DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Time to end political correctness

This isn't about bringing up the past as a hammer except to point out your cognitive dissonance. You are so quick to condemn Christians as little as 30 years ago for using the Bible to promote those things you listed, but are absolutely positive that this Supreme Court ruling is against God's will. The reason so many fundamentalists approved of slavery and anti-miscegenation and the crusades was because they believed it was God's will. Not because of perversion. Not because of personal advancement. But because the entire Christian community supported it.

What message does it send when Christian stalwarts such as Jerry Falwall blame 9/11 on the gays and lesbians. What message did it sent when John Hagee blamed Katrina on the gays and lesbians. What message does it send when Bob Jones III said it might not be a bad idea to stone homosexuals as the Bible commands.

It was only 6 months ago that a California Lawyer proposed a bill that California kills all the gays because it's Gods command. I'm sure your answer would be that this guy is a crackpot. It's true he's a crackpot. He's also a fundamentalist. And his viewpoint is shared by many other fundamentalists. When you believe that condoning homosexuality will bring about God's judgement, it's not hard to see why Christians are so blatantly against *any* legislation that may be perceived as condoning the act.

Imagine a country full of fundamentalists. In fact you don't have to imagine it. Go to Iran. Go to Pakistan. In several Islamic countries, not only would you get support for the "kill the gays" bill, it's already LAW.



What rights of hers were violated? She didn't do her job, she was ordered to do her job, she ignored the court order, and was found in contempt. What next, you're gonna tell us how a murderers rights are violated when they are found guilty of murder and sent to jail?

Your straw man argument against indigenous peoples holds no weight. Native American or Inuit marriage clerks do not have the right to deny marriage licenses because of their beliefs.

I would suggest that these men re-read their Bibles, and pay special attention to the fact that we all sin, that man loosed sin on the world through his own actions (Adam) and that sin is the reason the world is in the condition it is in, not specifically because one sin is somehow worse than another.

There is no recorded example of Jesus speaking to a gay person, but I suppose that He would tell such a person, if they came to Him, that He forgives their sins, and that they should go and sin no more. Further, when Jesus went to the cross, He went to save us from our sins, not to save us from all sins except for ...... (with the exception of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit .... which, in speaking with my Pastor, seems would certainly be impossible for a person who was going to be saved later anyway)

Jesus never said "I am going to save the world from only this sin" ... or "I am going to save the world, except those who practice this other sin" ...... He came to save us from our sins. All of our sins.

As far as those who want to kill a whole group of people because of their sin ..... I would suggest that such a person be very careful, because God knows all of our sins as well, and we are to be judged as we judge others. I also would ask where Jesus told anyone, either during his earthly ministry, or following His resurrection and glorification, to kill anyone for their sins. I can find no such teaching, and in fact, Jesus told us not to do so.

This is why it is so important for a person to read the whole Bible, and get the whole lesson it teaches.

God created man. Man sinned. This loosed sin and death upon the world.

Man wanted to be able to "do for himself" his salvation, so God set rules for man to do so. God's laws were perfect, and no man could ever hope to obey them perfectly, so the substitutional sacrifice system began. Man could sacrifice a perfect animal to atone for many of his sins. However, certain other sins required the most harsh of punishments. Why? Because man had to learn the lessons that God was teaching, that he could never find salvation on his own, even with an earthly sacrificial system.

That is a huge portion of the lessons of the Old Testament. In fact, I would argue that this was the main teaching of the Old Testament .... that man sins, and needs to be saved from his sins, because he is fully and completely incapable of saving himself, even with a sacrifice system in place by which he, largely, can do so.

Then Jesus came, and He was God made man. He was born as a human child, but was also fully God. He came to this earth to be the perfect sacrifice that could take away the sins of the entire world, all people in all times and places, as long as they accepted him as their Lord and Savior, and repented of their sins.

Some people look at the Bible as a story of God's punishment against man ..... but it really is the story of God's love for mankind. He knows our nature, and He knows that we, as a people, have to try and fail on our own to "earn" salvation in order for us to accept that we cannot do it on our own. He then came to earth, in human form, and, fulfilling so many prophesies along the way that I cannot count them all, He lived a perfect, sinless life. He then sacrificed that sinless life on the cross for our sins, as the perfect, unblemished 1st born sacrificial lamb of God.

How someone gets "go kill people" out of that is beyond me.

As far as laws condoning homosexuality, I do not oppose them because I think such will bring about God's judgement. God will judge this world when it is His chosen time, and not a second before or after. The problem I have with widespread acceptance of homosexuality, especially in the form of adding such to the institution of marriage, is that it then becomes acceptable, and moral in the eyes of many. This is very dangerous where the Bible is concerned. Why does a person repent of their sins? Because they know they are wrong. If society says that gay sex is just fine, and backs it up with gay marriage being perfectly acceptable, then is a person inclined to follow the Bible, or man? Many will blindly assume that because man says something is moral, then God must as well. This is the danger as I see it.

I don't hate gay people. I don't want to kill gay people. I want them to be saved.

Even a saved man will sin. We live in a fallen world, and that makes sin almost unavoidable at one time or another. However, we must not place our sin above the sacrifice of Jesus Christ in order of importance. We must not say to God that our sin is more important than Him. If we follow God, then we should strive to stay free from sin. We will fail, but the intent should be there. We should be injured ourselves by our sin. It should trouble us that we sin. We cannot do that if we live in a sinful relationship or lifestyle.

That is why I have a problem with easy divorce laws, with gay marriage, with women having multiple children out of wedlock, and so many other aspects of live today that go against the teachings of the Bible.

The Bible tells the story of God's love for us. In the Old Testament, He shows how we are incapable of saving ourselves, and He has to use some fairly brutal laws to get that point across .. because of who we are. The New Testament shows how great God's love is for us all, and the wonderful sacrifice God made for us all .... if we will only accept His love, and mercy.

I truly do not understand how anyone gets the idea that we have to kill people for their sins out of it, when read cover to cover.

Even they called me grandpa

You made a blanket statement you said "100 years ago Christians believed in Evolution and felt that the story of the flood was myth, not "fact." I pointed out the fact that the statement was not true for all Christians or even for any of the Christians I knew. You made a incorrect statement Gage and I pointed it out.



If you call recent over 100 years ago then I could agree with you. However in this part of the country you are way, way off on the 1970's statement as well. I heard it, I was taught it, and I was told about it by others who were hear 100 years ago.

There you go again. "Because the entire Christian community supported it"

What are you going to tell us next? ALL black people commit crimes? ALL black people loves them some watermellon, fried chicked, and chitlins?

Mmmmmmmmmmmmm

Throw in some Collard Greens and set me a place at the table!

I don't either, but there remains the troubling proposition that so many Americans believe the Bible to be the literal word of God, and the Word of God when taken literally mentions things like killing homosexuals (Leviticus 20:13), death for adultery (Leviticus 20:10), kill nonbelievers (2 Chronicles 15:12-13), and various other "edicts" spoken along the way. I know we've spoken at times about the New Covenant. My understanding is you believe that the New Covenant means the OT rules are done for unless specifically accounted for. Many fundamentalists believe the opposite: that unless Jesus or his Apostles specifically outlawed a practice of the old testament, that the old testament rules still apply.

Given that we had laws on the books for hundreds of years that claimed everything from miscegenation to slavery was God willed, we are only shortly out of the woodwork of well meaning Christians doing pretty bad things. Kim Davis is doing a bad thing but it pales in comparison to what we did in God's name over the course of this country's history. SSM is just the current item on the docket.

There are countries out there that are either ran by fundamentalists or terrorized by them. And sure, we could assert that only a minority of practicing Christians in the US are fundamentalist. What bother would they be? Yet the CIA estimates 20-31k ISIS members are in Syria and Iraq combined. Syria has 18 million people. You'd think 18 million versus 20k would be fairly easy to deal with.

People talking about their faith doesn't bother me. People talking about their religion doesn't bother me. What bothers me is hearing people spout FUD and rhetoric in an effort for sympathy. People like Mike Huckabee claiming that Christians would be thrown in jail, when 70% of America is Christian. People like you, who claim that Christianity is under attack when it's the single largest denomination in the US. Maybe the rhetoric doesn't both you. I hope it doesn't. But for those who are already in a fundamentalist shell and trained to doubt everything about the secular world, playing into their fears can be dangerous.

And I elaborated further. I'm not sure where it's a blanket statement. Modernist Christianity did enjoy the majority share during that time period (more precisely 1880-1960). Before 1880, Christians held more weight in the Bible as a basis of morals and decency than they did in it's divinity. There simply wasn't much argument about the Bible itself between denominations.



I'm not saying fundamentalists didn't exist back then. Dispensationalism was started in the 1830s. The World Christians Fundamentals Association was founded in 1919. Indeed, if we were to look back exactly 100 years ago to 1915, you'd see a time period where fundamentalism was becoming more prominent and aggressive.

Yet after the loss of the Fundamentalist-Modernist controversy in the 1920s, most Christians stuck with the modernist route and fundamentalists became fewer in number. But I think they found their shtick in the 1960s by saying the reason we have the Soviets and Abortion and Divorce rates and everything else is because we aren't taking God seriously enough. Billy Graham. Bob Jones. Jerry Falwell. Rob Grant. These names all started to become prominent in the 1960s. This started gaining traction and resonating with people. Once politicians realized there is a new voting block they did what all politicians do: they work to own it. So republicans and southern democrats adopted this new group. Reagan used them very well and helped laid the foundation for the evangelical prominence in politics today.

I'm not saying you weren't taught it. Hey, I was taught the sun revolves around the earth by fundamentalists. In 1997. But there is a general nationwide arc at play here that shows how much the Christian faith dynamic has changed in a century or so.

Are you going to contribute to the discussion or sit on the sidelines building strawmen?

Do you even realize that you are following the same playbook muslims use to defend islam from terrorism?

Well, all I can say is that I posted how I understand the structure of the Bible. Jesus came to take the penalty for sin, and that means that man no longer has any ability to impose penalties for another's sins. (breaking laws is different)

The OT shows man his sin and imperfection, and imposes the penalties for sin. There are harsh punishments, because God wanted to show man how seriously He takes sin. Sin is worthy of death, and only by death can sin be forgiven. (in the OT, through a direct sacrificial system)

The NT shows us that we can be forgiven through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, who died as a substitute for our sins.

As far as what we, as Christians, are allowed to do .... we can inform a person of their sins, like a man warning a friend that he is about to go speeding through a school zone .... and we can warn then of potential penalties, but we are not the judge who sentences them to their final punishment. We need to be really careful as not to assume a role that God has prescribed for others.

And ultimately that is all any of us have. I know Peter said the Bible is by its nature difficult to understand, and I get that. But I always took that to mean the Bible would be difficult for those who didn't work to learn it. When you talk of the Scripture it's clear you write with conviction. Even if I disagree with it I can see the logic. It's what gives me pause when people equate religious intolerance to bigotry. Yet so many people take the Bible incorrectly. And I don't mean seculars. I mean those who go to church. Those who are pastors and deacons. Many don't mean harm but are simply ignorant about the Bible. Some use them for their own devious ends. John Avanzini loves preaching about how God rewards people with monetary gain. He even said that John 19:23 meant Jesus wore designer clothing!

Oh it's a blanket statement alright. You do know that people do admit when they are wrong don't you. It's OK none of us are perfect.

Oh I contribute. I pointed out that your saying ALL CHRISTIANS, just like unwise people use to say ALL BLACKS, and some unwise people now say ALL MUSLIMS. Once again I have to say it's OK to admit your wrong buddy.

well....we do all love chicken bro. pretty much all whites do.

and watermelon. its good. don't hate.

The more I think about this issue the more I realize that only churches or justice of the peace should be allowed to issue marriage licenses, or have no marriage license requirements at all. The only reason the govt ihas a stake in this is for revenue.

I think that the "prosperity doctrine" is incredibly dangerous. If you don't have money, then God must not like you ... ?

1 That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat by the lake.
2 Such large crowds gathered around him that he got into a boat and sat in it, while all the people stood on the shore.
3 Then he told them many things in parables, saying: "A farmer went out to sow his seed.
4 As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up.
5 Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow.
6 But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root.
7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants.
8 Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop--a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown.
9 He who has ears, let him hear."
10 The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables?"
11 He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.
12 Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.
13 This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.
14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: " 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15 For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.'
16 But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear.
17 For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.
18 "Listen then to what the parable of the sower means:
19 When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is the seed sown along the path.
20 The one who received the seed that fell on rocky places is the man who hears the word and at once receives it with joy.
21 But since he has no root, he lasts only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, he quickly falls away.
22 The one who received the seed that fell among the thorns is the man who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke it, making it unfruitful.
23 But the one who received the seed that fell on good soil is the man who hears the word and understands it. He produces a crop, yielding a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown."

An early example of political correctness:

Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they marveled at him.

____________________

And some said, "So if I say Caesar's a tyrant I'm the bad guy!?".

Debate the issue or go away

I thought you'd be above trying to pick nits instead of debating the issue. Are you that fragile when it comes to discussing Christianity?

My mother in law was a practicing christian for decades and then she got hit with stage 1 oral cancer. She asks the pastor for advice and guidance. His response? She must have done something wrong. She doesn't practice anymore...

Look I think you get it, that not all Christians or even Christian churches are the same... and outside of that mainstream group there is a vocal minority group of fundamentalists who pervert the faith, and there are vocal minority groups who know how to market religion for money.

GM is too busy trying to find one sentence or one word and use that to say I'm 100% wrong. Absolving Christians of all wrong-doing just gives fuel and opportunity to those who pervert religion. Perhaps he should do more reflection and realize that there are Christians out there that pervert the Bible. And that bringing up these Christians and saying "hey, they are damaging the religion" is a valid concern for all Americans. I'm sorry if bringing up the past offends anyone, but there is a reason we have to look to history.

My comments have far less to do with "Christians are bad because of anti-miscegenation/slavery/crusades" and more to do with my contention that Christians will support SSM within a generation, maybe two. Past events took a bit longer. Miscegenation majority approval took about 30 years from the 1967 ruling. Nowadays it's hard to find a church that approves of anti-miscegenation doctrine. In time it will be hard to find a church that approves of anti-SSM/homosexuality doctrine. A new edition of the Bible will be written that softens the verses. Pastors will go on TV/social media and claim that those verses were taken out of context and do not speak of the love of God. You will have some churches that stick to the old ways. Just like you have churches that only preach using the KJV1611. But those churches that are trying to find new members and are struggling will change the dogma to attract people.

Take 40's defense of Kim Davis' divorce for example. That was unheard of to me when I was growing up in church. We straight up excommunicated divorced women. Even if her husband was abusing her. But nowadays you can find many, many churches that have softened the story of divorce and treat it as just any other sin. Why? Because so many people have divorces now that if all Christians took a hard line you'd have a hard time filling the pews.

All your negative stories have the same scenario, God did wrong and you or someone you know suffered at His hands.

Church done wrong and of course you suffered.

Very AntiChrist like. Claiming to be a believer but always
leading people away from Christ. Always with the reasons not
to have faith.

Seems to me that you and God need to wrestle this one out
between the two of you.

Gage has said that he has left the faith because of issues he had, IIRC. These situations he experienced in his church need to be addressed, and refuted Biblically. They may have been an individual church's beliefs, or a denomination's beliefs, but that does not make them Biblical.

These are important things to discuss, though, because a lot of people feel that suffering in the world disproves the existence of God.

"Why would God let good people suffer" is probably the single biggest question that keeps people away from Christ. It needs to be answered properly and with kindness, not contempt.

The answer, of course, is that there are no "good" people. Every single person has sinned, and sin is the thing that creates all of the problems in this world. Adam and Eve sinned, and that sin has been passed down from generation to generation, like a dominant gene that never goes away. Sin is the reason we have evil in this world. Sin is the reason we have death in this world. It is our own sin, mine, yours, and everyone else's that is the reason for all of the ills of the world. God gave us the Bible to show us His Law. He gave us a conscience to impress His Law on us. We know right from wrong, yet we all too often choose wrong. That is our choice.

That is why there is evil, and suffering, and death on this world. We need to help people understand this, as opposed to, as too many people seem to do, just berating them for the question. We then can help lead them (back) to Christ.

Are you to hard headed to admit when you made a mistake?

I've never once said God did me wrong. Quote me.

I do love that you're claiming I'm like the AntiChrist though! I'm sure anyone who had doubts in your church was soon excommunicated under the watchful eye of the almighty 40!

Yea, and I can adopt the concept you stated later about there being no good people. Everyone is born into sin and has to be saved of it. When tribulations occur you want the understanding and faith of your parishioners and fellow religious people.

I don't entirely blame 40 for saying I'm acting like the bad ol' AC because I don't see anything happening that would turn me back to faith. I didn't leave God because of God, I left him because of me. My faith was tested because of my being ostracized from the fundamentalist church. So I did my own soul searching and reading of the Scripture. I ultimately came to the conclusion that it wasn't worth it finding a new flock because I didn't see reason to believe in the God that modern Christians do. I'm agnostic in the sense that I don't see proof God doesn't exist. But I am atheist in the sense that I don't believe in the God of Abraham.

I'm sure I'd be a Christian today if I was part of a different/better congregation, but we all have to lead our own lives. It can be hard for me to not get angry at religious folks (especially fundamentalists, sorry) but I try to be understanding where possible because belief is not something you can just turn off, nor do you necessarily want to do that.

A large number of people, including Christians are satisfied if a person is firm in their beliefs and attempt to lead the lifestyle of a true Christian.

I believe the Pope has even stated similar sentiments.

I've absolutely admitted mistakes. I did so yesterday on another forum when I said I wanted to rebuild a classic car, maybe a Plymouth Polaris. I was called on it and said "oh that's right, it's a Polara" On this forum in the past I initially disagreed with YTown on his (and most others) interpretation of Scripture regarding homosexuality, but later ended up agreeing with him (just that I agree the Bible says it, not that I agree with the content therein.)

With the evidence of "admitting when I make a mistake" out of the way:

Only 4% of Americans approved of interracial marriage in the 1950s. 92% of Americans were Christian in that same decade. If you're arguing that I'm wrong because a very small minority of Christians opposed it, then I state again: you're picking nits. You seem to be far more preoccupied with trying to find the smallest morsel of anything to call me out on than you are with reading what I've posted.

Please prove to me that 1950s America was inter racially tolerant in the Christian community and I'll admit I made a mistake.

Mainstream Christianity is so different than what I grew up with I'm not even sure if I'd need to wear a suit and tie to church! We believed Rock music was bad. Christian rock was worse because it attempted to bring Jesus into it. And Country music? It was rock music where "you could understand the words." Nowadays it's easy to find churches with their own band behind the preacher complete with drum kit and bass guitar. I did go to a few churches in the early 2000s where the youth ministers professed a love for watching things like South Park or R rated movies. I'm not sure how I'd take it today if I found out my pastor binge watched say, Game of Thrones.

I'm all in when it comes to things. I'm not big on half measures. And based on my reading of the Bible I think Church in some weird way is closer to what I grew up with, not these "fake" churches that replace the words to "Girls, Girls, Girls" to "God, God, God." But I don't go to fundamentalist church because I disagree with most of the teachings. If some can go to "Church lite" and feel they are being close to God, more power to them. I think most of those churches loosened the rules to fill the tithe plates and make people feel like they are doing good even when they are sinning...

[quote]Please prove to me that 1950s America was inter racially tolerant in the Christian community and I'll admit I made a mistake.[quote]

I can admit that many americans were, but if you say ALL americans were I would call you out on that as well

Hate to interrupt this compelling argument about all vs most vs some... but we are not the only country dealing with immigrant issues... I've been watching with interest how the various European countries are dealing with the on-slaught of people...


Hungary shuts EU border, taking migrant crisis into its own hands
Reuters By Krisztina Than and Ivana Sekularac


Hungary Declares State of Emergency, Closes Borders to Refugees


SERBIAN-HUNGARIAN BORDER (Reuters) - Hungary's right-wing government shut the main land route for migrants into the European Union on Tuesday, taking matters into its own hands to halt Europe's influx of refugees.

An emergency effort led by Germany to force EU member states to accept mandatory quotas of refugees collapsed in discord.

Chancellor Angela Merkel appealed for European unity after one of her ministers called for financial penalties against countries that refused to accommodate their share of the migrants, provoking anger in central Europe.

A Czech official described such threats as empty but nonetheless "damaging" while Slovakia said they would bring the "end of the EU".

Under new rules that took effect from midnight, Hungary said anyone seeking asylum on its southern border with Serbia, the EU's external frontier, would automatically be turned back, and anyone trying to sneak through would face jail.

At the border, migrants barred from continuing their long journey north towards a new life in Germany chanted as the sun went down, and one held up a banner saying: "Mama Merkel, please help us!"

Families with small children sat in fields beneath the new 3.5-metre (10 foot) high fence, topped with razor wire, which blocks entry for migrants to the former communist country.

"Strike. No food. No water. Open this border," a woman had written on a child’s dress that she held above her head.

Migrants who tried to apply for asylum in a transit zone of metal containers were swiftly turned away. Macruf Suhufi Abdi Omar, a Somali man, told Reuters he had been refused asylum barely an hour after he gave his fingerprints.

Hungarian officials said they had denied 16 asylum claims at the frontier within hours and were processing 32 more. Police had arrested 174 people for trying to sneak across the border.

Prime Minister Viktor Orban, one of the continent's loudest opponents of mass immigration, says he is acting to save Europe's "Christian values" by blocking the main overland route used by mainly Muslim refugees, who travel through the Balkans and cross his country mainly to reach Germany or Sweden.

Amnesty International accused Hungary of "showing the ugly face of Europe's shambolic response" to the crisis.

The great migration has led to the unraveling of one of the 28-member EU's signature achievements, its Schengen system of border-free travel across much of the continent.

Record arrivals forced Berlin to reimpose emergency frontier controls this week, with several neighbors swiftly following. Austria, next on the road from Hungary to Germany, said tougher border measures would take effect at midnight.

Germany stepped up the pressure on EU states resisting the plan to spread refugees around the bloc under a mandatory quota system. Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere said the EU should penalize countries that reject quotas.

"I think we must talk about ways of exerting pressure," he told ZDF television, adding that some of the countries that opposed quotas were beneficiaries of EU funds.

Tomas Prouza, the Czech State Secretary for the EU, said the apparent German threat to cut off EU funds was "empty but very damaging to all". Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico declared his country would never agree to quotas, and threats of financial retaliation would lead to "the end of the EU".

Merkel later called for a special EU refugee summit, and distanced herself from her minister's comments. "We need to establish a European spirit again," she told a news conference. "I don't think threats are the right way to achieve agreement."

EU interior ministers, who failed to agree on Monday on the quota system championed by Germany, will meet again on Sept. 22.

Eastern European countries argue that a welcoming stance encourages more people to come, overwhelming welfare systems and risking the dilution of national cultures.

Under its new rules, Hungary said it had determined Serbia was "safe", and therefore it could automatically deny asylum claims at the border.

"If someone is a refugee, we will ask them whether they have submitted an asylum request in Serbia. If they had not done so, given that Serbia is a safe country, they will be rejected,” Orban was quoted as telling private broadcaster TV2 on Monday.

Serbia called the new Hungarian rules "unacceptable". The United Nations disputed the definition of Serbia as safe, saying the poor ex-Yugoslav state lacked capacity to house thousands of refugees turned back at Europe's gates.

Orban says that by reinforcing the EU's external border his government is merely enforcing EU rules, and that no countries are duty-bound to take in refugees that pass through safe states. Critics at home and in European neighbors say some of his rhetoric has crossed a line into alarmism and xenophobia.

At the border, migrants were close to despair. "I don’t know what I will do," said 40-year-old Riad from Aleppo in Syria. “I will wait to see. We have lost everything to reach this point.”

A record 156,000 migrants entered the EU in August, the bloc's border agency Frontex reported, taking the total for the year to more than 500,000. Frontex chief Fabrice Leggeri told Reuters his agency was preparing to speed up identification of illegal migrants and would help to deport them in large numbers.

EU data show just under half of asylum claims were granted last year but less than half of those rejected were deported.

Germany has prepared for as many as 800,000 asylum seekers this year, and some officials say that may be an underestimate.

"We’re on the street now,” said Mouz, a 22-year-old Syrian, who slept on the Hungarian border. Asked if he might consider another route, he replied: “I don’t know. I’m from Syria. I cannot go back.”

Serbia says it is readying more temporary accommodation but will not accept anyone turned back from Hungary.

"That's no longer our responsibility," Aleksandar Vulin, the minister in charge of policy on migrants, told the Tanjug state news agency. "They are on Hungarian territory and I expect the Hungarian state to behave accordingly towards them."

(Additional reporting by Sandor Peto; Writing by Peter Graff and David Stamp; Editing by Janet Lawrence)

Link

Did they close ALL of the border, MOST of the border, or just SOME of the boarder?

Isn't it amazing what a guarded fence can do?

I didn't think you would try to make that claim I hope in the future you'll appreciate that I'm not trying to demonizing current Christians on the basis of prior history. In the current line of questioning it's merely used to support my claim that in time, SSM will be at least begrudgingly accepted by most Christian churches in the US in a generation or two.

I did research Christian history a great deal in my soul searching on faith. But it wasn't to demonize current Christians. What I ended up coming to terms with was that in many respects, the 'Christian atrocities' we think of in the past (Nicene cleanings, crusades, slavery) were somewhat in line with the God of the Old Testament. He didn't put up with much when it came to those who opposed Christians, unless Christians brought it on themselves. So my standing query (to myself) has been were the Christians of the past wrong, according to God? Or are todays Christians far too compassionate and embracing of the secular world?

It's also a tiny case study in what can happen if you decide to do nothing when it comes to the extremist regimes in that region...

I brought this post up with my wife btw, and she highly recommended I stop posting here in case you decide to go past just speaking in tongues and other thoughtless rhetoric and try to find out where I live. We are both well aware what images come to mind when people bring up the AntiChrist....

I'm not sure yet if I will. But if I do, congratulations. A "persecuted Christian" silenced a dissenter by fear tactics.

I never thought you trying were trying to demonize christians buddy



BUT comparing one Church to another is like comparing men and women. The are just not the same



IMO and it is only my opinion. I think many christians in their past were wrong. Heck I think any Christians today ARE WRONG. But thats my opinion only.

Any? Is that the same as all? Do you think all Christians are wrong? That's what you said, I saw it.

LMAO it's called fat fingers, lack of proof reading, stupidy take your pick bro lol