[ the actual title of this page:]

( for ComputerIcon   or for   SmartPhone-Icon )


The theology of the bible-belt,
cradle of  "Conservative Christianity"

Pages :   1  ~  [2]

Having laid out the first six of the eleven theses
on page One of this web page, we'll cover the remaining 5 below :

The five remaining important
conservative beliefs (as laid out
by Dennis Wheeler )

Thesis # 7. The word of God supports absolute authority, rather than democracy.

Thesis # 8. "Civil governments derive their powers from God".

Thesis # 9. To oppose slavery is to go against God's Word.

Thesis # 10. The enslaving of non-Christian black Africans by White European
Christians was the best thing that could have happened to them

Thesis # 11. The Civil War won't be over until the true conservative Christianity of
the South triumphs not just there, but throughout the rest of the country

Thesis # 7 = The word of God supports absolute authority, rather than democracy

" "It is imperative that the Southern (i.e. conservative, white
    Christian) people stand against abolitionism, democracy, and equalitarianism.
        God has further ordained rulers over men in society. Romans 13:1, 'Let every soul be subject to the higher powers. For there is no power but of God; the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever resists the power, resists the ordinance of God.' And lest we think that God sanctions democracy as the only righteous form of government, we should read the words of the Apostle Peter as given to him by the Holy Spirit, 'Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the King.' (I Peter 2:17) Thus God Himself acknowledges the authority of a king."

        What this spokesman of Christian Conservatism is referring to is not just Peter's Epistle, but the much more important, famous, and controversial passage from the favorite biblical author of Conservatives, Paul of Tarsus, who gave the following perfectly clear instructions, regarding obedience to one's political leaders, no matter how evil they may be, (because 'there is no authority except from God' ) :

Letter to the Romans 13:1-7

'Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God.  Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.  For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.  Do you wish to have no fear of the authority?  Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval; for it is God's servant for your good.  But if you do what is wrong, you should be afraid, for the authority does not bear the sword in vain! It is the servant of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer.  Therefore one must be subject, not only because of wrath but also because of conscience.
        For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, busy with this very thing.  Pay to all what is due them–taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due. '

Anybody who really believes that this passage is divinely inspired and inerrant has no choice but to argue for "the divine right", not just of the kings of history, but of modern tyrants like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Min, Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein and all the other monsters to stay in power for as long as God allows. Far from allowing anyone to try to remove such rulers, this "Word of God" compels "Christians" to respect and obey such rulers : "there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. . .  Therefore, whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed."  Paul doesn't allow for the slightest bit of "interpretation".  He drives home his point over and over again, that we should treat any and all rulers as God's very own appointees to whatever office they hold, be it governor, king, emperor, president, prime minister, secretary general, or Führer. No "if's", "and's" or "but's" !

"Therefore, the equalitarians and their Abolitionist allies are quite wrong in their particular conception of 'all men being equal.'
        As Christians we must also reject the idea that each person is an independent integer whose place in society can be reckoned without regard to his family heritage, family history, religion, economic status, personal abilities, language, nationality, etc. These things are considered important at various places in the Bible, so we should acknowledge their value as well.
        . . (regarding) the legal and moral state of affairs in America after 130 years of Abolitionist rule. People no longer define righteousness or unrighteousness in terms of God's law. Instead, a new code of law called civil rights, or human rights, is the standard by which behavior is defined. Anyone who refuses to conform is persecuted as wicked, vile, immoral, and evil.
        Thus the present-day Abolitionists charge their enemies with the same indictments as did their predecessors against the antebellum slave owner. This is because their perspective has never changed. They believe in equality as though it will singularly usher in the Millennium. They further hold to the deification of democracy as that political order best suited to promote a world of peace in which there are no classes, no national divisions, and no inherent authority."

As F.W. Schnitzler has stated,
        'Democracy in America, too, has been twisted and shaped to suit the purposes of the myth-makers. The "secularization of history" has stripped America of its religious history and leaves us believing that democracy alone is to be credited for the blessings this nation has enjoyed. Democracy, in and of itself, however, is a valueless form of government. It does not imply, suggest, or impart moral, ethical, or religious values, blessings, or benefits. It merely proposes a political process or procedure whereby the actual feelings and demands of the majority can be determined and satisfied, whether right or wrong.'

"Despite the pleading of the self-righteous equalitarians, we need to remain steadfast in our assertions that God has ordained order, authority, submission thereunto, class, nationality, language, station, and several other divisions among the peoples of the world. These matters guide our lives. Abolitionists continue to deny the existence of any of the God-ordained divisions in the world. Their creed of "unity, brotherhood, and equality" is sounded throughout the earth. Yet, in this they stand in rebellion toward the God who created them and ordained the manner in which the earth is to function.
        It is imperative that the Southern (i.e. Conservative Christian) people stand against Abolitionism, democracy, and equalitarianism. We must interpret life in the manner God has interpreted for us in the Bible. Our forefathers died for that interpretation of life. And it is to be our guiding light as we enter the 21st century and prepare for our independent nationhood.

        We Southerners (i.e. white Christian Conservatives) have have been bequeathed a theological and philosophical heritage that is a marvel to the rest of the world. We are nonetheless a weak people at present because, as a people, we have not walked in the ways of our God. False doctrine and mischievous heresies permeate the South. It remains, however, that of the things for which we ought to repent, none of them are to be found in the charges of the Abolitionists - from the 1860s or the 1990s.
        Southerners who are not (Conservative) Christians need to repent of their sins, accept Christ as their Savior and Lord, and determine to follow in the (enslavement) ways of the God of their fathers, the God of the Bible.
        We Southerners who are Christians need to re-double our efforts at helping others of our number to live righteous lives, become informed concerning the truth, thereby enabling them to render aid to others.
        The forces of Humanism are strong, but our God is far stronger. There can be no doubt that the Humanists of today, who permeate our land, are totally motivated to stamp out every vestige of the Christian religion from our society. Nonetheless, we need not fear them because there is no power in the universe which can rival the anger of Almighty God. Once He turns on our enemies, they will be crushed. He will help us in this way, but we must first walk according to His commands, trust Him for our personal and national sustenance, while endeavoring to point others towards Him and His kingship over the earth.
        Thomas 'Stonewall' Jackson, whose memory is still revered in the South, was a Christian man who I do not believe would disagree with one word written in this report. The same could be said of Robert E. Lee, General Nathan Bedford Forest, (founder of the K K K) and, going back even further, George Washington and James Madison.
        Within these pages I have laid out to the best of my ability, the ideals which made America great and made the Confederacy the object of respect the world over. We are the sons and daughters of the Confederacy. It is our duty to carry forward, not only the memory, but also the ideology, of our forefathers. The ideas contained herein are our blueprint.
        In the mid-1990s, pro-Southern groups are beginning to spring up all over our nation. We stand, not at the end of history, as some have suggested, but we have been placed at the crossroads of history. The success of our war against the forces of evil will set the stage for the next 500 years of Western chronology.
        The forces of Humanism, Abolitionism, Democracy, and Equalitarianism, against which the Confederates fought so valiantly, need to be engaged again today. Not on the field of battle, but in the definitive arena of ideas.
        The government in Washington is crumbling morally and fiscally. Still, it continues to pile wickedness on top of wickedness - by its Civil Rights Act, by its Voting Rights Act, by its Martin Luther King Day, by its toleration of violent crime, by its welfare payments which necessitate theft through tyrannical taxation, by allowing sodomites to parade through the streets and to sit in high places of governmental power, by allowing and encouraging abortion on demand, by refusing to protect our borders from the third-world invasion, by publicly demonizing our Confederate forefathers, by allowing the continual humiliation and denigration of the Southern people, by continually glorying in the Abolitionists victories in both the Civil War of the 1860s and the Civil Rights War of the 1960s, and lastly, by attempting to stamp out our national existence as Southerners by working to tear our flag off of the flags of the states where we live.
        These sins, and many others must be brought to account. For Washington has been weighed in the balance and found wanting. Its days are numbered.
        By the end of this decade I believe that Washington's internal weaknesses - both moral and financial - will manifest themselves plainly. The entire Socialist-Humanist experiment which it has undertaken will come crashing down around its heads. The federal government has promised that it can regulate every facet of our lives, manage all of our resources, regulate all of our businesses, decide best how our money is to be spent, and still provide for every person's basic 'needs.' They can not. That will become painfully obvious when Washington's debt crisis brings it to its knees. The dollar will become virtually worthless. Unemployment will skyrocket. And almost no one will be protected from the anarchy which will then follow.
        At that point, the Southern people will still be here, working the Southern land, speaking that sweet Southern drawl, and prepared to take our rightful place at the table of nations (i.e. races).
        We are not revolutionaries, but we are the true America. We are the loyal people, not because we are loyal to a government, but because we are loyal to the ideals upon which America was founded. We represent all that is good about America, while the government in Washington, and especially the Clinton Administration, stands for all that is vile and unholy.
        Determine that you are going to join in our worthy crusade to re-establish our nation (i.e. white Southern race) and to be a force for God's righteousness in our land. By working together, and claiming the blessings of Almighty God upon our efforts, we can build a legacy which will glorify our God and be something of which our grand children can be proud."

These Conservative Christians do indeed have a legacy. But, why be proud of :
  BlueArrowOnGray.png all of the activities of the many "Christian Knights of the Ku Klux Klan"
  BlueArrowOnGray.png some 2400 African Americans lynched by Bible-belt Christians in the hundred years following the Civil War.
  BlueArrowOnGray.png thousands of white Christian lynchers being celebrated as heroes by their white Christian communities, instead of being convicted of murder in the first degree; (only 49 of these cold-blooded murderers were ever even indicted and only 4 were ever convicted and sentenced.)

Thesis # 8 = "Civil governments derive their powers from God" :

The Covenant Between God and Civil Governments.
        "Dabney argued that ultimately, civil governments derive their powers from God for the protection of the people under their care. After arguing against the "Social Contract" theory of civil government, Dabney made the following remarks,
        'The other theory may be called the Christian. It traces civil government to the will and providence of God, who, from the first, created man with social instincts and placed him under social relations... If asked, whence the obligation to obey the civil magistrate, it answers: from the will of God, which is the source of all obligation... Hence, civil government is an ordinance of God; magistrates rule by His providence and by His command, and are His agents or ministers.'
        Dabney also realized that from a human perspective, the political power of the civil government came from the people being governed, and did not reside in the rulers themselves, . . .     'while we emphatically ascribe the fact of civil government and the obligation to obey it, to the will of God, we also assert that in the secondary sense, the government is, potentially, the people. The original source of the power, the authority and the obligation to obey it, is God, the human source is not an irresponsible Ruler, but the body of the ruled themselves, that is, the sovereignty, so far as it is human, resides in the people, and is held by the rulers, by delegation from them.' "

    Pray tell how the above differs from the "Social Contract" theory which Dabney professes to repudiate.

Back now to the list of Theses

Thesis # 9 To oppose slavery is to go against God's word :

"In any discussion on Confederate theology a position on slavery is of crucial importance. The first problem encountered on the subject is that it is so very highly charged with emotion from the outset. Virtually everyone begins with the presupposition that slavery is wrong, evil, vile, and immoral. This leads to no discussion at all, for if slavery is all of the above, then what point could there possibly be for discussing it further?
A. Considered Biblically.
        Therefore, the first order of business is to examine the presupposition that slavery is immoral. For if that is ever found to be fallacious, then the entire course of American history needs to be rethought.
        As with any moral issue, the Christian must begin with the Bible. For this is the ultimate source of our ethical system, as the Bible is nothing less than God speaking to us."

As previously quoted from the Westminster Confession of Faith,
        'The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture. . .  The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.'

"In the preceding section it was shown that slavery was a religious matter, and so we must begin with the Bible to form our opinions about it. For everything, and this excludes nothing, which the Christian believes to be good or evil, must be received as such from the Holy Scriptures. All things which man needs for his life are to be found there.

As James Henley Thornwell declared,
        'The Bible, and the Bible alone, is her [the Church's] rule of faith and practice. She can announce what it teaches, enjoin what it commands, prohibit what it condemns... Beyond the Bible she can never go, and apart from the Bible she can never speak. To the law and to the testimony, and to them alone, she must always appeal; and when they are silent it is her duty to put her hand upon her lips.'
        For instance, why is murder wrong? The answer is because God has forbidden it in His Word. Why are prostitution and adultery immoral? Because they are forbidden in the Bible. Why is stealing wrong? Because God has forbidden it in Scripture.
        So, what of the institution of domestic slavery? Is it forbidden in Scripture? Does the Bible speak of it as a vile evil which must be expunged from the earth by any means necessary? The answer to these questions is simply, "No."
    Colossians 4:1 states, "Masters, grant to your slaves justice and fairness, knowing that you too have a Master in heaven."
    Ephesians 6:5 enjoins, "Slaves, be obedient to those who are your master according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ."
    In Luke 7 a centurion slaveholder sent his servants to ask Jesus to heal his slave. Not once did Christ condemn the man for being a master, but after healing his slave the Lord commended the master for his Christian character with these words, "I say to you, not even in Israel have I found such great faith."
    In Genesis 16:9, we see the angel of the Lord say to a runaway slave, "Return to your mistress, and submit yourself to her authority."

B. Thornwell's Defense.
        The Bible has a great deal to say about the subject of slavery besides these four verses. None of it, however, pours any contempt upon the institution. Again quoting Thornwell,

        'Certain it is that no direct condemnation of Slavery can anywhere be found in the Sacred Volume. A social element in all States, from the dawn of history until the present period, if it be the crying and damning sin which its enemies represent it to be, it is truly amazing that the Bible... nowhere gives the slightest caution against this tremendous evil. The master is nowhere rebuked as a monster of cruelty and tyranny... The manner in which the relation is spoken of and its duties prescribed... convey the impression that they [Biblical writers, i. e. prophets, apostles, etc.] themselves had not the least suspicion that they were dealing with a subject full of abominations and outrages.'
        There were those who argued against slavery on the grounds of compassion with Biblical maxims such as: do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

In answer to these Thornwell replied, 'The same principle which would make the master emancipate his servant on the ground of benevolence, would make the rich man share his estates with his poor neighbor... it is enough for a Christian man who compares Scripture with Scripture, to know that Slavery is expressly excepted from the application of this or any other principle in the sweeping sense of the Abolitionists.'
        The fact that a Christian treats another person in the manner in which he would want to be treated does not do away with all offices of authority. This was, however, the argument of the Abolitionist. For instance, fathers are enjoined in Scripture to use the rod in raising their children. The Abolitionist-type argument against this would logically be, "You shouldn't spank your child, do unto others as you would have them do unto you. You wouldn't want him to beat you, would you?"
        Thornwell saw the spuriousness of such an argument: The words of the golden rule are to be fitted into the social structure of society and are not meant to supplant it.

Dabney also had some good ideas on this logical fallacy of the Abolitionists,
        ''The whole reasoning of the Abolitionist proceeds on the absurd idea, that any caprice or vain desire we might entertain towards our fellowman, if we were in is place, and he in ours, must be the rule of our conduct towards him, whether the desire would be in itself right or not... On this rule, a parent who, were he a child again, would be wayward and self-indulgent, commits a clear sin in restraining or punishing the waywardness of his child, for this is doing the opposite or what he would wish were he again the child. Judge and sheriff commit a criminal murder in condemning and executing the most atrocious felon; for were they on the gallows themselves, the overmastering love of life would very surely prompt them to desire release.'

Concerning those Christians who were intent on condemning the institution of slavery despite the fact that they had no Biblical basis for such assertions, Thornwell had these words,
        'They seem much more like apologists for the defects and omissions of the Scriptures, than like humble inquirers sitting at the feet of Jesus to learn His will. They have settled it in their own minds that Slavery is a sin; then the Bible must condemn it, and they set to work to make out the case that the Bible has covertly and indirectly done what they feel it ought to have done.'


"Thus from a Biblical point of view, we can find no condemnation of the institution of slavery, nor, by extension, of the Southern nation (i.e. white Southern race). For although clear and odious abuses of slaves by their masters did sometimes occur, this same type of sin is also committed in our present-day society by those holding authority over others. To reject the institution of slavery on the basis of the occasional abuses within the institution, would logically require that we overthrow all authority in every institution because abuses occur within every institution and within every relationship. We can therefore state authoritatively that the slander and ridicule which has been heaped upon us because of slavery has been unbiblical, self-righteous, hypocritical, and Pharisaical. Regardless of how many people believe that our forefathers were intrinsically wicked because they owned slaves, those condemnations carry no moral weight whatsoever! "<\P>

        Michael Hill, who founded the League of the South in 1988 reflected these views when he wrote to members of his organization in 1998:

"The day of Southern guilt is over – the south was right – and let us not forget that salient fact. No apologies for slavery should be made. In both the Old and New Testaments slavery is sanctioned and regulated according to God's word. Thus, when practiced in accord with Holy Scripture, it is not a sin. Our ancestors were not evil men because they held slaves. This issue is our Achilles Heel, and the only way to deal with it is to confront our accusers boldly and without guilt. After all, what we are really upholding is God's word. Let us fear Him, and we'll fear no man."

Thesis # 10 = The enslaving of non-Christian black Africans by White
European Christians was the best thing that could have happened to them :

"It has also been alleged that slavery systematically ripped apart black families and blood ties. This is absurd as the nuclear family was essentially an unknown element to black society.

Again the words of Dabney are pertinent, 'Another charge against us is that our laws abrogated the rights of marriage among slaves, authorized their capricious separation by masters, and thus consigned them to promiscuous concubinage, like that of beasts... That is, first, a monstrous perversion of the facts, in that the Africans never had any marital rights or domestic institutions to be deprived of. Have men forgotten, that in their native country there was no marriage, and no marriage law, but the negroes either lived in vagrant concubinage, or held their plurality of wives as slaves, to be either sold or slain at will?'

"Little has changed as the greatest social problem facing African-Americans today is their lack of a family structure. Studies show that about 65 percent of African-American children are born out of wedlock. And of those who do get married, the divorce rate is twice as high as it is among whites, which is quite high in its own right."

"(Narratives of the time) "consistently portray an amazingly, to our modern eyes, benign picture of Southern plantation life. Affection for former masters and mistresses is expressed in terms of unmistakable devotion. Testimony to the good treatment, and kindness, and gentleness of many so-called heartless slave-owners, abounds. Many of the old slaves express a wistful desire to get back to the plantation.
        Slave life to them, according to their own words, was a life of plenty, of simple pleasures, of food, and clothes, and good medical care. There is no pervasive cry of rage and anguish. There is no general expression of bitterness or outrage. Instead, what you find on page after page are protestations of affection for a condition that most of us have thought that every slave despised.
        Overwhelmingly, there is a positive view of slavery set forth."

"The anger and the rage over slavery in the African-American community has originated since the time of the (Civil) war between the states and since the time of the Great Depression. It is, in fact, a product of the Civil Rights movement. Similarly to other communist social crusades, the Civil Rights movement has encouraged a systematic class and ethnic warfare between African-Americans and Southerners (i.e. white Christian Conservatives), and all of this has been undertaken in the name of justice, equality, and unity."
        "Despite the facts and the testimony of an array of scholars, the loud, wild-eyed, half-crazed fictions of African-American leaders and their Abolitionist fellow-travelers continue to be heard in this land. They speak over and over about how badly slaves were treated and how wicked our forefathers were for manhandling them in such a manner, along with how much we owe them for their trouble. The facts, nonetheless, demonstrate that the most fortunate event in the history of the Africans now in America occurred on the day an ancestor of theirs was brought to this land. Never before had they experienced such freedom or humane treatment at the hands of another human being. Never before had they been given the opportunity to experience the fruits and joys of Christian civilization.         Virginia was the first political jurisdiction to outlaw the slave trade. This was done in 1778. None of the Southern states trafficked in slaves. That business was a Northern business.
        The consensus of opinion, in Virginia and the South, was that if a person was already a slave, and recognized as such by the law of the commonwealth, then it was perfectly legitimate, and many times compassionate, to purchase said individual. Our people bought those already enslaved, and this was a benefit for both parties.
2. The complicity of blacks in the slave trade.
        It needs to be reiterated that the Africans have always been treated most brutally by other Africans, and this is as true today as ever. The slaves in America had virtually all been sold to Europeans by Africans. Although, slavery was outlawed in America in the 1860s, slavery continued to be practiced legally in Africa until the 1960s, and is still practiced today on that continent, albeit without statutory sanction."

Back to the list of Theses

Thesis # 11 = The Civil War won't be over until the true conservative Christianity
of the South triumphs not just there but throughout the rest of the country :

"At the time of the War Between the States, the Southern people were a Christian people. We had faults and sins which were widely practiced and needed vast improvement, but all things considered, our forefathers were a Christian people.
        The War Between the States was not merely a quarrel over slavery. There were far deeper philosophical and theological issues at stake of which slavery was merely one manifestation. Something dark and sinister had occurred in many of the churches in the North. These churches had repudiated historic Christian doctrine and had turned to the philosophical and ethical tenants of, first, Unitarianism, and later, Transcendentalism. Professor Douglas Floyd Kelly writes,
        Dabney firmly believed that the War was caused by the French Revolution `Jacobin' principles of New England Unitarian abolitionists and their liberal congressional `hacks,' who wished to turn the original constitutional republic with its emphasis on state and local power into a secularized, centralized democratic power.
        In some ways we can view the Civil War as America's version of the French Revolution, as from a Humanist impetus, the North waged a bitter and bloody war on the Christian moral order which existed in the South.
        The Northern victory was nothing more nor less than the violent overthrow of the Christian moral order upon which America was founded in 1776.
        New England Unitarianism had been greatly influenced by the principles of the French Revolution which identified the ideal of unity with the ideal of equality. This equalitarianism demanded that the institution of slavery be abolished.
        The Bible teaches that creation reflects its Creator . . .
God is One and God is Many. So it is with mankind. There is one mankind who are all of one blood (Acts 17:26, "And He made of one blood, every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth. . ."). However, mankind has been divided by God Himself into subsets called nations (i.e. races). The ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters of Genesis (tower of Babel) tell of this operation taking place. Then, Deuteronomy 32:8 gives a commentary on what has already happened, "When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when He separated the sons of man, He set the boundaries of the peoples. . ."
        Trinitarians have no compulsion to unify mankind because the God with whom we have unity in Christ is the One who has separated the human race into distinct and differing nations (i.e. races). (Translation : Conservative Christians of the white race aren't interested in promoting justice and equality for all races.)
        Unitarians, on the other hand, have no unity with God because they reject the Lord Jesus Christ." [

Sadly, Mr. Wheeler has forgotten the commandment against bearing false witness against others, as it is totally false to claim that "Unitarians" all reject the Lord Jesus Christ.]   "Thus, their entire scheme of righteousness is bound in their ability to unify mankind.  This departure from the Christian faith in many New England churches was the main catalyst for the social conditions which led to the Civil War.  By denying the divinity of both Christ and the Holy Spirit, the Unitarians became monistic. This one-sided view of God as a unity only, led them to falsely assume that mankind should be unified as well. This drove them to disavow God's world order as established early in mankind's history. The implication of this in society was quite simple. They needed to replace God's world order of separate peoples and nations (i.e. races) with a new world order of universal government and the unmitigated unity of mankind.
        The abolitionist movement was merely the first salvo in the war to destroy God's world order in America. This war continues today. The United Nations is its propagator."

Notice: This is to remind the reader that we "Liberals Like Christ" are providing most of the material on this page, not because we agree with it, but in order to show our readers the kinds of places where conservatives get the wierd political and/or sociological positions that they embrace and promote.

        Although the author of the "Theology of the Confederacy" above claims to be spelling out "true Christianity", I could find only one instance in which he quoted the actual words of Jesus Christ from one of the four Gospels! And he only did so in an effort to justify the practice of whites enslaving blacks, in the following context:

"Ephesians 6:5 enjoins, 'Slaves, be obedient to those who are your master according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ.'
In Luke 7 a centurion slaveholder sent his servants to ask Jesus to heal his slave. Not once did Christ condemn the man for being a master, but after healing his slave the Lord commended the master for his Christian character with these words, 'I say to you, not even in Israel have I found such great faith.'
In Genesis 16:9, we see the angel of the Lord say to a runaway slave, 'Return to your mistress, and submit yourself to her authority.' "

While quoting Jesus only once, as we pointed out above, Dennis Wheeler does exactly what most Christian Conservative spokesmen do. He quotes Paul of Tarsus much more often than Jesus, twelve times as often in Wheeler's case. To see why "Christian Conservatives" prefer Paul of Tarsus to Jesus of Nazareth, read http://WhatWouldJesusThink.info/bad-news-Paul.html.
        To see how much of Jesus words are quoted by people who actually believe in him, see http://LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/Christlike and / or http://WhatWouldJesusThink.info/Challenge.


                Charlie Rangel was one of the U.S. House's most celebrated members,
                        then serving his 17th term as the Representative of the Harlem area of N.Y.C.

A religious protest largely from the left :
"Conservative Christians say fighting cuts
in poverty programs is not a priority."
by Jonathan Weisman and Alan Cooperman
Washington Post staff writers

Dec. 14, 2005

"When hundreds of religious activists try to get arrested today to protest cutting programs for the poor, prominent conservatives such as James Dobson, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell will not be among them.
        That is a great relief to Republican leaders, who have dismissed the burgeoning protests as the work of liberals. But it raises the question: Why in recent years have conservative Christians asserted their influence on efforts to relieve Third World debt, AIDS in Africa, strife in Sudan and international sex trafficking – but remained on the sidelines while liberal Christians protest domestic spending cuts?
        Conservative Christian groups such as Focus on the Family say it is a matter of priorities, and their priorities are abortion, same-sex marriage and seating judges who will back their position against those practices.
        "It's not a question of the poor not being important or that meeting their needs is not important," said Paul Hetrick, a spokesman for Focus on the Family, Dobson's influential, Colorado-based Christian organization. "But whether or not a baby is killed in the seventh or eighth month of pregnancy, that is less important than help for the poor? We would respectfully disagree with that."
        Jim Wallis, editor of the liberal Christian journal Sojourners and an organizer of today's protest, was not buying it. Such conservative religious leaders "have agreed to support cutting food stamps for poor people if Republicans support them on judicial nominees," he said. "They are trading the lives of poor people for their agenda. They're being, and this is the worst insult, unbiblical."
        At issue is a House-passed budget-cutting measure that would save $50 billion over five years by trimming food stamp rolls, imposing new fees on Medicaid recipients, squeezing student lenders, cutting child-support enforcement funds and paring agriculture programs. House negotiators are trying to reach accord with senators who passed a more modest $35 billion bill that largely spares programs for the poor.
        At the same time, House and Senate negotiators are hashing out their differences on a tax-cutting measure that is likely to include an extension of cuts in the tax rate on dividends and capital gains.
        To mainline Protestant groups and some evangelical activists, the twin measures are an affront, especially during the Christmas season. Leaders of five denominations – the United Methodist Church, Episcopal Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Presbyterian Church USA and United Church of Christ – issued a joint statement last week calling on Congress to go back to the drawing board and come up with a budget that brings 'good news to the poor.'
        Around 300 religious activists have vowed to kneel in prayer this morning at the Cannon House Office Building and remain there until they are arrested. Wallis said that as they are led off, they will chant a phrase from Isaiah: 'Woe to you legislators of infamous laws . . . who refuse justice to the unfortunate, who cheat the poor among my people of their rights, who make widows their prey and rob the orphan.'
        To GOP leaders and their supporters in the Christian community, it is not that simple. Acting House Majority Leader Roy Blunt (R-MO.) said yesterday that the activists' position is not 'intellectually right.'
        The 'right tax policy,' such as keeping tax rates low on business investment, 'grows the economy, increases federal revenue – and increased federal revenue makes it easier for us to pursue policies that we all can agree have social benefit,' he said.
        Dobson also has praised what he calls 'pro-family tax cuts.' And Janice Crouse, a senior fellow at the Christian group Concerned Women for America, said religious conservatives 'know that the government is not really capable of love.'
        'You look to the government for justice, and you look to the church and individuals for mercy. I think Hurricane Katrina is a good example of that. FEMA just failed, and the church and the Salvation Army and corporations stepped in and met the need,' she said.
        Tony Perkins, president of the conservative Family Research Council, said the government's role should be to encourage charitable giving, perhaps through tax cuts.
        'There is a [biblical] mandate to take care of the poor. There is no dispute of that fact,' he said. 'But it does not say government should do it. That's a shifting of responsibility.'
        The Family Research Council is involved in efforts to stop the bloodshed in the Darfur region of Sudan as well as sex trafficking and slavery abroad. But Perkins said those issues are far different from the budget cuts now under protest. 'The difference there is enforcing laws to keep people from being enslaved, to be sold as sex slaves,' he said. 'We're talking here about massive welfare programs.'
        The Rev. Richard Cizik, a vice president of the National Association of Evangelicals, returned yesterday from the Montreal conference on global climate change, another issue of interest to evangelicals. 'Frankly, I don't hear a lot of conversation among evangelicals' about budget cuts in anti-poverty programs, he said. 'What I hear our people asking is, why are we spending $231 million on a bridge to nowhere in Alaska and can't find $50 million for African Union forces to stop genocide in Darfur?"

[ from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content /article/2005/12/13/AR2005121301764_pf.html ]
2006 The Washington Post Company

A Vanity Fair article on the best-selling "Left Behind" novels
provides a glimpse into the ultra-Conservative worldview:

"Far from being a Prince of Peace, the Christ depicted in the 'Left Behind' series is a vengeful Messiah so vengeful that the death and destruction he causes to unconverted Jews, to secularists, to anyone who is not born again, is far, far greater than the crimes committed by the most brutal dictators in human history.
        When He arrives on the scene in Glorious Appearing, Christ merely has to speak and 'men and women, soldiers and horses, seemed to explode where they stood. It was as if the very words of the Lord had superheated their blood, causing it to burst through their veins and skin.'
        'After the initial bloodletting, Nicolae Carpathia gathers his still-vast army, covering hundreds of square miles, and prepares for the conflict at Megiddo. As the battle for Armageddon is about to start, Rayford Steele climbs atop his Hummer to watch Christ harvest the grapes of wrath' . . .
        According to LaHaye and Jenkins, it is God's intent 'that the millennium start with a clean slate.' Committing mass murder hundreds of times greater than the Holocaust, the Lord – not the Antichrist, mind you – makes sure that 'all unbelievers would soon die.' . . .
        Steele looks at the hordes of soldiers assembled by the Antichrist, and 'tens of thousands burst open at the words of Jesus.' They scream in pain and die before hitting the ground, their blood pouring forth. Soon, [Tim] LaHaye and [Jerry] Jenkins write, tens of thousands of foot soldiers for the Antichrist are dying in the goriest manner imaginable, their internal organs oozing out, 'their blood pooling and rising in the unforgiving brightness of the glory of Christ.' "

See the first page for the first six of the
Eleven Important Conservative Beliefs
(as set forth in black and white by Dennis Wheeler )

Thesis # 1. White, southern Christians are
the only true Christians in America

Thesis # 2. Belief in science and belief in the Bible
don't mix, and true Christians go with the Bible

Thesis # 3. Man's law needs to be the reflection of
God's law (the ten commandments)

Thesis # 4. "There is no ethical righteousness
apart from the law of God"

Thesis # 5. Human beings are not entitled to the "rights"
claimed for them by "humanistic" theories

Thesis # 6. God's plan calls for inequality
among human beings, rather than equality

Take it from Stephen;
there is much more where
this came from, at my
ITYS-Banner website ColbertToldUso.gif
If ever you are moved to critique,
support, or enlighten me,
here's the way to do it :
email image