Donald Wildmon’s American Family Association: The Best Friends the Jews Have Ever Had
Further showing their commitment to religious tolerance and diversity, the American Family Association has sent the following petition to Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig:
The Washington Nationals professional baseball club has suspended a volunteer chaplain and rebuked a baseball player because they hold religious beliefs that are “Religiously Incorrect.”
Meaning what, exactly? That they don’t hate fa…
Volunteer chaplain Joe Moeller and outfielder Ryan Church were having a conversation concerning Christianity. Church asked Moeller a question about Jesus and salvation. “I said, like, Jewish people, they don?t believe in Jesus. Does that mean they?re doomed?” Church asked.
Volunteer chaplain Moeller simply nodded his head in agreement. For his “religiously incorrect” thinking ? even if it was simply a nod of the head ? Moeller was suspended.
Yeah, it’s amazing how prickly people get when you tell them they’re doomed to spend an eternity gnashing their teeth while being fist-fucked by demons.
Rabbi Shmuel Herzfeld, leader of an Orthodox Jewish congregation in Washington, said, “The Nationals did a good job about bringing hate into the locker room.” A chaplain and a baseball player are accused of hate speech because they were discussing a basic tenet of their faith!
And really, the most basic tenet of any religion is hating on other religions. If you can’t express self-righteous indignation toward people who have different beliefs, you might as well be a freaking Unitarian. Next thing you know, they’ll be telling Christians that it’s wrong to hate fa…
Wow!
Zounds!
Now it is not “religiously correct” for Christians to just “think” that salvation comes through Christ alone.
They can think it all they want- they just probably shouldn’t express it aloud while they’re at work. For instance, one of the central tenets of Bradism is that I fantasize every night about being held captive by a pair of sexy dominatrix lesbian midgets. But do I go blabbing my mouth about it in public? OK, so I do, but I wouldn’t at all blame my boss if he fired me for talking about it during office hours…
The Nationals immediately suspended Chaplain Moeller and Church issued an apology for asking the question.
Dr. Richard Land, head of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, had this to say: “The worst this chaplain could be convicted of is ascribing to orthodox Christian faith, which is what you want from a Christian chaplain.”
Yes, you want a chaplain who tells the Jews what they’ve got coming to them! It should be like the #1 qualification!
Since every other professional team is likely to follow any action taken by the Nationals, please sign the petition allowing freedom of religion and thought by those associated with professional baseball.
We will present the petitions to Mr. Bud Selig, Commissioner of Major League Baseball.
Uh, you guys realize that Selig is Jewish, don’t you? I don’t imagine he’s going to be very happy when you tell him that he’s doomed…
Survey says: you’re going to hell, Bud!
If I were a gambling person, I would say the unnamed religion was Islam. Just a wild hunch, though.
Bud Selig would go to hell regardless.
Help! I can’t read black lettering on dark grey background. Help I say!
damn right gus; that guy’s a jerk.
I’m also with Troy; what is going on around here>
whats an eternity, between friends?
“The worst this chaplain could be convicted of is ascribing to orthodox Christian faith, which is what you want from a Christian chaplain.”
yes, so get those chaplains out of the work environment!
you know, i kinda agree with the christian freakazoids…..of course for entirely different reasons. like, come on “religously incorrect”????!!! isn’t religion by definition nearly always incorrect? after all, religions are not much more than a bunch of insipid fairy tales meant to teach people to fear an acausal universe. honestly, it’s like someone who believes in the easter bunny is dissing someone else who believes in the fucking tooth fairy. they both deserve infinite mockery, and damn it….people should have the right to mock and insult fellow dumbasses….hopefully, to the point that dumbasses will commit fracticide and spare the rest of us their hubris.
It always amazes me how readily some of these idiots will admit that their religion is based on hate.
Of course, not many of them are smart enough to realize that that is exactly what they’re saying.
This baby blue color scheme is very disconcerting to us veteran readers.
religions are not much more than a bunch of insipid fairy tales meant to teach people to fear an acausal universe. honestly, it’s like someone who believes in the easter bunny is dissing someone else who believes in the fucking tooth fairy. they both deserve infinite mockery
Tell it like it is, huh!
Oh, fer cryin’ out loud. You mean all those babies I sacrificed to Ba’al don’t mean anything?
mock all you want, heathen dogs, but I will be laughing at all of you as you suffer in torment in the lake of hellfire, from my comfortable perch in heaven, next to the source of all love and compassion and forgiveness…hey, waitaminnit…
It’s not quite fair to say a religion is based on hate if all it really says is that God told us anyone who believes in something else can’t get into heaven. The bible kinda supports that point. And if you’re going to have chaplains in your baseball club I think it’s a little silly to vet them until they agree with you. Either let people talk about religion, or don’t, but don’t try to moderate it to suit you. I hate to say it, but I’m with the fundamentalists have a point.
Actually, while in hell, I think you get skull-fucked by demons, not fist-fucked, but I could be wrong.
Yeah, it’s really not hate. You’re just saying that if one chooses to accept another religion, he or she will burn in hell, that’s all. No biggie.
Relax–it’s both!
Since this is a religious question, shouldn’t you be getting Marie Jon’s opinion?
Isn’t’ that’ supposed’ to’ be’ Marie’ Jon’?
or Marie Jon”s opinion?
If there’s one thing more contemptible than partisan chaplains in sports teams, it’s non-partisan chaplains, for pete’s sake. What kind of time wasting wimp is a non partisan chaplain? Read Catch-22 again.
Assuming the (like, totally trustworthy) American Family Association is telling the ?undecorated? truth here, I?d have to agree with them: no one should find it shocking, or even noteworthy, that a Christian preacher believes those not following his religion is going to hell – including Jews, Muslims, and fa?
That isn?t to say I condone the AFA?s whiney cult of victimhood.
Oops, that should read: “…no one should find it shocking, or even noteworthy, that a Christian preacher believes those not following his religion ARE going to hell…”
Thank you. That is all.
I honestly don’t know why so many people seem to think that Christianity is a religion of love and peace.
It really DOES teach that Jews are going to burn in Hell. Nothing that jerk said is incorrect. Christianity actually IS a hate religion. There are other ways to do a religion that keep it from being a hate religion – Mormonism, so I’ve been told, teaches that only bad Mormons go to Hell – the rest of us go to a “not quite as nice Heaven”. But that’s not what Christianity believes. Christianity can claim to be a religion of love all it wants to, but the love is only for the members of its in-group, which is a slightly less impressive claim.
The whole thing sort of reminds me of hearing pacifists quote Marx on the evils of capitalism – without ever acknowledging or admitting that Marx also taught violent revolution. You can’t have it both ways.
All religions are hate religions, under certain circumstances – even Buddhism.
As for Marx, at least he has a logical system which purports to get to the bottom of the causes of human conflict, which is more than any of the religions have.
Why the fuck do American sports teams have chaplains anyway?
Do baseball players need prayers before shooting up?
I think the Christianity vs. Judaism argument is best answered on the field. And we all know that Ryan Church is WAY better than Hank Greenberg ever was. Hell, put him on the mound, and watch him shame Sandy Koufax.
Ah, hay-soos. I like heem very much. But he no help with curveball.
I personally don’t care that Church and the Pastor think everyone’s going to hell. My point is, there’s a time and a place to express such sentiments, and it’s not at work, especially when you’re a public figure representing a popular sports team.
What kind of pathetic jock-sniffer hangs around pro baseball locker rooms as a “volunteer chaplain” anyway? Or maybe it’s a matter of ministering to the needs of those sweaty buff boys to keep them away from the groupies? Those other groupies, I guess I should say.
If you don’t think people should talk about these things at work then the problem is hiring chaplains in the first place. The club started this thing by allowing religious figures in. You can’t then say you only want particular religious figures. What if they had specified that a muslim couldn’t talk to the players?
What if they had specified that a muslim couldn’t talk to the players?
Yeah, see, I wouldn’t want that either, especially if he’s talkin’ ’bout hatin’ on infidels and whatnot.
The tough part for me is, I think having religious figures around helps a lot of baseball players (who ain’t exactly the brightest folk in the world, if you haven’t noticed) make sound decisions. I mean, it’s been a long time since we’ve heard stories about players snorting lines of coke a la Doc Gooden and the Straw…
Brad, are you saying that baseball players need sky pilots to keep them off coke? Can’t you be a bit more blas? about this, please?
Jillian- Some Christians teach everyone other than their group is going to Hell, but a case can be made that Christianity per se doesn’t. A biblical case can be (and has been) made for universalism, and in fact apparently was the majority view in the early Greek-speeking church; Augustine and Jerome both wrote that a large part of the church even as late as their era was universalist. One key issue is whether the Greek word “aionion” is correctly translated as “eternal,” or is better understood as indeterminate but not necessarily infinite in length.
Now, how’s that for a tangent?
Brad, are you saying that baseball players need sky pilots to keep them off coke?
I didn’t put it very sensitively, but yes. Sadly, yes.
I’m quite comfortable with the people who claim that anyone not following their brand of Christianity is going to hell. Look who says things like that. If the actions in my life potentially means I’m going to spend an eternity with them, then I’d better get working on rounding up the neighbourhood strays for blood sacrifices in my living room and having even more abortions per day than I’m having.
Excellent work Mal de mer…I’ve already told all the happy little Christian children in da hood, that when they die the Lord will judge them.
When they end up in hell I’ll be waiting for them…they usually go home crying.
So little time, so many asshats.
Permanent consequences are a part of the life you live every day, until the singularity comes and you can regenerate limbs or upload your brain to the internet.
If some part of you lives eternally, then it makes sense that you can make a choice with eternal consequences.
If no part of you lives eternally, then eat, drink, and be merry.
The Christians don’t have a monopoly on hell. Neither do all Christians consign people to hell on the basis of gender, age, race, creed, social class, or sexual orientation.
There is a much more enlightening discussion of this issue at http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2005/06/lb_explicit_con.html
Read it, or email me. Or pile on.
I’m with mal de mer. An eternity with, oh, Pat Robertson WOULD be an eternity in hell.
Kind of reminds me of the south park where satan goes to heaven, and it’s all mormons. They spend eternity making crafts out of egg cartons and making plays about how premarital sex makes baby jesus cry.
Shit i’ve been to functions like that before, i’d take the insatiable lake of fire over that any day, with a huge look of relief on my face at that. I may be in hell, but at least all my friends are there!
They spend eternity making crafts out of egg cartons and making plays about how premarital sex makes baby jesus cry
Oh yeah? South Park ain’t Mormons. But you wouldn’t know that, huh?
The problem is that Wildmon and all members of the southern bastard church are cluless.
There is an offer on the site http://www.religionquestioned.com to shut down if one of these religious pricks can refute what is said about the Messiah which would not make the misBegotten One it.
At http://www.religionquestioned.com we don’t get into ID except to show why the God of the Bible is not the one.
Using the King David story we show that even though David broke God’s law and should have been killed along with Bathsheba instead God who in Deuteronomy 24:16 said a son shall not die for the sins of the father, causes the death of David’s son for just that reason. This very same God who is supposed to know future otherwise no prophecies smiles on Solomon, gives him everything only to have Solomon turn around and spit on him. While many say this story is about redemption, it really is a story that if you have an in with the judge you can break every LAW and not only get to keep the kingdom but the object of your crime, in this case Bathsheba. God’s action in this case proves he is an inept lying baby killer not someone capable of being true Creator
You are invited to show why what is posted at the above site is wrong. In fact there is an offer to close site.
Sampl
Many people believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God, but that is a fallacy. How can I say that. Well, no other authority then Jesus said so. When Jesus talked about divorce he said “ Moses gave that to you, that is not how it was from the beginning (Mark 10:2-9 & Matthew 19:7-8).
The fact that Jesus disagrees with Moses blows the conception of many that while the Bible may have been written by men , they only wrote what God wanted. But with Jesus saying that Moses’s decree was not God’s, that argument goes out the window.
Lets look at the following Hebrews 1 talking about
Jesus v5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
As for the question in 5 above about father and son relationship let us look into the
following which is what David was told when told that he could not build a Temple but it applies to Solomon and NOT Jesus as shown by:
2 Samuel 7:12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy
fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish
13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for
ever.
14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son.
If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men
:15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.
Now some take this to be the Messiah; however, since it talks about if he commits inequity, I will chasten him, it clearly is not talking about Jesus but about Solomon
which also is borne out in 1 KI 5:5 5
And, behold, I purpose to build an house unto the name of the LORD my
God, as the LORD spake unto David my father, saying,
Thy son, whom I will set upon thy throne in thy room, he shall build an house unto my name.
Continuing in Hebrews 1:13 But to which of the angels said he at any
time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Jesus is also quoted saying this in Matthew22 41-45; Luke 21:41-44, Acts 2:30-36
The above 13 appears in Psalm 110: 1Psalm 110 Of David.
1 The LORD says to my Lord: Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.
So, NO He may not have said it to any angel; but he sure as Hell said it to DAVID according to the believers own Bible .
As for {the Lord said to My Lord} Jesus also queried about that and Christians have interpreted that to be Jesus and that it was about Jesus. However, it is a Psalm of David about David. In that time Kings and even minor dignitaries were addressed MY Lord
In fact the Talmudists in one of their attempts to justify the killing of Uriah said he disrespected David by Not addressing him as My Lord. But don’t take my word for it let us see what it actually says in Psalm 110:1
The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
2 The LORD will extend your mighty scepter from Zion; you will rule in the midst of your enemies.
3 Your troops will be willing on your day of battle. Arrayed in holy majesty, from thewomb of the dawn you will receive the dew of your
youth.
4 The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind: You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.
5. The Lord is at your right hand; he will crush kings on the day of his wrath.
6 He will judge the nations, heaping up the dead and crushing the rulers of the whole earth.
You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.
not God or Son of God but a priest in the order of Melchizedek. Not Lord or Greatest should be proof for Christians that the psalm was not about Jesus regardless of the Claim of Jesus.
Christians point to Isaiah 53 as being a prophecy about Jesus but overlook the last verse
12
Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
So while God said he would divide the one talked about in 53 a portion with the great; it only makes him one of a group and NOT God or the LORD.
But Christians misled by their teachers are taught otherwise. I was told that I was taking the last sentence out of context, as the important part was the beginning. Since what I said blew a preconceived notion, it looks to a believer that I played with the quotation. While it is true that there is a lot between the beginning which might look like Jesus and the last sentence, the last sentence is part and parcel of the prophesy and it would be out of context to leave it out. I neither added something that wasn’t there or like the believer left anything out which would take it out of context.