|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jun 15, 2024 10:06:02 GMT
You .” Well, I can't quite get my head around that tbh. It doesn't wish to discriminate on the basis of religion, but wishes to build a society based on one? Them “ Britain First is committed to maintaining and strengthening Christianity as the foundation of our society and culture." So using Christianity as a foundation of society and culture but tolerating other religions is something that you ‘ can’t get your head around ‘? I dont necessarily support this but it’s quite a simple concept . Christianity states all other religions are the work of the devil. There isn't any toleration of other religions in Christianity. The aim is to preach the true religion to them and save them from going to hell. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2024 14:39:37 GMT
You .” Well, I can't quite get my head around that tbh. It doesn't wish to discriminate on the basis of religion, but wishes to build a society based on one? Them “ Britain First is committed to maintaining and strengthening Christianity as the foundation of our society and culture." So using Christianity as a foundation of society and culture but tolerating other religions is something that you ‘ can’t get your head around ‘? I dont necessarily support this but it’s quite a simple concept . Christianity states all other religions are the work of the devil. There isn't any toleration of other religions in Christianity. The aim is to preach the true religion to them and save them from going to hell. Yes, that is true. |
|
|
|
Post by bancroft on Jun 16, 2024 11:43:01 GMT
If you judge them by their actions they are against Islam and they go against groups on the Left like that mob that harassed Farage and his family eating in a pub. Perhaps only groups overstepping the political campaigning ethics when stunts are being pulled.
I guess they have a benefactor or two.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jun 19, 2024 10:37:14 GMT
They are a completely unelectable spin off from the BNP whose like and share model of promotion was banished from social media the best part of a decade ago. That may well be true but we are trying to find out what makes then that, what policies do they advocate that are unacceptable? No one seems able to put their finger on it so we are left with the feeling that they are bad because someone says so. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 19, 2024 12:36:46 GMT
You .” Well, I can't quite get my head around that tbh. It doesn't wish to discriminate on the basis of religion, but wishes to build a society based on one? Them “ Britain First is committed to maintaining and strengthening Christianity as the foundation of our society and culture." So using Christianity as a foundation of society and culture but tolerating other religions is something that you ‘ can’t get your head around ‘? I dont necessarily support this but it’s quite a simple concept . Christianity states all other religions are the work of the devil. There isn't any toleration of other religions in Christianity. The aim is to preach the true religion to them and save them from going to hell. Does it? What was Christs opinion on tolerating Buddhism or Hinduism? Did Paul demand an uprising against Roman religion? |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jun 19, 2024 13:39:23 GMT
Christianity states all other religions are the work of the devil. There isn't any toleration of other religions in Christianity. The aim is to preach the true religion to them and save them from going to hell. Does it? What was Christs opinion on tolerating Buddhism or Hinduism? Did Paul demand an uprising against Roman religion? There are various references in the Old Testament and in particular it is one of the Ten Commandments.
As for demanding an uprising, well it was not the way of Jesus. His view was to lead by example. The Romans were corrupt and evil. It was a military dictatorship where the emperor was a puppet of the army who held the real power. I think it was enough not to believe their bullshit that could get you into trouble.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 19, 2024 16:33:36 GMT
Does it? What was Christs opinion on tolerating Buddhism or Hinduism? Did Paul demand an uprising against Roman religion? There are various references in the Old Testament and in particular it is one of the Ten Commandments.
As for demanding an uprising, well it was not the way of Jesus. His view was to lead by example. The Romans were corrupt and evil. It was a military dictatorship where the emperor was a puppet of the army who held the real power. I think it was enough not to believe their bullshit that could get you into trouble.
The Old Testament was a backdrop to the New Testament and new covenant. afaik and as far as you know Jesus didn’t compel his followers to not tolerate other religions, in fact the opposite is true . Not only that but Jesus warmed against false prophets. That act alone tells us he accepts that false prophets would be part of a future world . |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jun 19, 2024 17:23:34 GMT
There are various references in the Old Testament and in particular it is one of the Ten Commandments.
As for demanding an uprising, well it was not the way of Jesus. His view was to lead by example. The Romans were corrupt and evil. It was a military dictatorship where the emperor was a puppet of the army who held the real power. I think it was enough not to believe their bullshit that could get you into trouble.
The Old Testament was a backdrop to the New Testament and new covenant. afaik and as far as you know Jesus didn’t compel his followers to not tolerate other religions, in fact the opposite is true . Not only that but Jesus warmed against false prophets. That act alone tells us he accepts that false prophets would be part of a future world . It's a major theme that runs through the whole bible. There is only one truth, and so you can imagine how Christians feel when people refer to "your truth" or "my truth", as if the truth can be whatever you imagine it to be. In fact there is also a major theme that runs through all of science, and it is the same thing. Only when you believe the Christian truth is the only truth can you build some kind of moral system that works. For example you can't have a system where someone thinks it is OK to kill someone else. That we call that evil, but only because we believe in this foundation of our morals. I do agree the bible's view was that many would not stick to the truth and become deviant. That's what Revaluations is about. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 19, 2024 17:25:54 GMT
The Old Testament was a backdrop to the New Testament and new covenant. afaik and as far as you know Jesus didn’t compel his followers to not tolerate other religions, in fact the opposite is true . Not only that but Jesus warmed against false prophets. That act alone tells us he accepts that false prophets would be part of a future world . It's a major theme that runs through the whole bible. There is only one truth, and so you can imagine how Christians feel when people refer to "your truth" or "my truth", as if the truth can be whatever you imagine it to be. In fact there is also a major theme that runs through all of science, and it is the same thing. Only when you believe the Christian truth is the only truth can you build some kind of moral system that works. For example you can't have a system where someone thinks it is OK to kill someone else. That we call that evil, but only because we believe in this foundation of our morals. I do agree the bible's view was that many would not stick to the truth and become deviant. That's what Revaluations is about. As I said , the Old Testament is a backdrop to the new covenant. So point out where Jesus told us not to tolerate other religions . |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jun 19, 2024 17:35:27 GMT
It's a major theme that runs through the whole bible. There is only one truth, and so you can imagine how Christians feel when people refer to "your truth" or "my truth", as if the truth can be whatever you imagine it to be. In fact there is also a major theme that runs through all of science, and it is the same thing. Only when you believe the Christian truth is the only truth can you build some kind of moral system that works. For example you can't have a system where someone thinks it is OK to kill someone else. That we call that evil, but only because we believe in this foundation of our morals. I do agree the bible's view was that many would not stick to the truth and become deviant. That's what Revaluations is about. As I said , the Old Testament is a backdrop to the new covenant. So point out where Jesus told us not to tolerate other religions . Rather he told us the right way. This in turn implies the other ways are wrong, and he did warn those who were thinking of going the wrong way. He was not some sort of military commander rounding up people to fight all other religions. The idea was the followers should spread the word of the gospel. This tolerate word is a modern word anyway. Sure it does come from the Latin, but used to mean "forbear to judge of or condemn with bigotry and severity" but in political correctness it has a specific meaning which is a kind of manipulation of language and thought in general. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jun 19, 2024 17:44:57 GMT
As I said , the Old Testament is a backdrop to the new covenant. So point out where Jesus told us not to tolerate other religions . Rather he told us the right way. This in turn implies the other ways are wrong, and he did warn those who were thinking of going the wrong way. He was not some sort of military commander rounding up people to fight all other religions. The idea was the followers should spread the word of the gospel. This tolerate word is a modern word anyway. Sure it does come from the Latin, but used to mean "forbear to judge of or condemn with bigotry and severity" but in political correctness it has a specific meaning which is a kind of manipulation of language and thought in general. So we both agree that Jesus didn’t tell his followers not to tolerate other religions then . Well done . |
|
|
|
Post by aristaeus on Jun 21, 2024 10:18:00 GMT
They are a completely unelectable spin off from the BNP whose like and share model of promotion was banished from social media the best part of a decade ago. That may well be true but we are trying to find out what makes then that, what policies do they advocate that are unacceptable? No one seems able to put their finger on it so we are left with the feeling that they are bad because someone says so. Repatriation, withdrawal form the UN, ban same-sex marriage, accept zero asylum seekers even if they're genuine, cut the welfare budget by 50% (bear in mind pensions makes up 44% of the welfare budget and unemployment benefit makes up only 1% of the welfare budget). Oh, and for anyone who is remotely aware of fascist ideology, Britain First is definitely fascist. Christ, they openly use palingenetic language (talking about a moral rebirth) on their website, which is a core fascist idea. Of course BF being fascist should come as no surprise given it was founded by an ex-BNP and National Front member - the National Front was founded by an ex member of the British Union of Fascists. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jun 21, 2024 17:01:50 GMT
They are a completely unelectable spin off from the BNP whose like and share model of promotion was banished from social media the best part of a decade ago. That may well be true but we are trying to find out what makes then that, what policies do they advocate that are unacceptable? No one seems able to put their finger on it so we are left with the feeling that they are bad because someone says so. I'm going on ballot box results, my feelings towards them are completely irrelevant to the point I made. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jun 21, 2024 17:10:36 GMT
That may well be true but we are trying to find out what makes then that, what policies do they advocate that are unacceptable? No one seems able to put their finger on it so we are left with the feeling that they are bad because someone says so. Repatriation, withdrawal form the UN, ban same-sex marriage, accept zero asylum seekers even if they're genuine, cut the welfare budget by 50% (bear in mind pensions makes up 44% of the welfare budget and unemployment benefit makes up only 1% of the welfare budget). Oh, and for anyone who is remotely aware of fascist ideology, Britain First is definitely fascist. Christ, they openly use palingenetic language (talking about a moral rebirth) on their website, which is a core fascist idea. Of course BF being fascist should come as no surprise given it was founded by an ex-BNP and National Front member - the National Front was founded by an ex member of the British Union of Fascists. Repatriation is a policy approved by most parties and is a UN policy. Why is withdrawal from the UN 'fascist'? Why would going back from same sex marriage to marriage being a man and a woman 'fascist'? They are not saying homosexuality is a sin they are only saying marriage is specifically a man and a woman. I am at a loss why slashing teh welfare budget is Fascist, they may have got the figures wrong and the detail messed up but why is it fascist? In the context the 'moral rebirth' is in relation to the cultural and social aspects of the country. Is that fascist? We have lots of new cultural and social actions that are basically changing those piecemeal such as gay marriage but because they are not called moral rebirth (although they are) they are not defined as fascist. Cameron promoting gay marriage, with no manifesto commitment to do so was changing British culture. The accusation if I recall was that they were a racist and fascist party. So far the evidence that they are is pretty slim on the ground. If the history of a party makes it then the US democrats are a slave owning approving party. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Jun 21, 2024 17:13:08 GMT
That may well be true but we are trying to find out what makes then that, what policies do they advocate that are unacceptable? No one seems able to put their finger on it so we are left with the feeling that they are bad because someone says so. I'm going on ballot box results, my feelings towards them are completely irrelevant to the point I made. Ballot box results are often and indication of hwo a party is viewed and how it is viewed is often a result of the press it receives, the press call them racist, far right and fascist with seemingly little evidence to go on. All I have been asking is what is that evidence which no one seems able to supply. |
|
