Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Christian Education and Schooling - Avoid Public School
Martin Luther | 2010 | bibletruth

Posted on 12/19/2010 11:05:46 PM PST by bibletruth

Martin Luther wrote: I am much afraid that the schools will prove the very gates of hell unless they diligently labor in explaining the Holy Scriptures...


TOPICS: General Discusssion; Moral Issues; Religion & Culture; Religion & Science
KEYWORDS:
Martin Luther wrote:

I am much afraid that the schools will prove the very gates of hell unless they diligently labor in explaining the Holy Scriptures...

I advise no one to place his child where the Scriptures do not reign paramount.

Most excellent advise, I only found this quote today, but I have followed this advise from my own discovery of what the public schools have failed (sic) to offer: that being the Holy Scriptures and the Word of God - the Bible. Which if read and studied by a child throughout their lives, they grow up disciplined and fearing God Almighty.

And for those who argue - "Separation of Church and State" - that fittingly proves that the public schools are the very gates of hell: leading a child to hell by the public schools anti-GOD stand and teachings of hedonistic pleasures of life... These type of teachings will certainly open the door to lead a child to the wide gate unto hell without any defense by the fear of God nor the defense shield of faith against the fiery darts of the evil one [e.g., Devil] [Ephesians 6:6]!

1 posted on 12/19/2010 11:05:50 PM PST by bibletruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bibletruth

...and I am talking about “true” Christian Biblical Education, i.e., home-schooling or Christian schooling which teaches the Holy Scriptures from GOD’s Word, not man’s tradition, nor man’s wisdom, which cannot compare with GOD’s wisdom...


2 posted on 12/19/2010 11:10:48 PM PST by bibletruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bibletruth

Good find.

The backdrop of public schools in the US always was the Christian paradigm up until Dewey and the Progressives wiped it out. The early McGuffey Reader (public schools) was filled with God and Christian morality. It was the backbone of the curricula. (Of course, children younger than 7 were not in institutions being brainwashed....they were home getting a moral foundation and learning to be independent and not conformists.)

Dewey wanted younger and younger children into forced schooling because their brains were “plastic” and it was easier to dictate the “proper” ideas they should have and make them conform in groups using humiliation for those who dared to disagree. The formative years are the first seven....that is why NAMBLA motto is: If not by eight, then it is too late.
.
He (Dewey and the Progressives) inserted moral relativism which destroys children’s ability to believe in moral absolutes.....it is brainwashing into secular humanism (Darwinism and Marxism).

Most educated people only had the bible in the home in early America and were only exposed to schooling for a few years out of their life. Lincoln had less than one year of public schooling. He was self taught.


3 posted on 12/19/2010 11:39:20 PM PST by savagesusie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

Dewey was evil. Truly. He loved the german school model. He also pushed as much as possible to get religion out of school and teach ‘community morals’. Where he was in the country (northeast for part of his time) was unitarian and they all hated Christianity (Trinity) and were hell-bent on getting Christian morals and anything Christian out of the schools.


4 posted on 12/20/2010 12:09:38 AM PST by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bibletruth

The local Christian school in my town New Hampshire is teaching Socal Justice. There is noway I’m sending my child to school there.


5 posted on 12/20/2010 12:17:56 AM PST by AlmaKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bibletruth

Avoiding public schools is a must as they are nothing but government schools instilling propaganda not education.


6 posted on 12/20/2010 12:17:59 AM PST by Republic_of_Secession.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bibletruth

Imagine two doors:

I can see why there is such a market for the prophecy pimps. They justify an abnormal state of affairs, rather than summoning God's people to practical repentance. If we are, after all, losing our own children, then we know, bone-deep, that we are forfeiting the future.
7 posted on 12/20/2010 12:42:26 AM PST by RJR_fan (The press corpse is going through the final stages of Hopium withdrawal. That leg tingle is urine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA; CynicalBear; ex-Texan; M. Espinola; topcat54; ShadowAce; jy8z; antidemoncrat; ...

Education and prophecy ping


8 posted on 12/20/2010 12:43:30 AM PST by RJR_fan (The press corpse is going through the final stages of Hopium withdrawal. That leg tingle is urine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

The Underground History of American Education by Gato has a lot of interesting facts that can be verified. He did a thorough job of tracing the ideas and methods inserted into public education.

The Closing of the American Mind by Bloom also traces a lot of the ideology that infected American Universities back as far as 1880 to the Postmodern German philosophers who were anti-John Locke—to put it mildly. They believed in no objective truth and moral absolutes. It was the end of reason and logic (modernism) and the idea that human nature and the Constitution do not evolve.

It was the beginning of mass indoctrination using the public schools as reeducation centers—to undo the destructive influence and thinking of Christian families.


9 posted on 12/20/2010 12:47:49 AM PST by savagesusie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AngieGal

ping to interesting quote.


10 posted on 12/20/2010 12:52:23 AM PST by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlmaKing
"The local Christian school in my town . . ."

You but one "Christian" school in the area?

If a professing Christian school is teaching social justice (I assume you mean the modern civil rights/ACLU type), then maybe it is not truly Christian and should not be dignified by calling it a "Christian" school.

11 posted on 12/20/2010 1:36:45 AM PST by John Leland 1789 (GratefulWhich scriptures were used in "the Apostles' ministries?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AlmaKing

I agree. You are obviously keeping a good eye on all schools. “Social Justice” is a perversion of the Gospel and is getting to be pervasive even in private Christian schools.

It is always wise to see what the curriculum is first.


12 posted on 12/20/2010 1:42:20 AM PST by kingpins10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: bibletruth

The government/sic.public school system has increasingly since the sixties progressed at accelerated pace away from the establishment of education in America.The first schools were established Harvard, Yale and the rest to teach the Bible and mans duty to God-then his fellow man. The third article of the Northwest Ordinance twice passed by Congress clearly declared Religion,Morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind ,Schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.” They did not intend the godless/sic.secular education that presents itself as American public education today. Home schoolers from Christian homes consistently score higher in educational testing than do their counterparts left behind in public school-God is the answer IMO.


13 posted on 12/20/2010 3:47:30 AM PST by StonyBurk (ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RJR_fan

I can certainly agree on this one. Most of the Colleges in this country were first established as Christian based institutions. I grew up in a Christian home went to a Christian grade school and High School and will forever be thankful. We do have a problem however with even today’s Churches which have become more and more secularized. It’s going to take true Christians getting back to Biblically based small Churches or even home groups of study like it was in the Bible days.


14 posted on 12/20/2010 5:32:27 AM PST by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear; RJR_fan; bibletruth
Christians getting back to Biblically based small Churches or even home groups of study like it was in the Bible days.

I submit that it is precisely that reason that we got into so much trouble.

Too much emphasis is put on process, a gimmick, or some other form of external methods, and not enough on the integrity of the Word. Back when I was unregenerate in the Big Box American Religion, I attended all kinds of home groups, retreats and study groups. I went to large mega churches and small. While attending, I thought I was being fed real spiritual food, and thought I had real mastery of the Bible until I ran into some people unaffiliated with all of that American Religion dreck - people who considered "Men are from Mars, Women from Venus" and "The Purpose Driven ____" as flotsam and jetsam. That was a humbling experience.

Looking back, I remember the way these home study groups worked, mostly fellowship, recipe swapping and talk of lawn care and movie reviews. We read from pop psychology books, pseudo devotionals like "The Prayer of Jabez" and then sat around making stupid opinions on how this effects my life and what I can do to make this transform me. I am sure now that this made God vomit.

A FB friend innocently put up a link of what I think sums up the problem. This offends me at so many levels. This isn't a house of worship, its a performance/sound stage and concert hall. Do these cast-offs look like ordained ministers? Is their "music" honoring to God or to secular ideas of Christmas? There is no talent, polished with thousands of hours of practice and dedication, they are playing a stupid video games downloaded from the internet while swaying around like XTC juiced up prostitutes at a gay bar. What in Hell is fuzzy reindeer antlers doing on stage during an alleged Christmas worship service?

It ain't just the schools, we gladly let the enemy take over our headquarters and raise their flags in our house of worship. This is mockery of God and everything that He stands for. Small study groups are led by social butterflies who only glance at a Cliff-Notes version of a heavily paraphrased Bible prior to suggesting what is most often heretical commentary on things they know very little about. It is giving the middle finger to those who have spent years of time in the Word and on their knees, learning the languages, studying the doctrines and the teachings of great theologians in the past. Their idea of deep is misquoting something from C.S. Lewis' "Screwtape Letters". It isn't the Older teaching the Younger as the Bible commands, rather it is the blind peer leading the blind.

Though there are exceptions, I am under the impression that those who Home School often have a more comprehensive approach to knowing God to that even in their choice where to worship, with whom they fellowship, and in their choices of avocations, literature and entertainment. My praise for their efforts knows no bounds.

Yes, the government schools are evil, without exception. Sending your child there is prima facie evidence of child abuse. If there is a way to steer your child into Hell more efficiently, the government schools have adopted and polished that methodology to an art. I reserve the high levels of contempt for unionized government school teachers, placing fourth to politicians and to demons. But at the very top comes the clergy of the American Religion, who deserve not only the mill-stone around the neck, but first to be weakened with a thorough horsewhipping for the wanton and deliberate damage that they have done to the Church.

I praise God daily for saving me and sanctifying me and my family from the outer darkness of the Premillennial Dispensationalist, Free Will, Seeker Sensitive American Religion.

15 posted on 12/20/2010 6:48:29 AM PST by The Theophilus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: kingpins10; John Leland 1789; AlmaKing

for those of you that think social justice is a perversion of the Gospel, how do you deal with the following passages?

John the Baptist prepares the way...
Luke 3.7-14 - highlights: live a life that shows repentance, share with those who have none, don’t rip people off and don’t extort

Jesus reads Isaiah and reveals His mission...
Luke 4.18-19 - “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight to the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

The Sheep and the Goats...
Matthew 25.31-46 - what you did for the least of these, you did to me...

The church mission...
Acts 1.8 - “you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

Social Justice is a part of the Gospel, certainly not a perversion...

For more info, read:
Deuteronomy (notice the repetition of aliens, orphans & widows)
Isaiah 58 (two big sins of Israel - idolatry & neglecting the poor)
Amos (same as above)
Micah (simply put Micah 6.6-8)

Our Good News is Good News for all people! And God expects His people to be the ones that proclaim it!


16 posted on 12/20/2010 7:12:21 AM PST by bexardave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: The Theophilus

>>Christians getting back to Biblically based small Churches or even home groups of study like it was in the Bible days<<

>>I submit that it is precisely that reason that we got into so much trouble.<<

Did you miss the part of my comment about “Biblically based”? You mention the small study groups you attended then describe how they used everything but the Bible. You describe Churches incorporating things never found or taught in the Bible. While your article is rather discombobulated it would appear that what you experienced was so far from being Biblically based that it had nothing to do with my comment on “Biblically based small Churches or even home groups”.

Your last comment about “Premillennial Dispensationalist” left no doubt about where you stand on that however. Perhaps you experiences there were as well less then Biblically based.


17 posted on 12/20/2010 7:20:27 AM PST by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: bexardave
"Social Justice is a part of the Gospel, certainly not a perversion..."

You evidently didn't notice my qualification . . . "modern civil rights/ACLU" type of social justice, which is NOT Biblical justice at all.

18 posted on 12/20/2010 7:59:14 AM PST by John Leland 1789 (GratefulWhich scriptures were used in "the Apostles' ministries?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Did you miss the part of my comment about “Biblically based”?

In all due respect CynicalBear, the phrase "Biblically based" is empty in its meaning since EVERY denomination, especially the American Religion, sincerely believes that what they are doing is "biblically based".

Pick your topic, any topic; Free Will? Calvinists, Arminians, Pelagians, Amyraldians all feel that their soteriology is "Biblically based" when logic tells us that no more than one is biblically correct. While we can't even agree on the most fundamental doctrine of Soteriology, neither do we agree on basic Christology, the Eucharist, Eschatology, the definition of The Church, the doctrines of Grace, Redemption, Baptism, the Atonement, the Solas, Spiritual gifts, ANYTHING. The Mormons, Catholics, Evangelicals, Fundamentalists, Reformers, Anglicans, Greek Orthodox, Quakers all claim to be "Biblically based" yet have some of the most animated food-fights that are allegedly based on Scripture.

that what you experienced was so far from being Biblically based that it had nothing to do with my comment on “Biblically based small Churches or even home groups

Amen

I promise you, that if you were to approach any of those I associated with, or for that matter go to any of those that fulfill that description today, that they would take great offense to your suggestion that they are not "biblically based". Just like you take great offense to my rejection of Dispensationalism - even though I can quote Scofield, Lindsey, Pentacost, Walvoord and Ryrie perfectly because I was there with you at one time, they would set the kindling to your feet, branding YOU as a heretic for daring to "judge" them and "question their faith".

I like you, and I appreciate your zeal as you defend what you personally and hopefully sincerely believe is to be true, because I see myself twenty years ago in what you post here. I also pray that you become uncomfortable with the violence to Scripture that your present beliefs do and that you are challenged to at least take an honest and open look at what the Church has faithfully believed for millennia before Darby's legacy.

19 posted on 12/20/2010 8:48:02 AM PST by The Theophilus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: The Theophilus

From that post I would suggest that you simply went from one system of beliefs to another and that one to be correct but are not terribly sure at this point. You were proven incorrect on certain points of that original belief and rejected all elements of that belief system?

If you don’t believe in the dispensational view which view did you adopt?


20 posted on 12/20/2010 9:31:31 AM PST by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
You were proven incorrect on certain points of that original belief and rejected all elements of that belief system?

I was asked to prove "Free Will" was taught. Valiant struggle but I couldn't be honest with the Word and continue to skip over Election. Talked confidently about the "Rapture", couldn't prove it either without wresting Scriptures. One thing after another, from the "God helps those who help themselves" to the child's song "Jesus loves Me this I know". Things I spouted off as true where challenged. What this did do is get me to scour the Bible intensely looking for proof-texts, digging through STs, commentaries and whatever I could find that would support my claims. It is a pattern that has benefited me greatly to this day.

If you don’t believe in the dispensational view which view did you adopt?

I went from Dispensational, to pan-millennial because of the many doctrinal contradictions in Dispensationalism, and because I still didn't know enough Scripture to recognize types and symbols in OT and Revelation prophecies. I am fully aware that Ezekiel's Temple, when isolated from Scripture and read plainly as literal text screams future physical temple. So was Isaac Newton's Historicist view, which put Ezekiel's Temple in the intertestamental period, correct? You and I can see that there are too many pieces missing for Newton's Full Preterism to be correct. So because temple sacrifices nill out Dispensationalism, and the historical record doesn't agree with Full Preterism Post Mill, what else is there?

It is problems like that where trying to discover what is meant that drew me to history's theologians who with clarity and confidence described the various interpretations, pros and cons and offering their own view which almost always was cast in the light of contemporary circumstances. I must thank greatly the work of Partial Preterist Post Mills who seem to have a very good grip on unifying and harmonizing the prophecies with sound biblical doctrine, but I don't share their optimism because that part of their interpretations are rather forced and one is sort of guilted into accepting it.

For these and many more reasons, I consider myself a cautious neo-Amillennialist. Cautious in that even the greatest theologians went to the grave with certain prophecies left unexplained - so who am I to know for sure? "Neo" because even my "Realized Millennialist" pastor thinks I am nuts concerning some of my own interpretations.

21 posted on 12/21/2010 5:34:03 AM PST by The Theophilus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: bexardave
"Social Justice is a part of the Gospel, certainly not a perversion..."

What you are quoting are examples of individual charity not social justice. Clearly Jesus calls us all to individual altruism. But Jesus NEVER suggested that Christians should collectively steal from some to give to others. Paul never forced anyone to give to the Church in Jerusalem. But, he did say that if you are truly regenerate you will have a burning desire to do so and be a "happy giver". You cannot outsource your Christian moral obligations by seeking to have "society" do it for you; which is what the "social justice" crowd seeks to do. It must be an individual voluntary act of personal love.

22 posted on 12/21/2010 5:37:15 AM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: The Theophilus

Maybe a bottom line look at the Bride of Christ? That personal relationship to Jesus that so few within the Denominational divide focus on.

The awakening of the Bride and the end of denominations

There will be no Baptist seating area in the Kingdom. Nor will there be a German, French, or Chinese section, American flags, or any other special arrangements to pacify the prejudices and narrow-mindedness of sinful and carnal mortals (I Corinthians 3:3!) We will live there the way we have been called and commanded to live here, but with much better success! (To dwell with saints in Heaven above, oh it ‘twil be glory, but to dwell on earth with saints here below is quite another story!)

And so, as the day approaches there is a growing awareness among believers that such divisions are not to be permitted to keep true believers from coming together and fellowshipping. The Bride is rising up and stepping forth to take her place on the end-time stage. She is learning to simply step over the denominational, doctrinal and theological hedges, fences and walls that have kept her divided, dazed, and confused for nearly two millennia.
As a young woman entering puberty, she is growing increasingly self-conscious and aware of something stirring in her. She is beginning to look at herself in a new way, and seeks the fellowship and companionship of her peers. She is beginning to have a mind of her own, and it is focused on her Lover, her Prince Charming, her Friend (Song of Solomon 5:16). She is rapidly outgrowing the traditional Christian paradigm, which is a lot like religion. She will have none of religion. She is interested only in relationship. She is coming together. Born again believers all over the globe are beginning to see that they have an innate organic relationship, and all denominational, theological, and doctrinal matters are becoming increasingly irrelevant to them. They just want to be together to share their love for their Lord and their anticipation of His soon return to receive them and consummate the relationship at the Marriage of the Lamb.

Because they are comprised of both believers and unbelievers, denominations and other Christian religious institutions and organizations will continue to exist along side end time Believers as they begin to walk in the truth of the Bridal paradigm. As the Bride (consisting of true believers) begins to grow increasingly radical in her passion for her beloved, it is quite likely that the leaders of the denominations and other institutions (which — it cannot be emphasized enough — are irrelevant to the Bridal paradigm aside from the fact that some members of the Bride may still be found within them) may very likely raise up persecution against the Bride out of jealousy. This remains to be seen. Such would be an interesting fulfillment of Song of Solomon 5:7.

Regardless, movements such as the house church movement, which encourage relationship rather than ritual, transformation rather than theology, and love rather than liturgy, will continue to bring all true believers together as the Lord stirs in their heart and creates a new hunger within them which can only be satisfied by more of Him, which can only be experienced through His corporate Body, which is the true Church spoken of in the New Testament.


23 posted on 12/21/2010 6:46:52 AM PST by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Maybe a bottom line look at the Bride of Christ?

All great and edifying, but the last paragraph is a non sequitor. What is being described in the opening paragraphs probably includes many things in Christ, including, but not limited to service, exhortation and teaching. What the last paragraph speaks of is exclusively koinonia which has its place, and according to John is the glue that keeps us strong during times of distress.

I think we need to respect the fact that we have differing spiritual gifts and more importantly, very different personalities such where some may like High Church and liturgy where others may be heavy on the Experiential Charismatic side. Perhaps your home group plan is great for attracting similar tastes and aspirations, whereas I think the Church has pretty much made the evening Sunday Service the thing that you are looking for - time for corporate teaching and fellowship without the burden of entertaining the interloping goats that occasionally attend and profane the morning version.

24 posted on 12/21/2010 7:50:17 AM PST by The Theophilus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: The Theophilus

>> I think we need to respect the fact that we have differing spiritual gifts and more importantly, very different personalities such where some may like High Church and liturgy where others may be heavy on the Experiential Charismatic side.<<

Oh, I agree fully. It’s when the “extras”, for lack of a better word at present, is something that begins to mean “Jesus atonement plus something extra” for salvation it begins to detract from the true gospel.


25 posted on 12/21/2010 8:38:57 AM PST by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: circlecity

Just to clarify the term - when I say “Social Justice” I’m speaking of the overall fairness of a society in its sharing of sustenance and burdens, all people (created by God) are entitled to basic human needs regardless of the superficial things that divide us.

The Deuteronomy passages are to a society (the people of God); the words of the prophets - Isaiah, Amos, Micah - are directed to the religious and civic leaders of the day...

I agree that when government agencies get involved it generally screws it up and most of the time perpetuates the cycles of poverty and injustice, however, the church (followers of Jesus, Christians) should do such a good job of dealing with these issues that the governments need not get involved. And as you say, Paul never makes this compulsory but posits that we are such huge recipients of the blessing of God that we should be pretty fired up about sharing. After all, we do worship him as the One who owns it all anyway, right?

By the way, I believe that Jesus calls us not to “individual altruism” but rather “communal altruism”, this seems to be the pattern of the early church.


26 posted on 12/21/2010 4:36:19 PM PST by bexardave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789

How do you feel about the work that Martin Luther King, Jr. did? In the will of God or outside the will of God (as best we can tell)?


27 posted on 12/21/2010 4:37:43 PM PST by bexardave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789

How do you feel about the work that Martin Luther King, Jr. did? In the will of God or outside the will of God (as best we can tell)?


28 posted on 12/21/2010 4:37:46 PM PST by bexardave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: bibletruth
Martin Luther wrote: I am much afraid that the schools will prove the very gates of hell unless they diligently labor in explaining the Holy Scriptures... I advise no one to place his child where the Scriptures do not reign paramount.

What a prophet he turned out to be. Years later along comes Karl Marx advocating "free education for all children in government schools".

29 posted on 12/21/2010 4:41:09 PM PST by Marathoner (Repeal the 17th amendment, and the 16th for good measure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bexardave
"when I say “Social Justice” I’m speaking of the overall fairness of a society in its sharing of sustenance and burdens, all people (created by God) are entitled to basic human needs regardless of the superficial things that divide us."

What does "fairness of a society" mean apart from coerced redistribution of property? The Deuteronomy passages in any social sense are to a theocracy that doesn't exist anymore. "Sharing" is an individual voluntary act, today and as Paul recommended it. Yes, we should be pretty fired about sharing as individuals, it is a mark of justification. But compelling another to share as we deem fit is nothing but a form of coveting. Again, "communal altrusim" is an individual voluntary act done in a corporate setting. In the early Church everyone had the right to walk away.

30 posted on 12/21/2010 5:05:58 PM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bexardave
"How do you feel about the work that Martin Luther King, Jr. did? In the will of God or outside the will of God (as best we can tell)?"

I believe that M.L. King, Jr. was closely connected with communists and other radicals, and, had he lived long enough, it would have become more clear that Mr. King favored a Marxist-socialist society. He was using race as a means to that end.

31 posted on 12/21/2010 7:16:46 PM PST by John Leland 1789 (GratefulWhich scriptures were used in "the Apostles' ministries?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: bexardave

I must have missed it...

where’s the part about empowering Caesar to take from all people, or even just the rich, and give it away as “Christian” charity?

You must have also missed that part where charity is not to be coerced, but given freely and cheerfully.
Here it is, 2 Cor 9:7
“Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”


32 posted on 12/21/2010 7:29:12 PM PST by MrB (The difference between a (de)humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: bexardave

Martin Luther King Jr. Was Not A Good Man!
Published Nov 25, 2005

By Don Boys, Ph.D.

http://www.cstnews.com/bm/racial-issues-facing-christians-today-common-sense-for-today/mlk-martin-luther-king-jr-media-ignoring-the-facts/martin-luther-king-jr-was-not-a-good-man.shtml

Martin Luther King’s statement that a person should be judged by his character not the color of his skin is a majestic thought. I will do that as I look at King, and I wonder if radical leftists, King worshipers, white liberals, black non-thinkers, media moguls and others will do the same? Some “conservatives” need to do likewise!

In my lengthy report (from which this column is taken) I look at the whole man and all the circumstances that made him what he was: The Person, the Preacher, the Politician, the Party, the Plagiarist, the Prevaricator, and the Philanderer, and the Protectors. To be fair, balanced, and accurate we must look at every facet of his life. Some will object to my research, questioning my motives but do my motives really matter? Isn’t it the truth that is important? Don’t people of character care about truth anymore?

Richard John Neuhaus said of King: “Dr. King was, for all that was great about him, an adulterer, sexual libertine, lecher, and wanton womanizer.” Neuhaus is a well-known liberal theologian and writer. My research also indicates that King was a drunk, plagiarist, bisexual, and Marxist. Try to remember that we are not concerned with his race or complexion, but his character.

If you read my King report with his name substituted with another, maybe Bill King, most decent, honest people would be repulsed and disgusted. Why not the same reaction with Martin Luther King?

If you read my King report with his name substituted with another, maybe Bill King, most decent, honest people would be repulsed and disgusted. Why not the same reaction with Martin Luther King?

If we were looking at David Duke and did not deal with his past involvement with the Nazi movement, I would be accused of bias or poor research. In the interest of truth am I not required to do the same with King? If not, then why is he exempt from a careful, honest look at his past to make a decision about him in the present? If I am wrong, please correct me.

No person deserves to be called a journalist if he refuses to look at both sides of an issue or if he/she refuses to give proper weight to all arguments because of prejudice. If a writer is fearful of where the truth will lead him, he should be selling insurance.

During the eight years I wrote columns for USA Today, I asked the editor if I could do a column on King’s plagiarism, however, I never got permission. I had read the story of King’s thievery in the London papers during a stopover from one of my trips from the Middle East. The editor of USA Today either did not believe me or more probably did not want to take the heat for breaking the story. The Wall Street Journal broke the story a couple of months later although they did so gingerly.

It is noteworthy that the American media was then forced to deal with King’s plagiarism, but even then they defended him! One main defense was that it was a “black thing,” which was an insult to honest, decent Blacks. When you quote King you don’t know whom you are quoting!

Why is there little debate in the King controversy? During the eight years I wrote columns for USA Today, the editor would not permit me to do a column on King although every year in early January, they always did a page dealing with him. I have one issue that has five columns dealing with King without one critical word on the whole page about him! That is a disgrace to all honest journalists everywhere.

Evidence proves that King had numerous affairs with various women plus numerous one night stands with prostitutes; two black columnists reveal that FBI tapes support the charge that King was bisexual having been heard during a sex orgy with his “best friend” Ralph Abernathy. King was also caught running naked after a woman down a Norway hotel hallway during his trip to accept the Nobel Peace Prize! The night before he was killed he spent the night with two women and fought with a third, according to his “best friend” Ralph Abernathy. If a man will not keep his marriage vows, he is not worthy to walk my dog.

According to the Bible, King was not even a believer in Christ! He rejected Christ’s deity, His virgin birth and his physical resurrection so according to II John he should not be honored; instead no one should “bid him God speed.” Furthermore, I challenge anyone to produce one example of King, a Baptist preacher, ever seeking to get lost men to accept Jesus Christ as Savior. Never happened because he did not believe that was essential.

King, like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, Rudy Giuliani and assorted Republicans was a man without character, and informed, honest, decent Americans should not be honoring him with a special day each year.

While I was a member of the Indiana House of Representatives, a member introduced a bill to memorialize King before we had his national holiday forced upon us. The memorialization meant nothing since we did them almost every day as routine.

When the King vote came up (it was a voice vote since it was no big deal) mine was the only negative vote out of a hundred. No one in the senate voted no. I wondered where all the conservatives were. Soon they surrounded me saying that they should have voted with me but didn’t think it was worth the flack. I was told that had I demanded a recorded roll call vote and spoken against the memorialization, there would have been repercussions with my legislation!

The following year the same thing happened in exactly the same way! I started to speak to the issue and demand a recorded vote but did not do so. Why? I don’t know. Some might say it was peer pressure. My conservative friends told me, “Don, it won’t do any good and could hinder your chances of getting your bills even assigned to committee.” It was the only time I did not follow my principles while in office.

King does not deserve a national holiday but instead he should be exposed as a fraud, a fake, and a fool, and I would feel the same about a white conservative! As for celebrating January 15, I will do so since it is my birthday!


Six salient articles about Martin Luther King, Jr. at:

http://heckahost.com/cgi-bin/moxiebin/bm-search.cgi/q/12?bmq=King&bms=12


33 posted on 12/21/2010 7:29:16 PM PST by John Leland 1789 (GratefulWhich scriptures were used in "the Apostles' ministries?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: circlecity

Coerced redistribution of wealth is a misguided effort at creating “a fair society”, it is not the definition. The USAmerica system of forced redistribution of wealth irritates the snot out of me because they have proven ineffective in everything but perpetuation of the problem. It supplies only for the physical need and ignores or minimizes the other basic needs of humans - identity, belonging and purpose - all of which are needs that the church has answers to. But the church has become too inwardly focused in most cases...

Without regard to the form of government - theocracy, monarch, republic, democracy, etc. - based on the Deuteronomy passages it is evident that God is concerned about those that can’t care for themselves...most of us believe in the unchanging nature of God, so I think it is a relevant question(s) for the church today: does God still have compassion on the needy today and does he expect his people to reflect that compassion?


34 posted on 12/21/2010 8:28:07 PM PST by bexardave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: circlecity

Coerced redistribution of wealth is a misguided effort at creating “a fair society”, it is not the definition. The USAmerica system of forced redistribution of wealth irritates the snot out of me because they have proven ineffective in everything but perpetuation of the problem. It supplies only for the physical need and ignores or minimizes the other basic needs of humans - identity, belonging and purpose - all of which are needs that the church has answers to. But the church has become too inwardly focused in most cases...

Without regard to the form of government - theocracy, monarch, republic, democracy, etc. - based on the Deuteronomy passages it is evident that God is concerned about those that can’t care for themselves...most of us believe in the unchanging nature of God, so I think it is a relevant question(s) for the church today: does God still have compassion on the needy today and does he expect his people to reflect that compassion?


35 posted on 12/21/2010 8:32:32 PM PST by bexardave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789

I didn’t ask what you thought of MLK,Jr. but what you thought of his work...

Maybe he wasn’t the best example...let me re-phrase the question:

Do you think racism and oppression of any people group is in God’s will?


36 posted on 12/21/2010 8:44:10 PM PST by bexardave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: bexardave
I didn’t ask what you thought of MLK,Jr. but what you thought of his work...

Maybe he wasn’t the best example...let me re-phrase the question:

Do you think racism and oppression of any people group is in God’s will?

His work, in it's outcome, as seen today in inner cities, was as poor as his character.

The entire civil rights movement associated with Mr. King is responsible for keeping a substantial segment of people of his own race under oppression to the socialist welfare state.

So, you are correct, the racist Mr. King was out of God's will.

37 posted on 12/21/2010 10:55:22 PM PST by John Leland 1789 (GratefulWhich scriptures were used in "the Apostles' ministries?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: bexardave

I agree with everything in your last post. Nothing you say there departs from traditional concepts of Christian charity which should be practiced by ALL Christians both in their private lives and corporately through their Churches. This is not what is generally meant by the idomatic term “social justice” which always pursues socialistic practices. To the extent you are saying that the Church should be more involved with the welfare of the community it serves, I could not agree more.


38 posted on 12/22/2010 3:16:27 AM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson