I was one of the first people to eat at the first Chick-Fil-A at the Greenbriar Mall in atlanta long - long ago. The recent agitation (?) concerning CFA is, well, disturbing. An entire corporation has been vilified because of the publication of one man's religious beliefs. I find that very very scary and hurtful.
I am scared because it is now common to vilify someone for their religious beliefs. Oh, let me correct that - it is now common, acceptable and encouraged to vilify an orthodox follower of Jesus the Redeemer for their beliefs.
Not only is is a "good thing" to do so but it is also acceptable to use hyperbole, innuendo and unsupported allegations. I just want to say that in 1933 it was another religious group that came under attack and was vilified in the media. It was a small step from that Crystal-Night and another short step to the camps.
It is hurtful because I doubt if every (even many) of the CFA employees share that one man's views. But hatred doesn't set boundaries and hate is the only word that fits this and other attacks.
Let's agree on this. A "Christian" does not get to "hate" anyone - but we are told we are hated - duhhhh. If a Christian can discriminate at all it is only in a very few and clearly defined biblical instances. We are told what we "believers" can participate in and support. What we are to oppose is primarily focused within ourselves - "the flesh."
I am concerned that the state is really beginning to squeeze the church in most of her forms and desires to eradicate her. The choice seems to be more and more between serving God and serving man. Religious freedom has to allow for the prohibitions imposed within (note within) a religious community. Once the state passes into the sanctuary and begins to impose its will there - we might as well all line up for the arena or the trains.
Of course - when the rubber actually meets the road and the sheep are indeed led to the slaughter they probably won't need trains, a couple of buses will do.
I am scared because it is now common to vilify someone for their religious beliefs. Oh, let me correct that - it is now common, acceptable and encouraged to vilify an orthodox follower of Jesus the Redeemer for their beliefs.
Not only is is a "good thing" to do so but it is also acceptable to use hyperbole, innuendo and unsupported allegations. I just want to say that in 1933 it was another religious group that came under attack and was vilified in the media. It was a small step from that Crystal-Night and another short step to the camps.
It is hurtful because I doubt if every (even many) of the CFA employees share that one man's views. But hatred doesn't set boundaries and hate is the only word that fits this and other attacks.
Let's agree on this. A "Christian" does not get to "hate" anyone - but we are told we are hated - duhhhh. If a Christian can discriminate at all it is only in a very few and clearly defined biblical instances. We are told what we "believers" can participate in and support. What we are to oppose is primarily focused within ourselves - "the flesh."
I am concerned that the state is really beginning to squeeze the church in most of her forms and desires to eradicate her. The choice seems to be more and more between serving God and serving man. Religious freedom has to allow for the prohibitions imposed within (note within) a religious community. Once the state passes into the sanctuary and begins to impose its will there - we might as well all line up for the arena or the trains.
Of course - when the rubber actually meets the road and the sheep are indeed led to the slaughter they probably won't need trains, a couple of buses will do.
No comments:
Post a Comment