And this guy provides the drinks and entertainment. (Any resemblance to a certain Freeper with horns is purely coincidental.)
Posted on 10/18/2011 3:25:05 PM PDT by Just4Him
Franky Schaeffer is the son of the late, highly influential evangelical thinker Francis Schaeffer, who helped shape the modern conservative evangelical movement. The son boasts he was himself a co-founder of the Religious Right. But he since has denounced Christianity as “stupid,” writes bitter tell-all books about his parents, and ferociously attacks conservative religionists as the virtual root cause of all American evils.
A blogger for The Huffington Post, young Schaeffer is now faulting religious conservatives for facilitating Wall Street greed. He’s imploring the Wall Street Occupiers to “protest the root source of America’s tilt to the far unregulated corporate right.” For Schaeffer, the next logical step is to demonstrate “outside mega churches, Evangelical publishing houses, [and] religious organizations that lead the ‘moral’ crusades against women and gays and all the rest.”
Will the Wall Street Occupiers heed Schaeffer’s frenzied call and next park their tents, blankets and anti-capitalist placards in the parking lots of suburban mega churches? It seems unlikely. But Schaeffer’s demand fits with the crazy Left’s sometime fixation on demonizing opponents based on class and religion.
Thirty years ago, young Schaeffer joined his father in critique of the secular Left. Today, he faults religious conservatives for the “insanity and corruption” that plagues America. In 2008, he endorsed Barack Obama and publicly demanded John McCain renounce his ostensibly “hate-filled supporters.” More recently, he’s slammed Obama’s critics as “racists.” All the energy he once channeled into what he derides as “fundamentalist” Christianity is now furiously focused against all the perceived representatives of his parents’ faith.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
LOL! Thanks! I’m locked and loaded...
Words of wisdom! Thanks...
televangelism is the professional wrestling of religion.
He’s just joined the “bad guys” for awhile. It’s all a script and perhaps he never believed any of it.
The Statue is just a statue, It can be replaced.
It is what the Statue represents that is important, This idiot just bought a ticket to hell, unless he repents.
People like this I would like to choke until their tongue hangs out. I know that isn’t Christian,but I would face my maker after choking this SOB and take my chances.
And this guy provides the drinks and entertainment. (Any resemblance to a certain Freeper with horns is purely coincidental.)
When I was in school some of the Turkish students were going to a Turkish parade in NYC; they brought along some local black Guardian Angels in case other groups tried to disrupt them.
Nobody tried to disrupt them.
The official history in Spain has erased all images of the freaks shooting at statues of Christ; the book “The Last Crusade” has some of those pictures. They’ve even edited out the hammer & sickle flags carried by many in the mobs of 1936, while removing any statues of Franco.
There had been a small movement for Franco’s canonization; I’m sorry to see it hasn’t made much headway. His purpose was simple: to live and die in a Catholic Spain. Even the freaks today are under the monarchist flag, instead of the “Republican” flag from prior to the war.
Like Franco, we’ll need some Muslims to straighten this sh!t out.
Run a simple Google search using the following terms: franky schaeffer christianity stupid You'll get plenty of citations just like the source referenced in this post. Check 'em out.
I see we share the same weakness. I have great difficulty in turning the other cheek. Quite the contrary, as a matter of fact. I have to pray real hard for the Lord to help me restrain my natural urge to, shall we say, square away the opposition.
Thank you for sharing your insights, dear brother in Christ!
They’ll be met by a dozen or so Jeanne Assams at the door.
These people would take things to the point of rounding us up and gassing us in concentration camps if they could. Maybe not this year; but soon.
They hate us that much.
The Catholic Church has NEVER modifed dogma to accomodate its members or its leaders.
Luther & Co. and Henry VIII actually deleted the definition of certain sins to accomodate popular opinion or powerful individuals. Doing so was fundamental to the founding of their sects, and is now fundamental to their continued existence. Yet in the long run, there is nothing real that endures in such sects. Why worship a God who heeds the dictates of the popular will of the members?
I can find lots of citations to articles attributing that view to Schaeffer, but none in which he actually asserts that “Christianity is ‘stupid’”.
The articles all seem to be glosses on his actual views by people who equate “Christianity” with Biblical-literalist protestantism.
As a pious Orthodox Christian, who unlike Schaeffer would like to see the law more closely reflect Orthodox moral teachings, I find the “Christianity” of Biblical-literalists thin and unsatisfying both intellectually and spiritually.
The fact that I do not think intellectual effort matters spiritually (except in overcoming intellectual impediments to embracing grace in Christ) and the remembrance of the view of the Elder Cleopa (a Romanian priest-monk persecuted by the Communists) that “Neo-protestantism may be a means of salvation for some because of the truth it holds” (meaning the truth of the Scriptures) lead me to think the question of whether it is “stupid” or not is uninteresting.
So, how and why did the filioque get inserted into the Western version of the Creed after many years in which the Popes of Rome upheld the Orthodox Catholic Faith against the influence of the filioque-championing Franks?
For those of us in the East it certainly looks like modifying dogma to accommodate some very powerful folks in the Patriarchate of Rome.
While I don’t accept your premise and I am not familiar with it and thus won’t discuss it, my prior post should have said the following, which clears up what my point is:
The Catholic Church has NEVER modifed dogma to accomodate THE SINS of its members or its leaders. Whereas protestantism only got traction and survived (and survives) because its dogma was intentionally formulated to appeal to popular sentiment and the sentiments of powerful secular leaders. The Catholic Church has always suffered because it won’t redefine sin to accomodate sinners - but in the long run she flourishes because of that very fact! Amen.
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.