselves how they have gotten themselves into a situation where extinction
is less than 30 years away.' Extinction is hardly likely to be complete
extinction. There will surely be isorated Christian believers and pockets of
Christian believers and larger groups, although not numerically very large.
The consequence, if orthodox Christians are to be believed (but they
shouldn't be believed, not for one moment) is that the percentage of people
headed for hell will increase enormously - an enormous contrast with the
situation in the ages of faith, when Christians persecuted ferociously
Christians with different shades of belief and non-Christians but there were
so many people who did accept Christ as their Saviour. There is no necessary
linkage between and 'anti-woke' views and Christian belief. To very
different extents, Simon Webb's 'History Debunked,' the New Culture Forum,
GB News, the Daily Telegraph and the Spectator support or even endorse
Christianity. I've particular knowledge of the Daily Telegraph and the
Spectator because I regularly bought the newspaper and subscribed to the
magazine over a long period of time and got used to seeing pieces which
assumed the importance of Christianity in the country's national life, even
if they were never very frequent. 'Christian Woman' is yet another
conservative outfit which treats Christianity as beyond scrutiny. I disagree
with this view and many of the other views to be found on the site. There
has been comment on the increase in numbers of working class conservative
supporters and the possibility of losing that support, of course. If some
conservative supporters want to lost that support, then taking for granted
and promoting the Christian view of things may well contribute to that
debacle. It won't influence me. I'm in no danger of voting for the greens,
the Labour Party, the Women's Equality Party or any of the alternatives,
including the candidates who fully expect to lose their deposits.
Limitations of space have prevented me from discussing the views of Calvin
Robinson and the New Culture Forum video 'https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fw3jl0Tckh8
'How to Return the Church to God & Reverse Its Wokery? My Conservative
Views Stopped My Ordination.' Many Christians and many Churches are
completely open about their views on redemption - and, as the see it, the
damnation of unbelievers - although in my experience, they are never willing
to defend their views. Many Christians, on the other hand, treat their views
like closely guarded secrets. Don Calvin Robinson believe in the damnation
of all the people at GB News and the New Culture Forum who don't accept
Christ as Lord and Saviour or doesn't he? If he doesn't, then his orthodoxy
is questionable. All this discussion began with an issue to do with gay
pride. I'll end this comment with some material on treatment of homosexuals
- an international focus with British examples. I think that in general,
awareness of British history is strong amongst anti-woke people, with good
cause. But in general, anti-woke people ignore and evade the dark side of
British history. 'List of people executed for homosexuality in Europe.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi... What orthodox Christians have done to
homosexuals over the centuries. Among the punishments mentioned in the
article, including some from this country: A German cross-dressing lesbian
executed for heresy against nature They were pierced in their tongues,
hanged and burned; they were also charged with blasphemy. German from
Augsburg; burned in Rome with 3 heretics From Augsburg; one burned, other 4
(all ecclesiastics) bound hand and foot in a wooden cage to starve[ both
drowned in a barrel Lesbian, drowned Burned at Tudela for "heresy with his
body" And from the UK: His trial was at the Old Bailey in November, where he
was convicted of having "a venereal affair" with James Hankinson. He was
hanged at Newgate. He was hanged with a forger, Ann Hurle - they were led
out of Debtor's Door and rather than the New Drop they were hanged by a cart
being driven from under them. "Spershott's hanging was perhaps the last
occasion at which was performed the folk ritual of the hangman passing the
dead man's hands over the neck and bosoms of young women as a cure for
glandular enlargements." The last two men to be hanged for homosexuality in
England. [1835]
Mahyar Tousi, writing on Twitter (28 November, 2021) 'This is a Christian country. Get used to it. I don't care if it hurts your feelings.' This was in response to the grotesque, stupid advice to Ministers to avoid using the word 'Christmas' as use of the word would offend minorities.
The trouble with Mahyar Tousi's comment is that endorsing Christianity is endorsing grotesque, stupid, harmful views. It can easily be shown that Christianity is much more ridiculous and much more harmful than woke views. I'm astonished but not completely surprised that so many anti-woke sites and You Tube channels do endorse Christianity. In defence of Mahyar Tousi, his You Tube channel is mainly secular. His endorsement of Christianity here could be viewed as a token gesture. Yes, anti-woke sites do go in for 'gesture politics.' In fact, gesture politics is a prominent feauture of too many anti-woke sites. Gesture politics: 'political actions or positions taken chiefly to gain publicity or influence public opinion, typically requiring little effort or having no significant impact.'
I'll give an assortment of evidence to justify the claim that Christianity is a liability for anti-woke sites. It's a long list but it could easily be much, much longer. The list may not be accepted as it is - it will perhaps need breaking down into sections. Anti-woke people who find it too much effort to follow discussions which are thorough - they may prefer to engage in activities 'typically requiring little effort' - nobody is forcing you to read any of this. Post your complaints if you feel inclined - if, that is, you can summon up the energy to post a one-or-two liner, probably not more, but nobody is compelled to read your complaints either.
Mahyar Tousi's comment on this supposedly Christian country ignores the deep divisions amongst Christians.
'List of people executed for homosexuality in Europe.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
What orthodox Christians have done to homosexuals over the centuries. Among the punishments mentioned in the article, including some from this country:
A German cross-dressing lesbian executed for heresy against
nature
They were pierced in their tongues, hanged and burned; they were
also charged with blasphemy.
German from Augsburg; burned in Rome with 3 heretics
From Augsburg; one burned, other 4 (all ecclesiastics) bound
hand and foot in a wooden cage to starve[
both drowned in a barrel
Lesbian, drowned
Burned at Tudela for "heresy with his body"
And from the UK:
His trial was at the Old Bailey in November, where he was
convicted of having "a venereal affair" with James Hankinson. He
was hanged at Newgate. He was hanged with a forger, Ann Hurle -
they were led out of Debtor's Door and rather than the New Drop
they were hanged by a cart being driven from under them.
"Spershott's hanging was perhaps the last occasion at which was
performed the folk ritual of the hangman passing the dead man's
hands over the neck and bosoms of young women as a cure for
glandular enlargements."
The last two men to be hanged for homosexuality in England.
[1835]
https://mahyartousi.co.uk/forums/topic/our-christian-heritage/
Nick Ferrari
At one point in the discussion, Peter Kiszely said, with reference to the
use and misuse of the word 'safe,' 'We all know you can see it in the
language.' Whatever good sense and sensitivity the host and guests showed
when discussing the mistakes of the woke, their mistaken actions as well as
the language they use so often, that sense and degree of sensitivity was
nowhere to be found when it came to discussing the episode of the 'flag and
swastika.' On the evidence available, it seems that Hampshire Police
blundered - a comical act, to an extent, but with serious, even sinister
overtones. But when Emma Webb gave her own interpretation, it was very
disturbing, conniving in hideous misuse of language - but those highly
accomplished bullshit detectors Peter Whittle, Rafe Heydel-Mankoo and Philip
Kiszely seemed to find nothing wrong. Their minds, or their nostrils,
perhaps, seem to have failed them.
From the Pastor's article: 'A video report on Sky News used the term ‘religious bigotry’ to describe our Christian testimony. Whatever happened to impartial reporting? Why did the reporter not come over to us and ask some questions? She would have found out that we are perfectly capable of engaging in civilised debate.
If the Pastor ever made use of the opportunity to have a 'civilized debate' with Sky News about homosexuality, I'd recommend to Sky News asking him for a comment on the material to be found in the Wikipedia 'List of people executed for homosexuality in Europe.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
If homosexuals loathe his orthodox views on homosexuality, it has something to do with awareness of what orthodox Christians have done to homosexuals over the centuries. They would loathe them even more the more they know about the horrific facts. Among the punishments mentioned in the article, including some from this country:
A German cross-dressing lesbian executed for heresy against nature
They were pierced in their tongues, hanged and burned; they were
also charged with blasphemy.
German from Augsburg; burned in Rome with 3 heretics
From Augsburg; one burned, other 4 (all ecclesiastics) bound hand
and foot in a wooden cage to starve[
both drowned in a barrel
Lesbian, drowned
Burned at Tudela for "heresy with his body"
And from the UK:
His trial was at the Old Bailey in November, where he was convicted
of having "a venereal affair" with James Hankinson. He was hanged at
Newgate. He was hanged with a forger, Ann Hurle - they were led out
of Debtor's Door and rather than the New Drop they were hanged by a
cart being driven from under them.
"Spershott's hanging was perhaps the last occasion at which was
performed the folk ritual of the hangman passing the dead man's
hands over the neck and bosoms of young women as a cure for
glandular enlargements."
The last two men to be hanged for homosexuality in England. [1835]
Is Pastor Peter Simpson perfectly capable of engaging in civilized debate or perfectly capable of becoming evasive when confronted by harsh realities?
Is the confidence of Christians, including your own Christian
supporters, fragile? Can Christians defend themselves robustly, with
argument and evidence? Or do they prefer to flee the battlefield and
take no part in the 'battle of ideas?' Here, I'll include comments
on evangelical and other protestant views and on the Anglican
Church. I'll begin, though, with the Roman Catholic Church.
Christianity is and has never been a monolithic faith, and
Christians have never been fully united in their views. The wars of
religion, such as the Thirty Years War of 1618 - 1648, which killed
many millions, are graphic evidence of that. I regard woke views as
ridiculous and harmful. Have the Roman Catholic Church and the
various Protestant Churches caused harm, have they presented some
ridiculous views? I'm sure they have, and still do, although Nazism
and Stalinism have been vastly worse. I don't in the least claim
that individual Roman Catholics and other Christians are always
negligible people, quite the opposite. There are many, many
Christians known to me with substantial strengths - massive
strengths. Although this is a long comment, I can't do justice to
the issues in the space available. All I'm doing is presenting a few
snippets. To begin with the teaching of 'Saint' Thomas Aquinas, the
'Doctor Angelicus' ('Angelic
Doctor') of the Roman Catholic Church: 'With regard to heretics,'
the Angelic Doctor writes, 'two points must be observed: one, on
their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own
side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated
from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the
world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith
which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports
temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers
are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more
reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of
heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death.' The
burning alive of heretics and execution by other means constitutes a
hideous episode of Roman Catholic history. A well known example:
Giordano Bruno, who denied such Catholic doctrines as eternal
damnation, the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the virginity of
Mary and transubstantiation. He was found guilty and burned at the
stake in 1600. Protestants have also dealt with failures to conform
to Protestant orthodoxy by methods far in excess of any used by
'woke' people. To give just one, well-known example, Michael
Servetus rejected the doctrine and other Roman Catholic doctrines.
He was condemned by the Catholic Church in France and fled to
Calvinist Geneva. He was denounced by Calvin and burned at the stake
for heresy in 1553, by the order of the governing council of Geneva.
The pretence that British history has been overwhelmingly or almost
always a a force for good is is contradicted by many, many events.
I'd include in the ong list of exceptions this, the execution of
Thomas Aikenhead for blasphemy, but this execution was as long ago
as 1697. So far as I'm aware, the much more recent phenomenon of 'wokeism,'
for all its harmful effects, has never executed anyone. 'Woke'
censorship of views that the 'woke' dislike is well known but
Christians have been just as vigorous - in fact, far more so.
Censoring of books has been an established, official practice of the
R.C Church. The 'Index Librorum Prohibitorum' ('List of Prohibited
Books') contained books which Catholics were forbidden to read. It
included books deemed heretical or contrary to morals. Books placed
on the prohibited list included Kant's monumental 'Critique of Pure
Reason,' Pascal's ' Penseés' (with notes by Voltaire), Spinoza's 'Tractatus
Theologico-Politicus,' Locke's 'An Essay Concerning Human
Understanding,' John Stuart Mill's 'Principles of Political
Economy,' Edward Gibbon's 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,'
Flaubert's 'Madame Bovary' - and all the works of the philosopher
David Hume, all the works of Zola and all the works of Sartre.
Here, in its zealous pursuit of 'error,' wokeism comes close to the
hideous record of the Roman Catholic Church or even surpasses it in
some ways and the 'woke' penalties for offending may be severe but
nowhere near as severe as execution. Over the centuries, Roman
Catholics have persecuted orthodox protestants and orthodox
protestants have persecuted Roman Catholics, often forcing them into
hiding and often executing them when discovered. Well into the
19th century, members of Oxford and Cambridge University were
required to subscribe to the Thirty-Nine articles of the Church of
England, the statement of faith and practice which amongst much else
articulated the doctrine of the Trinity and doctrines of sin and
salvation which have hideous implications - I touch upon this
briefly below. The universities were far from being havens of sanity
and unfettered debate before the advent of 'wokeism.' It would
take a long time to give a summary of the ridiculous aspects and
harmful effects associated with one Roman Catholic doctrine alone,
baptism. Here, Protestant views are surely less ridiculous, less
harmful (but, as I explain later, Protestant doctrines of salvation
and redemption are very often much more ridiculous and harmful than
Roman Catholic doctrines: the contrast between salvation by faith
and salvation by works. Roman Catholic doctrines of the sacraments
are markedly different from Protestant doctrines. The sacrament of
baptism has very often been thought essential for salvation in the
Roman Catholic Church. Augustine (the Augustine of Hippo, North
Africa, not the Augustine of Canterbury) seems to have changed his
views on baptism. In one sermon of his, he claimed that only people
who had received baptism could be saved, a belief shared by many
early Christians. A passage in 'City of God' may possibly indicate a
belief that children born of Christian parents who died unbaptized
were not necessarily doomed to hell. The Roman Catholic Church has
in general shown the utmost reluctance to concede that unbaptized
children could be admitted to heaven, hence the extension of
doctrine to include the state of 'Limbo' for unbaptized babies,
neither heaven nor hell. I'd say that 'woke' beliefs in general
don't quite reach the ridiculousness of all this. Modern Catholic
discussions of baptism equal or surpass in ridiculousness 'woke'
views. A short extract from an article on the site https://angelusnews.com/faith/emergencies-and-baptism-will-soda-water-do/
with a title which reflects the Website address, 'Emergencies and
baptism: will soda water do?' 'A red pickup truck was overturned
by the side of the road. The driver lay on the grass, thrown clear
of the vehicle, crumpled, bleeding and unresponsive. A young man
pulled his car off the road and sprinted to the side of the dying
man. He called 911, then rushed back to his car and grabbed the
waxed cup from a fast-food restaurant that was in the cup holder of
his car. It held some melting ice and water, left over from a soda
he’d drank earlier in the day. He poured the water from the melted
ice over the man’s forehead with the words, “I baptize you in the
name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” The man died a
few minutes before the ambulance arrived. 'The next day, the
young man posted the question on a Catholic Q&A site: “I’m just
wondering — was it a valid baptism?” The helpful advice offered in
the article included this, 'For a valid baptism of an adult, the
Church requires an unbaptized person and pure water.' It gives this
quotation from the 'Catholic Encyclopedia:' Water derived from
melted ice, snow, or hail is ... valid. … As to a mixture of water
and some other material, it is held as proper matter, provided the
water certainly predominates and the mixture would still be called
water. Invalid matter is every liquid that is not usually
designated true water. Such are oil, saliva, wine, tears, milk,
sweat, beer, soup, the juice of fruits and any mixture containing
water which men would no longer call water.' As for doctrines of
salvation, redemption, orthodox evangelical views are unsurpassed
for their hideous implications, but are widely shared by other
Christians. 'Saint' Paul taught that the eternal destiny of a person
is decided by faith or lack of faith in Jesus Christ as 'personal
lord and saviour.' There are countless statements of Christian faith
which present this bleak view. This is from a page of the Christian
Police Association with the title 'Faith.' 'We Believe ... that
'those who have died having believed and received forgiveness will
be raised, and together with those believers who are still alive,
will be taken to live with Christ forever. Those who have refused to
believe will be condemned from God’s presence forever.' The Oakes
Holiday Centre in Sheffield, which tries to mix fun with
Christianity, can find no fun in this 'Statement of Belief' on their
Website: 'The Lord Jesus Christ will return in person, to judge
everyone, to execute God's just condemnation on those who have not
repented and to receive the redeemed to eternal glory.' These are
some implications of these statements and similar statements from
Christian Churches all over the country, all over the world. The
list could be extended indefinitely. According to this doctrine of
redemption, commonplace in Christian circles: All police officers
are doomed to spend eternity in hell, except for the minority of
police officers who have accepted Jesus Christ as personal lord and
saviour, including police officers killed in action. All the
troops who liberated the concentration camps and extermination camps
are consigned to hell, except for the minority of Jesus Christ
accepters. All the people executed by the Nazis for saving the
lives of Jews are consigned to hell, except for that minority.
Time to mention the case of one person, Ernst Biberstein, who
studied theology and became a pastor. During the Second World War,
he was the commanding officer of Einsatktommando 6, which executed
thousands of people. The Einsatzkommandos were a sub-group of the
Einsatzgruppen, mobile killing squads, who exterminated Jews and
others in the territories captured by the German forces as they
advanced Eastwards. After the war, he was tried and sentenced to
death but the sentence was commuted. He was released in 1958 and
returned to the clergy. There seems reason to believe that he was
a committed Christian and qualified for salvation according to the
orthodox Christian view, or one view of the orthodox Christian view.
There's every reason to believe that virtually all the people
massacred by his execution squads and the other Einsatzgruppen were
not qualified for salvation according to the orthodox Christian
view, every reason to believe that virtually all the people killed
in the Nazi gas chambers were unqualified for salvation, according
to this deranged doctrine. There may well have been some Christian
converts amongst them, but the victims were overwhelmingly Jews,
without a belief in Christ as Lord and Saviour. Loving mothers and
fathers, loving mothers and fathers who have looked after disabled
children, are all consigned to hell, unless they belong to that
minority of believers. And what of the fate of the disabled children
themselves - are they saved or damned? The Bible gives no
information about an age above which young people qualify for
damnation. I know of no Christian discussions of the issue, although
there must surely be some. The belief that all composers go to
hell is yet another consequence. So, to give just one example,
Dmitri Shostakovich: hell. Johann Sebastian Bach, heaven. All the
working people who have done backbreaking and dangerous work - or
backbreaking and dangerous work - are damned, including ones killed
in pit disasters, in industrial accidents, all doomed - apart from
the believing minority. The Christian Police Association also has
this belief: 'We Believe that the Bible, as originally given, is the
inspired Word of God without error and is the only complete
authority in all matters of faith and doctrine.' What are people
who have this belief in the inerrancy of the Bible to make of these
Biblical texts? Just a few examples. Psalm 137: 8-9 in the 'Good
News (!)' translation: Babylon, you will be destroyed. Happy are
those who pay you back for what you have done to us - who take your
babies and smash them against a rock. Exodus 22: 18-19, again, in
the 'Good News' translation: 'Put to death any woman who practices
magic.' By the way, this is Exodus 22: 20 'Condemn to death
anyone who offers sacrifices to any god except to me, the Lord.'
The Authorized version of the Bible gives this as the translation
for another verse from a book supposedly 'without error,' Exodus 22:
18: 'Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.' King James - the
King James of the King James version of the Bible - believed that
witches deserved death. His book on witchcraft, 'The Demonology'
gives revealing insights into his state of mind. He was a ferocious
persecutor of women he thought of as witches, and under his
jurisdiction, many women were put to death. A
fascinating/ridiculous page https://anglican.ink/2022/05/21/growth-decline-and-extinction-of-uk-churches/
gives 'Estimated Extinction Dates for UK Churches.' 'The Church
of England and Catholics should last until the second half of the
century. However, they need to take urgent action now. Stemming
losses is not enough. None of us can prevent ageing! Whatever their
current denominational emphases, they should put all aside to
encourage members to make new disciples who can replicate
themselves. Praying for an outpouring of the Holy Spirit would not
go amiss either.'Sadly, the immediate future looks bleak for the
Church in Wales, Church of Scotland, Episcopalians, Methodists, and
older Welsh nonconformists. They need to seriously ask themselves
how they have gotten themselves into a situation where extinction is
less than 30 years away.' Extinction is hardly likely to be complete
extinction. There will surely be isorated Christian believers and
pockets of Christian believers and larger groups, although not
numerically very large. The consequence, if orthodox Christians are
to be believed (but they shouldn't be believed, not for one moment)
is that the percentage of people headed for hell will increase
enormously - an enormous contrast with the situation in the ages of
faith, when Christians persecuted ferociously Christians with
different shades of belief and non-Christians but there were so many
people who did accept Christ as their Saviour.
I'll give an assortment of evidence to justify the claim that Christianity is a liability for anti-woke sites, that although woke views are in general ridiculous and harmful, they are less ridiculous and less harmful than the views of orthodox Christian doctrine. It's a long comment but it could easily be much, much longer. Anti-woke people who find it too much effort to follow discussions which are thorough - nobody is forcing you to read any of this. Post your complaints if you feel inclined - if, that is, you can summon up the energy to post a one-or-two liner, probably not more, but nobody is compelled to read your complaints either.
'List of people executed for homosexuality in Europe.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
What orthodox Christians have done to homosexuals over the centuries. Among the punishments mentioned in the article, including some from this country:
A German cross-dressing lesbian executed for heresy against
nature
They were pierced in their tongues, hanged and burned; they were
also charged with blasphemy.
German from Augsburg; burned in Rome with 3 heretics
From Augsburg; one burned, other 4 (all ecclesiastics) bound
hand and foot in a wooden cage to starve[
both drowned in a barrel
Lesbian, drowned
Burned at Tudela for "heresy with his body"
And from the UK:
His trial was at the Old Bailey in November, where he was
convicted of having "a venereal affair" with James Hankinson. He
was hanged at Newgate. He was hanged with a forger, Ann Hurle -
they were led out of Debtor's Door and rather than the New Drop
they were hanged by a cart being driven from under them.
"Spershott's hanging was perhaps the last occasion at which was
performed the folk ritual of the hangman passing the dead man's
hands over the neck and bosoms of young women as a cure for
glandular enlargements."
The last two men to be hanged for homosexuality in England.
[1835]
(2) These
are some implications of these statements and similar statements from
Christian Churches all over the country, all over the world. The list could
be extended indefinitely. According to this doctrine of redemption,
commonplace in Christian circles: All police officers are doomed to spend
eternity in hell, except for the minority of police officers who have
accepted Jesus Christ as personal lord and saviour, including police
officers killed in action. All the troops who liberated the concentration
camps and extermination camps are consigned to hell, except for the minority
of Jesus Christ accepters. All the people executed by the Nazis for saving
the lives of Jews are consigned to hell, except for that minority. Time to
mention the case of one person, Ernst Biberstein, who studied theology and
became a pastor. During the Second World War, he was the commanding officer
of Einsatktommando 6, which executed thousands of people. The
Einsatzkommandos were a sub-group of the Einsatzgruppen, mobile killing
squads, who exterminated Jews and others in the territories captured by the
German forces as they advanced Eastwards. After the war, he was tried and
sentenced to death but the sentence was commuted. He was released in 1958
and returned to the clergy. There seems reason to believe that he was a
committed Christian and qualified for salvation according to the orthodox
Christian view, or one view of the orthodox Christian view. There's every
reason to believe that virtually all the people massacred by his execution
squads and the other Einsatzgruppen were not qualified for salvation
according to the orthodox Christian view, every reason to believe that
virtually all the people killed in the Nazi gas chambers were unqualified
for salvation, according to this deranged doctrine. There may well have been
some Christian converts amongst them, but the victims were overwhelmingly
Jews, without a belief in Christ as Lord and Saviour. Loving mothers and
fathers, loving mothers and fathers who have looked after disabled children,
are all consigned to hell, unless they belong to that minority of believers.
And what of the fate of the disabled children themselves - are they saved or
damned? The Bible gives no information about an age above which young people
qualify for damnation. I know of no Christian discussions of the issue,
although there must surely be some. And this: all supporters of the New
Culture Forum and other anti-woke organs are consigned to hell according to
these doctrines, unless, again, they belong that minority of believers.
Peter Whittle of the New Culture Forum, who says that he isn't a religious
man, is certainly destined for hellfire, according to orthodox evangelical
belief and not just evangelical belief - unless he changes his mind, perhaps
as a result of a miraculous conversion. Many, many Christians pray for that
kind of thing. All the working people who have done backbreaking and
dangerous work - or backbreaking and dangerous work - are damned, including
ones killed in pit disasters, in industrial accidents, all doomed - apart
from the believing minority. The Christian Police Association also has this
belief: 'We Believe that the Bible, as originally given, is the inspired
Word of God without error and is the only complete authority in all matters
of faith and doctrine.' What are people who have this belief in the
inerrancy of the Bible to make of these Biblical texts? Just a few examples.
Psalm 137: 8-9 in the 'Good News (!)' translation: Babylon, you will be
destroyed. Happy are those who pay you back for what you have done to us -
who take your babies and smash them against a rock. Exodus 22: 18-19,
again, in the 'Good News' translation: 'Put to death any woman who
practices magic.' By the way, this is Exodus 22: 20 'Condemn to death
anyone who offers sacrifices to any god except to me, the Lord.' The
Authorized version of the Bible gives this as the translation for another
verse from a book supposedly 'without error,' Exodus 22: 18: 'Thou shalt
not suffer a witch to live.' King James - the King James of the King James
version of the Bible - believed that witches deserved death. His book on
witchcraft, 'The Demonology' gives revealing insights into his state of
mind. He was a ferocious persecutor of women he thought of as witches, and
under his jurisdiction, many women were put to death. Simon Webb of
'History Debunked' has declared his belief in 'The Lord,' so his eternal
destiny is secure, unless he loses his faith for any reason. On to other
matters in this brisk tour of Christian theological artefacts. A
fascinating/ridiculous page https://anglican.ink/2022/05/21/growth-decline-and-extinction-of-uk-churches/
gives 'Estimated Extinction Dates for UK Churches.' 'The Church of
England and Catholics should last until the second half of the century.
However, they need to take urgent action now. Stemming losses is not enough.
None of us can prevent ageing! Whatever their current denominational
emphases, they should put all aside to encourage members to make new
disciples who can replicate themselves. Praying for an outpouring of the
Holy Spirit would not go amiss either.'Sadly, the immediate future looks
bleak for the Church in Wales, Church of Scotland, Episcopalians,
Methodists, and older Welsh nonconformists. They need to seriously ask
themselves how they have gotten themselves into a situation where extinction
is less than 30 years away.' Extinction is hardly likely to be complete
extinction. There will surely be isorated Christian believers and pockets of
Christian believers and larger groups, although not numerically very large.
The consequence, if orthodox Christians are to be believed (but they
shouldn't be believed, not for one moment) is that the percentage of people
headed for hell will increase enormously - an enormous contrast with the
situation in the ages of faith, when Christians persecuted ferociously
Christians with different shades of belief and non-Christians but there were
so many people who did accept Christ as their Saviour. There is no necessary
linkage between and 'anti-woke' views and Christian belief. To very
different extents, Simon Webb's 'History Debunked,' the New Culture Forum,
GB News, the Daily Telegraph and the Spectator support or even endorse
Christianity. I've particular knowledge of the Daily Telegraph and the
Spectator because I regularly bought the newspaper and subscribed to the
magazine over a long period of time and got used to seeing pieces which
assumed the importance of Christianity in the country's national life, even
if they were never very frequent. 'Christian Woman' is yet another
conservative outfit which treats Christianity as beyond scrutiny. I disagree
with this view and many of the other views to be found on the site. There
has been comment on the increase in numbers of working class conservative
supporters and the possibility of losing that support, of course. If some
conservative supporters want to lost that support, then taking for granted
and promoting the Christian view of things may well contribute to that
debacle. It won't influence me. I'm in no danger of voting for the greens,
the Labour Party, the Women's Equality Party or any of the alternatives,
including the candidates who fully expect to lose their deposits.
Limitations of space have prevented me from discussing the views of Calvin
Robinson and the New Culture Forum video 'https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fw3jl0Tckh8
'How to Return the Church to God & Reverse Its Wokery? My Conservative
Views Stopped My Ordination.' Many Christians and many Churches are
completely open about their views on redemption - and, as the see it, the
damnation of unbelievers - although in my experience, they are never willing
to defend their views. Many Christians, on the other hand, treat their views
like closely guarded secrets. Don Calvin Robinson believe in the damnation
of all the people at GB News and the New Culture Forum who don't accept
Christ as Lord and Saviour or doesn't he? If he doesn't, then his orthodoxy
is questionable. All this discussion began with an issue to do with gay
pride. I'll end this comment with some material on treatment of homosexuals
- an international focus with British examples. I think that in general,
awareness of British history is strong amongst anti-woke people, with good
cause. But in general, anti-woke people ignore and evade the dark side of
British history. 'List of people executed for homosexuality in Europe.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi... What orthodox Christians have done to
homosexuals over the centuries. Among the punishments mentioned in the
article, including some from this country: A German cross-dressing lesbian
executed for heresy against nature They were pierced in their tongues,
hanged and burned; they were also charged with blasphemy. German from
Augsburg; burned in Rome with 3 heretics From Augsburg; one burned, other 4
(all ecclesiastics) bound hand and foot in a wooden cage to starve[ both
drowned in a barrel Lesbian, drowned Burned at Tudela for "heresy with his
body" And from the UK: His trial was at the Old Bailey in November, where he
was convicted of having "a venereal affair" with James Hankinson. He was
hanged at Newgate. He was hanged with a forger, Ann Hurle - they were led
out of Debtor's Door and rather than the New Drop they were hanged by a cart
being driven from under them. "Spershott's hanging was perhaps the last
occasion at which was performed the folk ritual of the hangman passing the
dead man's hands over the neck and bosoms of young women as a cure for
glandular enlargements." The last two men to be hanged for homosexuality in
England. [1835]
new culture forum
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLmFbU21HSU&t=74s
full video of woke police scandal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58yEPioAyTw&t=25s
Rowan Dean
Hampshire Police has blundered, Laurence Fox (who manipulated a gay pride flag to form a swastika) has blundered, the veteran was badly mistaken, so many anti-woke sites are badly mistaken in their interpretation of the events and now you're badly mistaken as well. The anti-woke sites and Sky News Australia are badly mistaken not about every aspect of the case but about a central aspect of the case. Without thinking, you were quick to see the case with anti-woke vision - but the case raised issues which needed a very different perspective. A central issue which has been neglected by the anti-woke media: it's essential not to equate the Nazis with people who are obviously not Nazis, such as people involved with gay pride events. To use the word 'Nazi' indiscriminately, negligently, without giving any thought to the barbarities which put the Nazis in a category apart - their cruelties rivalled by the cruelties which occurred in Stalinist Russia but exceeding them - has to be condemned. People generally know about Auschwitz and Belsen and Dachau and perhaps more concentration and extermination camps, and about some of the horrors which took place during the Nazi domination of Europe, but might benefit by enlarging their knowledge. The mobile killing units, the Einsatzgruppen, which accompanied Nazi forces during the invasion of Russia, are not common knowledge, perhaps, but their contribution to the horrors which took place under Nazi domination was immense. To equate the men of the Einsatzgruppen who shot vast numbers of people, including babies and their mothers, in some cases, for bravado, killing both with a single bullet, with the actions (and antics) of gay pride is very wrong - despicable. It would be like saying of a gay activist, 'he's the worst person whose ever lived.' It would be an abandonment of all balance and fair-mindedness, completely ridiculous but also very disturbing. I live in a country, England, whose wartime achievements are reason for intense pride, without forgetting that we were aided by people from many other countries. You Australians live in a country whose wartime achievements are reason for intense pride. Your achievements are beyond praise. 'Pride' is a word which tends to be overused and misused, like the word 'celebrate.' Limited achievements, very limited achievements, non-existent achievements are so often treated as 'awesome.' Some people seem to be forever 'celebrating' this and that. To give just one example of those wartime achievements, the perilous low-level attack by RAF Mosquito planes on the Gestapo headquarters at Aarhus, Denmark which freed members of the Danish resistance in Gestapo captivity, which killed many members of the Gestapo and which destroyed Gestapo files, including ones on the Danish resistance. The attack has been described as the most successful one of its kind during the Second World War. But obviously there are countless more. Pride in the part played by Britain and Australia, and New Zealand and other countries in the Second World War is not just justifiable but to be encouraged. The arrest of the veteran was obviously not just counter-productive but wrong, but anyone who supposes that being arrested by Hampshire Police can be equated with being arrested by the Gestapo is badly mistaken. The members of the allied armed forces who faced flame-throwers in battle, who risked being torn limb from limb, who faced all kinds of other dangers, dangers, in the Atlantic and Pacific, in all spheres of action, deserve not to have their achievements diminished by comparing the swastika, the symbol of hideous Nazi brutality, with the Gay Pride Flag. Hampshire Police mishandled the matter and made bad mistakes but they are no more Nazis than the Gay Pride people. The Swastika is an ugly, hideous symbol of fanaticism and cruelty. It's not a symbol which lends itself to a Laurence Fox publicity stunt. There are different ways of regarding his manipulation of the images but I think they must all amount to adverse judgment on him. I get the impression that there's complacency in many parts of the anti-woke camp. Someone who is anti-woke may even believe that the anti-woke cause matters more than any other cause, or most other causes - another bad mistake. Democratic, advanced societies face a vast range of problems, call upon a vast range of skills, are intrinsically intricate. Woke mistakes are only part of the whole and anti-woke activity is only part of the whole. Police forces may be sadly deficient in some respects whilst being efficient, good, perhaps outstanding in so many others. To suppose that they should be judged primarily for their action or lack of action in aiding the anti-woke movement is very wide of the mark. To overlook the fact that they face violence often, that they are sometimes injured in the course of duty, that a significant part of their work is unpleasant and intensely difficult is mistaken. It's essential to take into account the fact that their work often calls for great versatility and that inevitably, some or many members of police forces will be found wanting. It's essential to view these issues without smugness, without the delusions and illusions which can easily occur when people are sitting at their computers in a place of safety judging people who often have to work in conditions which aren't safe. The atrocious misuse by woke people of 'safe,' as in 'safe spaces,' has to be condemned severely, but anti-woke people may lack appreciation of physical dangers, the kind that the police often have to face. The police forces which protect society against all kinds of threats can't, realistically, protect society against all threats. Anti-woke candidates in elections are never or hardly ever electable, because their speciality, anti-woke studies, doesn't address so many of the problems which societies face. Anti-woke people can't possibly claim immunity from reasonable, fair-minded criticism. There is such a person as the anti-woke 'snowflake,' who can't face criticism. Anti-woke people who can dish out criticism but can't take it should try a different field for their talents, if they have any. I certainly don't claim immunity from criticism myself. I won't give any details here, but over the years, I've worked energetically to oppose 'woke' views (I'm not at all keen on the word 'woke,' but for convenience, I've used it.) If anyone wants to make criticisms of my views, go ahead.
Hampshire Police has blundered, Laurence Fox (who manipulated a gay pride flag to form a swastika) has blundered, the veteran was badly mistaken, so many anti-woke sites are badly mistaken in their interpretation of the events and now you're badly mistaken as well. The anti-woke sites and Sky Australia are badly mistaken not about every aspect of the case but about a central aspect of the case. Without thinking, you were quick to see the case with anti-woke vision - but the case raised very disturbing issues, issues which needed a very different perspective. A central issue which has been neglected by the anti-woke media: it's essential not to equate the Nazis with people who are obviously not Nazis, such as people involved with gay pride events. To use the word 'Nazi' indiscriminately, negligently, without giving any thought to the barbarities which put the Nazis in a category apart - their cruelties rivalled by the cruelties which occurred in Stalinist Russia but exceeding them - has to be condemned. People generally know about Auschwitz and Belsen and Dachau and perhaps more concentration and extermination camps, and about some of the horrors which took place during the Nazi domination of Europe, but might benefit by enlarging their knowledge. The mobile killing units, the Einsatzgruppen, which accompanied Nazi forces during the invasion of Russia, are not common knowledge, perhaps, but their contribution to the horrors which took place under Nazi domination was immense. To equate the men of the Einsatzgruppen who shot vast numbers of people, including babies and their mothers, in some cases, for bravado, killing both with a single bullet, with the actions (and antics) of gay pride is very wrong - despicable. It would be like saying of a gay activist, 'he's the worst person whose ever lived.' It would be an abandonment of all balance and fair-mindedness, completely ridiculous but also very disturbing. I live in a country, England, whose wartime achievements are reason for intense pride, without forgetting that we were aided by people from many other countries. You Australians live in a country whose wartime achievements are reason for intense pride. Your achievements are beyond praise. 'Pride' is a word which tends to be overused and misused, like the word 'celebrate.' Limited achievements, very limited achievements, non-existent achievements are so often treated as 'awesome.' Some people seem to be forever 'celebrating' this and that. To give just one example of those wartime achievements, the perilous low-level attack by RAF Mosquito planes on the Gestapo headquarters at Aarhus, Denmark which freed members of the Danish resistance in Gestapo captivity, which killed many members of the Gestapo and which destroyed Gestapo files, including ones on the Danish resistance. The attack has been described as the most successful one of its kind during the Second World War. But obviously there are countless more. Pride in the part played by Britain and Australia, and New Zealand and other countries in the Second World War is not just justifiable but to be encouraged. The arrest of the veteran was obviously not just counter-productive but wrong, but anyone who supposes that being arrested by Hampshire Police can be equated with being arrested by the Gestapo is badly mistaken. The members of the armed forces who faced flame-throwers in battle, who risked being torn limb from limb, who faced all kinds of other dangers, dangers, in the Atlantic and Pacific, in all spheres of action, deserve not to have their achievements diminished by comparing the swastika, the symbol of hideous Nazi brutality, with the Gay Pride Flag. Hampshire Police mishandled the matter and made bad mistakes but they are no more Nazis than the Gay Pride people. I get the impression that there's complacency in many parts of the anti-woke camp. Someone who is anti-woke may even believe that the anti-woke cause matters more than any other cause, or most other causes - another bad mistake. Democratic, advanced societies face a vast range of problems, call upon a vast range of skills, are intrinsically intricate. Woke mistakes are only part of the whole and anti-woke activity is only part of the whole. Police forces may be sadly deficient in some respects whilst being efficient, good, perhaps outstanding in so many others. To suppose that they should be judged primarily for their action or lack of action in the anti-woke movement is wrong. To overlook the fact that they face violence often, that they are sometimes injured in the course of duty, that a significant part of their work is unpleasant and intensely difficult is wrong. It's essential to take into account the fact that their work often calls for great versatility and that inevitably, some or many members of police forces will be found wanting. It's essential to view these issues without smugness, without the delusions and illusions which can easily occur when people are sitting at their computers in a place of safety judging people who sometimes have to work in conditions which aren't safe. The police forces which protect society against all kinds of threats can't, realistically, protect society against all threats. Anti-woke candidates in elections are never or hardly ever electable, because their speciality, anti-woke studies, doesn't address so many of the problems which societies face. Anti-woke people can't possibly claim immunity from reasonable, fair-minded criticism. There is such a thing as the anti-woke 'snowflake,' who can't face criticism. I certainly don't claim immunity from criticism myself. I won't give any details here, but over the years, I've worked energetically to oppose 'woke' views I'm not at all keen on the word 'woke,' but for convenience, I've used it.) If anyone wants to make criticisms of my views, go ahead.
Hampshire Police has blundered, Laurence Fox (who manipulated a gay pride flag to form a swastika) has blundered, the veteran was badly mistaken, so many anti-woke sites are badly mistaken in their interpretation of the events and now you're badly mistaken as well. The anti-woke sites and Sky Australia are badly mistaken not about every aspect of the case but about a central aspect of the case. Without thinking, you were quick to see the case with anti-woke vision - but the case raised very disturbing issues, issues which needed a very different perspective.
A central issue which has been neglected by the anti-woke media: it's essential not to equate the Nazis with people who are obviously not Nazis, such as people involved with gay pride events. To use the word 'Nazi' indiscriminately, negligently, without giving any thought to the barbarities which put the Nazis perhaps in a category apart - their cruelties rivalled by the cruelties which occurred in Stalinist Russia but exceeding them by quite a margin - has to be condemned. If people know about Auschwitz and Belsen and Dachau and perhaps a few more concentration and extermination camps, and about some of the horrors which took place during the Nazi domination of Europe, they might benefit by enlarging their knowledge. The mobile killing units, the Einsatzgruppen, which accompanied Nazi forces during the invasion of Russia, are not common knowledge, perhaps, but their contribution to the horrors which took place under Nazi domination was immense. To equate the men who shot babies and their mothers, in some cases, for bravado, killing both with a single bullet, with the actions (and antics) of gay pride is very wrong - despicable. It would be like saying of a gay activist, 'he's the worst person whose ever lived.' It would be an abandonment of all balance and fair-mindedness, completely ridiculous but at the same time disturbing and with consequences.
I live in a country, England, whose wartime achievements are reason for intense pride, without forgetting that we were aided by people from many other countries, in many other countries. You Australians live in a country whose wartime achievements are reason for intense pride. Your achievements are beyond praise. 'Pride' is a word which tends to be overused and misused, like the word 'celebrate.' Limited achievements, very limited achievements, non-existent achievements are so often treated as 'awesome.' Some people seem to be forever 'celebrating' this and that. To give just one example of those wartime achievements, the perilous low-level attack by RAF Mosquito planes on the Gestapo headquarters at Aarhus, Denmark which freed members of the Danish resistance in Gestapo captivity, which killed many members of the Gestapo and which destroyed Gestapo files, including ones on the Danish resistance. The attack has been described as the most successful one of its kind during the Second World War. But obviously there are countless more. Pride in the part played by Britain and Australia, and New Zealand and other countries in the Second World War is not just justifiable but to be encouraged.
If anyone supposes that being arrested by Hampshire Police can be equated with being arrested by the Gestapo, that being held in a cell by Hampshire Police can be equated with being held in a cell by the Gestapo, they are badly mistaken. The achievements of members of the armed forces who faced flame-throwers in battle, who risked being torn limb from limb, or all the other acute dangers, in the Atlantic and Pacific, in all spheres of action, deserve not to have their achievements diminished by comparing the swastika, the symbol of hideous Nazi brutality, with the Gay Pride Flag. Hampshire Police mishandled the matter and made bad mistakes, but they are no more Nazis than the Gay Pride people.
I get the impression that there's complacency in many parts of the anti-woke camp. Someone who is anti-woke may even believe that the anti-woke cause matters more than any other cause, or most other causes - another bad mistake. Democratic, advanced societies face a vast range of problems, call upon a vast range of skills, are intrinsically intricate. Woke mistakes are only part of the whole and anti-woke activity is only part of the whole. Anti-woke candidates in elections are never or practically never electable, because their speciality doesn't address all the other problems which societies face. Anti-woke people can't possibly claim immunity from reasonable, fair-minded criticism. There is such a thing as the anti-woke 'snowflake,' who can't face criticism.
Anti-woke people can't possibly claim immunity from making mistakes, immunity from criticism. I certainly don't claim immunity from criticism myself. I won't give any details here, but over the years, I've worked energetically to oppose 'woke' views (by the way, I'm not at all keen on the word 'woke,' but for convenience, I've used it.) If anyone wants to make criticisms of my views, go ahead.
Laurence Fox has blundered, the people at the New Culture Forum who discussed the issue and who took a similar view to yours have blundered and now you have blundered. You're all badly mistaken, not about every aspect of the case but about a central aspect of the case. I've already posted a comment on the New Culture Forum You Tube video page. I'm glad that they accepted the comment for publication and I'm confident that you won't be censoring this comment. Nobody in the 'anti-woke movement' should wish to get a reputation as an anti-woke 'snowflake.' A central issue which you neglect: it's essential not to equate the Nazis with people who are obviously not Nazis, such as people involved with gay pride events. To use the word 'Nazi' indiscriminately, negligently, without giving any thought to the barbarities which put the Nazis perhaps in a category apart - their cruelties rivalled by the cruelties which occurred in Stalinist Russia but exceeding them by quite a margin - has to be condemned. If people know about Auschwitz and Belsen and Dachau and perhaps a few more concentration and extermination camps, and about some of the horrors which took place during the Nazi domination of Europe, they might benefit by enlarging their knowledge. The mobile killing units, the Einsatzgruppen, which accompanied Nazi forces during the invasion of Russia, are not common knowledge, perhaps, but their contribution to the horrors which took place under Nazi domination was immense. To equate the men who shot babies and their mothers, in some cases, for bravado, killing both with a single bullet, with the actions (and antics) of gay pride is very wrong. We live in a country whose wartime achievements are reason for intense pride (without forgetting that we were aided by people from many other countries, in many other countries.) 'Pride' is a word which tends to be overused and misused, like the word 'celebrate.' Limited achievements, very limited achievements, non-existent achievements are so often treated as 'awesome.' Some people seem to be forever 'celebrating' this and that. To give just one example of those wartime achievements, the perilous low-level attack by RAF Mosquito planes on the Gestapo headquarters at Aarhus, Denmark which freed members of the Danish resistance in Gestapo captivity, which killed many members of the Gestapo and which destroyed Gestapo files, including ones on the Danish resistance. The attack has been described as the most successful one of its kind during the Second World War. Pride in the part played by Britain in the Second World War is completely justifiable. If anyone supposes that being arrested by Hampshire Police can be equated with being arrested by the Gestapo, that being held in a cell by Hampshire Police can be equated with being held in a cell by the Gestapo, they are mistake which calls for criticism. Hampshire Police mishandled the matter and made bad mistakes, but they are no more Nazis than the Gay Pride people. I get the impression that there's complacency in many parts of the anti-woke camp. Someone who is anti-woke may even believe that the anti-woke cause matters more than any other cause, or most other causes - another bad mistake. Anti-woke people can't possibly claim immunity from reasonable, fair-minded criticism. I certainly don't claim immunity from criticism myself. I won't give any details here, but over the years, I've worked energetically to oppose 'woke' views (by the way, I'm not at all keen on the word 'woke,' but for convenience, I've used it.) If anyone wants to make criticisms of my views, go ahead.
According to Mahyar Tousi, in a Twitter comment (28 November, 2021): 'This is a Christian country. Get used to it. I don't care if it hurts your feelings.' I'll give an assortment of evidence to justify the claim that Christianity is a liability for anti-woke sites, that although woke views are in general ridiculous and harmful, they are less ridiculous and less harmful than the views of orthodox Christian doctrine. It's a long comment but it could easily be much, much longer. Those anti-woke people who find it too much effort to follow discussions which are thorough - nobody is forcing you to read further, obviously.. Post your complaints if you feel inclined but nobody is compelled to read your complaints either. Here, I discuss not 'churches' in general but particular versions of Christian faith. Their differences are often very significant. Protestants have killed Catholics in large numbers and Catholics have killed Protestants in large numbers on account of the differences. It would be impossible to do more than touch upon the ridiculousness and harmful effects of Roman Catholicism over the years, over the centuries. I'll include comments on the ridiculousness and harmful effects of evangelical and other protestant views, comments on the Anglican Church's very substantial contribution (as the Established Church for centuries, it has had plenty of practice). I'll omit material on Roman Catholic doctrine, a pity in view of the massive evidence available. As for doctrines of salvation, redemption, orthodox evangelical views are unsurpassed for their hideous implications, but are widely shared by other Christians. 'Saint' Paul taught that the eternal destiny of a person is decided by faith or lack of faith in Jesus Christ as 'personal lord and saviour.' There are countless statements of Christian faith which present this bleak view. This is from a page of the Christian Police Association with the title 'Faith.' 'We Believe ... that 'those who have died having believed and received forgiveness will be raised, and together with those believers who are still alive, will be taken to live with Christ forever. Those who have refused to believe will be condemned from God’s presence forever.' T These are some implications of these statements and similar statements from Christian Churches all over the country, all over the world. The coverage could be extended indefinitely. According to this doctrine of redemption, commonplace in Christian circles: All police officers are doomed to spend eternity in hell, except for the minority of police officers who have accepted Jesus Christ as personal lord and saviour, including police officers killed in action. All the troops who liberated the concentration camps and extermination camps are consigned to hell, except for the minority of Jesus Christ accepters. All the people executed by the Nazis for saving the lives of Jews are consigned to hell, except for that minority. Loving mothers and fathers, loving mothers and fathers who have looked after disabled children, are all consigned to hell, unless they belong to that minority of believers. And what of the fate of the disabled children themselves - are they saved or damned? The Bible gives no information about an age above which young people qualify for damnation. I know of no Christian discussions of the issue, although there must surely be some. And this: all supporters of the New Culture Forum and other anti-woke organs are consigned to hell according to these doctrines, unless, again, they belong that minority of believers. Peter Whittle of the New Culture Forum, who says that he isn't a religious man, is certainly destined for hellfire, according to orthodox evangelical belief and not just evangelical belief - unless he changes his mind, perhaps as a result of a miraculous conversion. Many, many Christians pray for that kind of thing. All the working people who have done backbreaking and dangerous work - or backbreaking and dangerous work - are damned, including ones killed in pit disasters, in industrial accidents, all doomed - apart from the believing minority. The Christian Police Association also has this belief: 'We Believe that the Bible, as originally given, is the inspired Word of God without error and is the only complete authority in all matters of faith and doctrine.' What are people who have this belief in the inerrancy of the Bible to make of these Biblical texts? Just a few examples. Psalm 137: 8-9 in the 'Good News (!)' translation: Babylon, you will be destroyed. Happy are those who pay you back for what you have done to us - who take your babies and smash them against a rock. Exodus 22: 18-19, again, in the 'Good News' translation: 'Put to death any woman who practices magic.' By the way, this is Exodus 22: 20 'Condemn to death anyone who offers sacrifices to any god except to me, the Lord.' The Authorized version of the Bible gives this as the translation for another verse from a book supposedly 'without error,' Exodus 22: 18: 'Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.' King James - the King James of the King James version of the Bible - believed that witches deserved death. His book on witchcraft, 'The Demonology' gives revealing insights into his state of mind. He was a ferocious persecutor of women he thought of as witches, and under his jurisdiction, many women were put to death. Simon Webb of 'History Debunked' has declared his belief in 'The Lord,' so his eternal destiny is secure, unless he loses his faith for any reason. Peter Whittle has declared that he isn't a religious man so his prospects are likely to be very different, according to the illusions and delusions of orthodox Christian belief. There is no necessary linkage between and 'anti-woke' views and Christian belief. To very different extents, Simon Webb's 'History Debunked,' the New Culture Forum, GB News, the Daily Telegraph and the Spectator support or even endorse Christianity. I've particular knowledge of the Daily Telegraph and the Spectator because I regularly bought the newspaper and subscribed to the magazine over a long period of time and got used to seeing pieces which assumed the importance of Christianity in the country's national life, even if they were never very frequent. 'Christian Woman' is yet another conservative outfit which treats Christianity as beyond scrutiny. I disagree with this view and many of the other views to be found on the site. There has been comment on the increase in numbers of working class conservative supporters and the possibility of losing that support, of course. If some conservative supporters want to lost that support, then taking for granted and promoting the Christian view of things may well contribute to that debacle. It won't influence me. I'm in no danger of voting for the greens, the Labour Party, the Women's Equality Party or any of the alternatives, including the candidates who fully expect to lose their deposits. Limitations of space have prevented me from discussing the views of Calvin Robinson and the New Culture Forum video 'https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fw3jl0Tckh8 'How to Return the Church to God & Reverse Its Wokery? My Conservative Views Stopped My Ordination.' Many Christians and many Churches are completely open about their views on redemption - and, as the see it, the damnation of unbelievers - although in my experience, they are never willing to defend their views. Many Christians, on the other hand, treat their views like closely guarded secrets. Don Calvin Robinson believe in the damnation of all the people at GB News and the New Culture Forum who don't accept Christ as Lord and Saviour or doesn't he? If he doesn't, then his orthodoxy is questionable. All this discussion began with an issue to do with gay pride. I'll end this comment with some material on treatment of homosexuals - an international focus with some British examples. I think that in general, awareness of British history is strong amongst anti-woke people, with good cause. But in general, anti-woke people ignore and evade the dark side of British history. 'List of people executed for homosexuality in Europe.' https://en.wikipedia.org/wi... What orthodox Christians have done to homosexuals over the centuries. Among the punishments mentioned in the article, including some from this country: A German cross-dressing lesbian executed for heresy against nature They were pierced in their tongues, hanged and burned; they were also charged with blasphemy. German from Augsburg; burned in Rome with 3 heretics From Augsburg; one burned, other 4 (all ecclesiastics) bound hand and foot in a wooden cage to starve[ both drowned in a barrel Lesbian, drowned Burned at Tudela for "heresy with his body" And from the UK: His trial was at the Old Bailey in November, where he was convicted of having "a venereal affair" with James Hankinson. He was hanged at Newgate. He was hanged with a forger, Ann Hurle - they were led out of Debtor's Door and rather than the New Drop they were hanged by a cart being driven from under them. "Spershott's hanging was perhaps the last occasion at which was performed the folk ritual of the hangman passing the dead man's hands over the neck and bosoms of young women as a cure for glandular enlargements." The last two men to be hanged for homosexuality in England. [1835]