For the most part, that's what I mean by rogue media. However, one has to be careful with alternative media, too. Luckily, it's not difficult to figure out which ones are sincere and which ones have an agenda.
Let's Discuss This Video.
- Thread starter LysanderShapiro
- Start date
For the most part, that's what I mean by rogue media. However, one has to be careful with alternative media, too. Luckily, it's not difficult to figure out which ones are sincere and which ones have an agenda.
Everybody has an agenda-'seek ye first the kingdom of heaven';' the truth will set you free!"
Indeed. I think what I meant was I'm more willing to follow the stories of sources that have shown much more honesty and consistency. But I also follow the House and the Senate. And I'm compare where we're going with history--I'm very much attracted to history. However, most of us have learned a strange derivative of history.
Tis true- follow the money....that's where you will find your answers. See who ultimately benefits from the 'legislation' that is passed. I am sure you will start to see a pattern forming as select organizations, corporations and individuals seem to keep getting the majority of the tax payer dollars.
'For the love of money....' (agenda)
Absolutely. I may be young, but this is definitely not news to me. My concern with government is that it time after time seems to only want to serve itself. But of course, it can't do it without convincing the public first that their intention is to serve them.
Paul said it best:
Ephesians 6:12
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
Ephesians 6:12
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
In reading some of the other posts (before diverging onto the media) I have to agree with both of you. I didn't have time to really parse out everything he was saying (which would have meant several repeats of the video). That's why I don't care for his standing "religion" in opposition to Jesus, because religion includes so many things which ought not to be rejected. Gathering on Sunday and observing a fairly standard order of worship is a longstanding tradition. Is it dead tradition and religion? Mere rote? Or is it the lifeblood of the continuity of our fellowship and service? Depends on what is going on in the hearts and minds of the congregants, doesn't it? There are rules, practices, lines of authority, defined lines of roles and responsibilities. Are these the dead husks of "religion", or are they the structure and activity of the living Church? Depends on what's going on in the hearts and minds of the people engaged in them. Obviously, if the Spirit of God isn't present, all these things are empty and meaningless, but if He is, then we tread dangerous ground in being contemptuous of them.
Jesus wasn't just a rabble-rouser. He came to redeem mankind. Where did He begin? In His Father's house, in the synagogue. In His diatribes against the Jewish leaders, was it the religion He was speaking against, or was it the unfaithfulness of those leaders in living and teaching that religion?
Thing is, it's such a catchy notion - love Jesus and hate religion. Trouble is, too many people latch onto these ideas without really thinking them through. Jesus, as far as I can tell, isn't looking for rebels, radicals, and rabble-rousers. He's looking for disciples (from which we get the word, discipline) and obedient sons, servants, and stewards.
Jesus wasn't just a rabble-rouser. He came to redeem mankind. Where did He begin? In His Father's house, in the synagogue. In His diatribes against the Jewish leaders, was it the religion He was speaking against, or was it the unfaithfulness of those leaders in living and teaching that religion?
Thing is, it's such a catchy notion - love Jesus and hate religion. Trouble is, too many people latch onto these ideas without really thinking them through. Jesus, as far as I can tell, isn't looking for rebels, radicals, and rabble-rousers. He's looking for disciples (from which we get the word, discipline) and obedient sons, servants, and stewards.
I think you hit the nail on the head. Granted, I don't want to be too hard on this guy -- I think he genuinely loves Christ, I think his intention is to do God's will, etc. However I think he's in many ways mistaken what God's will is on the grand scale.
It's absolutely catchy to "hate religion and love Jesus." I might be at opposition of some here, but this can even be seen as dating back to Martin Luther. It certainly created a new wave of this mentality with guys like Lonnie Frisbee back in the 1960s in Costa Mesa, CA.
I think it is often seen as a tool to draw in non-believers; "They're not Christians, but if we make this look easy going and hip, maybe they'll like us and come to know God." I used to think that this was the absolute best solution to bringing the Gospel to people. I've come to realize something--people in general have a longing for something more than what is material. They will either fight it by choosing to hate it or they will pursue it and, at least, search for it. I think because people have that longing, there is no need to water down religion. If anything, all it does it show inconsistency and even a lack of respect for it. If one doesn't respect religion the way it should be shown, why should unbelievers even begin to do it themselves?
I think it stems from a mischaracterisation of the nature of the problem. There is no question that there is a lot of dead wood in modern Christianity, but his approach (and not uniquely his, obviously, but it is his video we are discussing) is like plowing up an entire field because there are tares in it.
