To: michaelwlf3
Get a clue, will you? The question is one of unity, not of who says what to whom. If Christians could be bothered to show a united front, no one could run roughshod over us the way some political groups would like to. Instead, they would rather argue over things like whether you have to be dunked to be well and truly baptized or if sprinkling is okay. For some of us doctrine does matter and we recognize that unity with those who seek to destroy us is not a good way to advance The Gospel. Look at what's being done to Evangelical Christians in Russia by the Russian govt with the backing of the Russian orthodox and the supercilious cry for "unity" falls apart.
98 posted on
07/26/2014 9:17:51 AM PDT by
wmfights
To: wmfights; michaelwlf3
However, the unity in the face of attacks from outsiders is important.
Also, specifically to Michael's case, he as an Anglican is attacked as being not sufficiently "P" enough
809 posted on
07/29/2014 10:55:10 PM PDT by
Cronos
(ObamaÂ’s dislike of Assad is not based on AssadÂ’s brutality but that he isn't a jihadi Moslem)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson