| A Christian Plot for Domination?|
"With Tim Pawlenty out of the presidential race, it is now fairly clear that the GOP candidate will either be Mitt Romney or someone who makes George W. Bush look like Tom Paine. Of the three most plausible candidates for the Republican nomination, two are deeply associated with a theocratic strain of Christian fundamentalism known as Dominionism. If you want to understand Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry, understanding Dominionism isnt optional.
Put simply, Dominionism means that Christians have a God-given right to rule all earthly institutions."
read more: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/08/14/dominionism-michele-bachmann-and-rick-perry-s-dangerous-religious-bond.html
| 2011/8/17 18:00|
| Re: A Christian Plot for Domination?|
I saw on Dad's TV tonight that Perry's leading in the polls.
Part of the strong-delusion, is thinking that there is a governmental answer [a man] that will end our problems here and abroad. So many talking about the elections - thinking that one man can change the world's problems or at the least - make life more financially secure or safe for us here in the States - when the problem is Global now and nothing will bail us out of our permanently welded ties to the rest of the world and the UN and the amount of debt we are in, to nations such as China - just for one of many.
Surely is time to pray that none of us gets caught up in that delusion. "Put not your trust in Princes"
We need to understand Global Governance Soon.
| 2011/8/21 0:06|
| Re: |
Protestant dominionism reminds me of Rome's vision to rule all nations.
| 2011/8/21 10:06||Profile|
| Re: Who are the Dominionists?|
The NAR are the prime administrators of current "Christian" Dominionism today. I have been aware, and opposed to, the NAR since their beginnings, over a decade ago.
I am amazed at the tentacles these usurpers have entangled themselves in, and the politicians they have aligned themselves with. They want influence in the Oval Office...They want the World. They see themselves as THE qualified prophets and Apostles in the Earth...and demand that authority while they seek to establish it.
They are very similar to the Vatican...and are de facto self-declared popes. The really strange thing about them is their unorthodoxy. All of them supported Todd Bentley, and are filmed extensively on stage with him, endorsing him...and of course...Emma,..The winds of Change Demons..and Todd's Karate stylings of "healing"...and his 31 resurrections from the dead. [ See Morningstar Madness and "Apostle" Rick Joyner...youtube
Sarah Palin was also in their camp, and attended some of their church conferences. Basically, it is a group of ambitious men that have declared themselves Apostles. Interestingly, they all have occult ties to the Vatican; many of them meeting high officials there...and maybe even the Pope....Here is some information at the heart of WHO the Dominionists really are...and there is a ton more if you want to surf it.
They are ambitious, deceived anti-Christ politicians in league with demons; all in the holy Name of christ...just like Rome.
| 2011/8/21 10:17|
| Re: |
Wow. I must have had my head in the sand. I am aware of these false teachers but never heard of NAR. There is no answer outside of the gospel....the cross of Jesus Christ. be on guard....the great falling away is in progress and true believers will soon be a minority and unwelcome.
| 2011/8/21 11:01||Profile|
| Re: |
Thanks for the links. What is amazing is how much this movement flies under the radar. I think its because people are simply dis-engaged. It seems that if any person represents their particular philosophy, then the " Christian background,' or what they actually believe is simply unimportant to most people. This to me, more than anything, is a sign of the triumph of the world over what passes for Christianity. Ultimately, people who are rooted and grounded in this world, believe that the answers to this worlds problems lies with man, despite what prayer calls they may go to or what prayers they may pray.
I would urge all Christians to do a study of what dominionism is and who are the leaders of such a movement and why politics is such an important part of dominionism.........brother Frank
| 2011/8/21 11:12|
| Re: |
Rachel Maddow is the wrong source to be getting info from.
I think you are going down a rabbit trail chasing dominion theologist.
I would encourage you all to be wise as serpents and gentle as doves on this one.
We need Government. Our nations government and people need to acknowledge God.
We all know that no government or people will be perfect but we need to support righteous candidates who will represent moral, conservative, God honoring laws and ways.
Lastly, I will quote Judge Roy Moore, "Seperation of church and state does not mean seperation of God from Government."
Our Government officials should acknowledge the laws of nature and of natures God, otherwise men become God and make their own laws.
Ps 9:17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.
Ps 22:28 For the kingdom is the LORD'S: and He is the governor among the nations.
Ps 33:12 ¶ Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance.
Ps 47:8 God reigneth over the heathen: God sitteth upon the throne of his holiness.
Job 12:23 He increaseth the nations, and destroyeth them: he enlargeth the nations, and straiteneth them again.
Appolus and brothertom are of course free to post their thoughts as am I. I will probably not respond to anymore on this particular thread cuz I don't have time to get into a debate on this.
God bless to all, John
| 2011/8/21 13:23|
| Re: A Christian Plot for Domination?|
I think that the author of this particular article shouldn't make such deep assumptions about individuals or figures that she did not have the opportunity to interview for clarification.
It is funny, but many of these same journalists (and would-be journalists) -- especially at The Daily Beast -- were unwilling to apply the same level of criticism toward individuals like President Obama during his run for the White House -- even though he provided quite a bit more questionable anecdotes from his own religious background and associations. So, this raises a question about the author's perceived motives.
The danger is that the author is assuming that Rick Perry believes in "Dominionism." There was no evidence whatsoever presented that would substantiate such a view. The author never interviewed the Governor. The author cited another article that also failed to seek clarification with the Governor. While it provides a brief explanation of the error of "Dominionism," it fails to link either candidate to such a belief. So, the entire article reeks of assumption, connecting dots, insinuation, hearsay, rumor and even conspiracy.
This shouldn't surprise anyone. This tactic has been used in politics for quite some time. Any time a person who professes a faith in Christ decides to run for a public office or participate in public service, some will undoubtedly scrutinize their faith. In many instances, they will try to paint them as what they affectionately call a "wingnut" or make insinuations about their views and label such views as "extreme."
In one of my classes during grad school, we had a guest speaker who had served in Bill Clinton's administration. He mentioned the "strategic tactics" that were engaged during the two election campaigns in order to "lessen the impact of Evangelical Christians during the election." He pointed out how, in 1992, they created a strategy to use Christians themselves to spread questions about then-President George H. W. Bush. This man said that he knew the impact that Christians could have on elections and policy. So, they decided to "use" certain Christians to publicly take issue regarding Bush's religious beliefs and his choice of words (following he first Gulf War) regarding "a new world order" -- and even implying that he personally believed that Muslims would go to Heaven. This issue was purposely leaked to major media outlets.
This speaker stated emphatically that the goal was to use "denominational differences" to cause friction and lessen the impact of evangelicals during the election. He claimed that it worked, citing a decline in turnout among evangelicals in 1992...the amount that supported third party candidates (such as Ross Perot)...and a small increase in the number of evangelicals who supported Clinton. He emphasized that every strategy like this was vital to the election since none of the candidates would obtain a majority and the margin of victory would be about 5% of the vote.
I listened to the guest speaker and it caused me to wonder why the man wasn't embarrassed about admitting such dishonesty. This man was admittedly aware of the large amount of people who claim to have been "evangelicals" and "Christians" and just how easy it can be to stir dissension in their midst.
After all, the word "Dominionism" is often incorrectly thrown out in churches regarding individuals who believe that Christians have an opportunity to serve in areas like government, school boards, military, or other public offices. It seems that whenever an individual says that he feels the liberty -- or even a call -- to serve in such a public manner, someone will undoubtedly come out from behind a pew (or elsewhere) and unleash the "D" word. When, in reality, many of those individuals who serve in such public arenas don't embrace the actual views of "dominionism" -- such as a view that Christians have a "God-given right to rule all earthly institutions."
During college, I attended a church where one of the church elders decided to run for the school board. Prior to this, he was well-beloved and highly regarded in both the Church and community. When he decided to run, it was odd that some loud members of the church actually stepped out and raised issue about him. This was the first time that I had ever heard the "dominionsim" word -- and it was used as a slight against that man. This man was a successful small business owner and had a large family. Somehow, the insinuations started flying to the point where a few very loud church folks went so far as to claim that he had "supported NAFTA," that he "wasn't tithing" and even publicly questioning the man's faith and status as an "elder" in the church. Such rhetoric somehow made its way out of the church and into the community.
In reality, the man was a father who was simply concerned about the schools that his children and grandchildren were attending. He had hoped that he could allow his faith and Biblical views about righteousness and unrighteousness to influence the local school district (a special government district) through such an office. He didn't have a desire to "take over" the district with Christianity or any sort of view about "a God-given right to rule all earthly institutions." Yet the damage was done. This man won the election, but some people never looked at him the same way.
I don't know if Rick Perry belongs to such a belief. However, I am willing to refrain from even entertaining such an insinuation until I know for certain. Politicians often invoke their religious faith or religious principles during elections. Of course, it seems that any time a candidate invokes a claim regarding his Christian faith, the "dominionism" insinuation is pushed back into fray.
Do these candidates really believe such odd notions about Christian dominion over earthly institutions? I suppose that this would have to be asked from candidate to candidate. However, I certainly don't think that there is enough evidence for this author to claim that Perry or Bauchmann is "deeply associated" with it. And, of course, it makes one wonder why the author -- a Jewish feminist -- and those that she seems intent on provoking aren't equally concerned or puzzled about the "liberation theology" elements from President Obama's own religious background.
If we aren't careful, we will end up giving credibility to such things without full certainty. At the same time, I think that we should be careful about straying into the realm of politics or political discussions when they can very well lead to the type of quarrels that we hope to avoid here. Like thingsabove said, we may find ourselves doing down a winding rabbit trail that serves to distract us from the "straight and narrow."
| 2011/8/21 13:45||Profile|
| Re: |
"I would urge all Christians to do a study of what dominionism is and who are the leaders of such a movement and why politics is such an important part of dominionism."
I reiterate this point. I think you will find that one of the top proponents of dominionism helped organized the recent prayer gathering in Texas. Sad thing is, politician and " minister," are manipulating each other...... brother Frank
| 2011/8/21 20:35|
| Re: |
If Perry had organized public prayer meetings during his three terms as Governor I would not have any suspicions about him.
But he did not, so it is only normal to be a bit wary of him since he organized such a grand public prayer meeting just before he announced he is running for Prez.
Dominionism is very alive in America. It is interesting how it has crept into many different kinds of denominations.
| 2011/8/21 22:24|