Thanks Craig that certainly is a detailed explanation - which is what I was
hoping for.

1) Abortion - I am not fully against you on this one as I would find it hard
to tell a woman that has been raped that she must have the baby. I would
also find it hard to tell a mother carrying a baby that is KNOWN to be
extremely handicapped that she must have the child - although "extremely
handicapped" would be hard to define as many such people live amongst us
quite happily. This all said I find it hard to believe killing an unborn
baby (foetus if you will) for convenience sake is something God would
condone.

2) Leaders/members of the RRR are totally unchristian - You use the word
"unchristian" rather than "non-christian" which I like but you seem to imply
that these guys(& girls) are TOTALLY unchristian. Perhaps Pat Robertson is
an example here because while I believe his comments on Chavez are crazy I
do still think he is a genuine Christian who wandered into territory he
shouldn't go near.

I agree his flirtation with politics is dangerous but I
think he is a Christian and genuine -

"Craig Chilton" <

"Jeffrey Towell" <jtowell@bigpond.com> wrote:

Hi, Craig,

You refer often to what you call the Religious Radical Right.

America's most notorious, since its leadership and lemmings CLAIM
to be Christian, while their words, actions, and agendas are every bit
as hateful, bigoted, and UN-Christian as were those of the segrega-
tionists that infested our Southern states, 40+ years ago.

As an Aussie (in Melbourne, Australia) who is not fully up to date
with US politics please tell me who the leaders of this group are
(political and spiritual)

The RRR Cult is a unique cult in its structure.

(1) It deceptively and dishonestly cloaks itself in the mantle
of respectability that Christianity affords it.

A. Unfortunately for Christianity in America, this has resulted
in Christianity having come into greater and greater
disrespect in U.S. society. Millions of American non-
Christians who might have been receptive to the Gospel
message, had there never been a control-freakish and
hateful RRR Cult, misperceive the cult and its loathsome
agendas against human/civil rights and personal liberties
as somehow being *representative* of Christianity. And
thus would find attending a rat fight to be preferable to
having anything to do with Christianity.

B. Fortunately, though, thanks to a recent cluster of missteps
(e.g., their desperation to prolong the potential mental
agony of Terry Schaivo. 3/4 of Americans told them where
to go in no uncertain terms over *that* act of abject stupidity
and hatefulness.), America's society is finally awakening
to the UN-Christian nature of its members and agendas,
and the process leading to REJECTION of the cult, and
relegation of its sociopathic agendas to extinction is
probably now underway. At last! 30 years later than that
should have happened.

(2) The cult, rather than being a stand-alone one, like all other
cults, past and present, perfidiously INFILTRATES *existing*
congregations/churches and poisons the minds of the more
gullible/less intelligent of its members -- from WITHIN. And
keeps their cult members IN PLACE, to continue its lying
and hateful indoctrination -- *inside* those churches.

Thus, "Religious Radical Right" is not an actual title for the
cult. It instead is a descriptor of it. (A more accurate descriptor
would be the "IRreligious Radical Right." But then we couldn't
as easily make the very APT comparison of its lemmings with
the EQUALLY hateful and stupid louts of the Ku Klux Klan --
the KKK.

KKK and RRR: Same mindless bigotry and disregard for human
rights. Only the **targets** are different. The KKK targets blacks.
The RRR targets women and gays.

At its upper levels, the RRR Cult is *tremendously* well organ-
ized, and absolutely dedicated, 23/7, to the furtherance of its
agendas of vile hate. It is an oligarchy, and even though there
are several leaders at the top, heading several organizations to
which RRR Cult lemmings subscribe, there's not a penny's worth
of difference between them when it comes to the leaders' being
a perfect fit for the Bible's prophesied False Teachers... who
tickle the ears of the hateful and control-freakish lemmings with
the sort of lies and propaganda that appeal to such dolts.

The Worst of the key leaders of the oligarchical RRR Cult

Jerry Falwell -- FOUNDER of the RRR, in the mid-1970s.
(He called it "The Moral Majority" -- which never was either.)
James Dobson -- "Focus on the Family"
D. James Kennedy -- Coral Ridge ministries
Beverly La Haye -- "Concerned Women for America"
Donald Wildmon -- "American Family Assn."
Gary Bauer -- "Family Research Council"
Pat Robertson -- "700 Club" (and a proven LOON)

Also who are among the leaders of what you call ACTUAL
Christians.

They ARE actual Christians, and by their HONEST and
compassionate fruits, they PROVE themselves to be such.
(UNlike the perfidious and bigoted False Teachers, above.)

Some of the Most CHRISTIAN of **Non**-RRR Cult
Christian Leaders

Billy Graham (almost all of the time)
Charles F. Stanley
Robert Schuller
David Jeremiah
Zola Levitt
Jack Van Impe (most of the time)
Hal Lindsey (most of the time)
( ...and thousands of other less-well-known ones. Who
follow the Bible, rather than preaching an artificial and
arbitrary litany of phony dogmas. And thus are not
organized in cultic fashion. They are HONEST, Christian
teachers. They generally have NOTHING to do with
lending support to any of the loathsome goals of the RRR.)

What is the ACTUAL Christians views on what it means
to be salt and light.

The "light" part probably refers to Jesus' Great Commission
to his followers to enlighten nonbelievers (without being pushy
or obnoxious about it) with the Gospel message.

Since salt adds flavor to food, this is probably a reference
to Christians' presenting the Gospel in a vibrant and appealing
manner.

(NOT the way that the RRR's leaders pervert that passage.
The Bible never appointed/authorized/condoned any person
or group to act as ENFORCERS of its precepts vis-a-vis
society in general. Much less to attempt to enforce PHONY
and UN-biblical dogmas... such as the RRR Cult does with its
defining issue -- mindless and hateful opposition to the remedy
of abortion. (And, of course, trying to FORCE full gestation
upon millions of women, which would impose immense hardship
upon them, and would be tantamount to a 9-month-long form
of *rape* -- is in diametric **opposition** to Jesus firm command
that his followers show love and compassion to their neighbors.
Abortion isn't even *mentioned* in the Bible, much less opposed.
See sig of this post for possible reasons why that's the case.)
It appointed **no** GESTAPO.

Thanks.

Jeff

You're quite welcome, Jeff.

-- Craig Chilton

Thanks Craig that certainly is a detailed explanation - which
is what I was hoping for.

Although I don't know everyone you mention on your lists
of RRR leaders and non-RRR leaders I assume that you
strongly oppose politicised Christianity -- by that I mean Christian
groups with an overt involvement/concern with political issues.

Of course the US is unique in this in that most (if not all)
other countries do not have sufficient Protestant Christian
numbers to have political clout...

...Catholic influence in some countries goes without saying). ...

...I am not sure I agree with you 100% when social issues are
being addressed such as by Focus On the Family. But when true
political issues are being meddled with (such as Pat Robertson's
ideas on how to deal with Bolivia) I do agree 100%.

Perhaps Billy Graham tops your list due to not trying to be
involved politically -- He did pass messages from US presidents
to other world leaders but was not himself politically active as far
as I can tell from his autobiography.

As far as the rest of your non-RRR list is concerned I can
only give a thumbs up to the other 3 I know of : Charles F. Stanley,
David Jeremiah and Hal Lindsey.

Overall I'd say that perhaps I agree with you 80%. With such a high
agreement its probably sad to point out the differences but its of more
benefit than running through everything I agree with.

1) Abortion - I am not fully against you on this one as I would find
it hard to tell a woman that has been raped that she must have the
baby. I would also find it hard to tell a mother carrying a baby that is
KNOWN to be extremely handicapped that she must have the child --
although "extremely handicapped" would be hard to define as many
such people live amongst us quite happily. This all said I find it hard
to believe [that ending a pregnancy] for convenience sake is some-
thing God would condone.

I'm not so keen on your theory that God only puts Spirits in those
reproductive process entities that] He knows [ahead of the birth
event] will survive -- what about babies that survive only a day
after birth -- or a week -- where is the line?

Perhaps you point is that abortion under certain circumstances
may be morally wrong but that Christian groups should live by this
rather than impose it on national law - If so I take your point.

2) Leaders/members of the RRR are totally unchristian - You use
the word "unchristian" rather than "non-christian" which I like but
you seem to imply that these guys(& girls) are TOTALLY unchristian.

Perhaps Pat Robertson is an example here because while I
believe his comments on Chavez are crazy I do still think he is
a genuine Christian who wandered into territory he shouldn't go
near. I agree his flirtation with politics is dangerous but I think he
is a Christian and genuine - even if he is genuinely wrong
sometimes.

Not living in the States I do not have to get concerned with
issues such as the Religious Right and how they affect (and I
agree many times pollute) Christainity.

What is of concern to me however is another group that I do
not have a name for but who promote an EASY Christianity that
is a combination of psychology and motivational speaking.

I will name a few leaders of this unnamed group using only
US preachers as they are more likely to be known to you (they
exist all over the world, though):

TD Jakes
Joel Osteen
Jerry Savelle

Without getting into debates about Word-of Faith etc. these
guys and many more concern me due to the fact that their sermons
seem to remove the cross and instead encourage people to "be
the best they can be", "be rich", "Reach their full potential" and
many other motivational ideas.

I won't expand on my feelings on this group but do feel they are
very dangerous in their own right.

As for your politicised group -- perhaps they should "render unto
Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's."