Posted on Oct 30, 2019
Pastor Burns Atheist's Book! Author Responds (ft. Andrew Seidel)
1.7K
30
21
1
1
0
A fundamentalist pastor* shows one of the reasons why fundamentalist Christianity is incompatible with the United States Constitution...
First, one of our country's principles is the free exchange of ideas, not burning books that one doesn't like, and that the pastor has obviously not read.
Second, burning the book, and the corresponding backlash, has increased the sale of the book.**
*Greg Locke is a pastor of a small church in Tennessee, his wife divorced him for domestic violence and abuse, he's reported to have had an affair with a church employee (and whom he later married), he's openly homophobic and transphobic, and is not very bright. For example, his tirade against Planned Parenthood resulted in significantly higher donations for the organization.
**It's available through Amazon, and I'm currently reading it on Kindle.
First, one of our country's principles is the free exchange of ideas, not burning books that one doesn't like, and that the pastor has obviously not read.
Second, burning the book, and the corresponding backlash, has increased the sale of the book.**
*Greg Locke is a pastor of a small church in Tennessee, his wife divorced him for domestic violence and abuse, he's reported to have had an affair with a church employee (and whom he later married), he's openly homophobic and transphobic, and is not very bright. For example, his tirade against Planned Parenthood resulted in significantly higher donations for the organization.
**It's available through Amazon, and I'm currently reading it on Kindle.
Atheism
Religion
Christianity
1st Amendment
Constitution
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
2
2
0
There's a quote from a great film that I really like, "Any man who judges by the group is a pea-wit". I'm what most people would call a "fundamentalist" Christian; why? Because I believe in the "fundamental" doctrines of the Judeo-Christian belief system. In summary, that means not only do I believe in a supreme, divine being... but I accept that He is a singular entity, that the Hebrew Scriptures reflect God's instructions to mankind, that Christ was His son, and that the words of the Apostles can be taken as similarly divinely inspired. That naturally places my beliefs at odds with the constantly evolving philosophies of mankind... from time to time. What that doesn't make me is an ignorant jack-wagon who is incapable of abstract thought, is consumed by my own hypocrisy, and who thinks burning a book will actually effect any ideological reformation within the hearts and minds of those otherwise disposed. Neither does it generally put me at odds with the governing principles of the United States of America.
There are times I ask myself why I even bother to comment on such posts- Obviously there are those who have had experiences, or formed opinions in regard to "organized religion" to which they have every "right". It's doubtful a few lengthy lines of commentary from Yours Truly is going to change that. I suppose I "bother" because in all sincerity... I would like to get the same said people to at least consider the possibility that while they may have a point- they may be incorrect. Frankly, I assume that's their motivation as well, albeit in the opposite direction.
If there is no god of any flavor, no afterlife, no consequences for our actions after death... then one could (and by moral obligation would be compelled to) justly suggest that any belief system which imposes restrictions on happiness, preaches eternal penalties for quite "average" human behavior, and (most importantly) generates significant influence and revenue as a result... would be a great evil to rid the world of.
However... there's always the other possibility.
In that case, understanding which (if any) of the myriad world faiths has it "right" would be perhaps the single most important activity of human existence. That's why I remain connected to my faith, and why I passionately defend it... even in the face of the countless times false-teaching, manipulation, and corruption has pervaded the organized practice thereof.
One thing is certain; we all find out the answer in the end. Sadly, we don't appear capable of sending back word once we have it.
There are times I ask myself why I even bother to comment on such posts- Obviously there are those who have had experiences, or formed opinions in regard to "organized religion" to which they have every "right". It's doubtful a few lengthy lines of commentary from Yours Truly is going to change that. I suppose I "bother" because in all sincerity... I would like to get the same said people to at least consider the possibility that while they may have a point- they may be incorrect. Frankly, I assume that's their motivation as well, albeit in the opposite direction.
If there is no god of any flavor, no afterlife, no consequences for our actions after death... then one could (and by moral obligation would be compelled to) justly suggest that any belief system which imposes restrictions on happiness, preaches eternal penalties for quite "average" human behavior, and (most importantly) generates significant influence and revenue as a result... would be a great evil to rid the world of.
However... there's always the other possibility.
In that case, understanding which (if any) of the myriad world faiths has it "right" would be perhaps the single most important activity of human existence. That's why I remain connected to my faith, and why I passionately defend it... even in the face of the countless times false-teaching, manipulation, and corruption has pervaded the organized practice thereof.
One thing is certain; we all find out the answer in the end. Sadly, we don't appear capable of sending back word once we have it.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
Thanks for this. I’ll be sure to burn this book in my fireplace. Free speech and all.
(1)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Cpl Jeff N. - that says something about your sense of honor, or lack thereof...
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
That’s laughable. Slow morning convincing illegals they need your help today? Capt Gregory Prickett
(0)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
Capt Gregory Prickett - oooh, that hurts so bad coming from a lawyer. A profession that doesn't know what the word means and clearly doesn't appreciate sarcasm either.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
"A fundamentalist pastor* shows one of the reasons why fundamentalist Christianity is incompatible with the United States Constitution..."
I must disagree with you tonight, Cpt. Prickett.
This nitwit is no more a Christian fundamentalist than the author of the book he burned.
He doesn't represent fundamental Christianity any more than District Judge Elizabeth Halverson (Nevada) represents the dignity of the bench.
Under fundamental Christian rules of conduct, this man would never be allowed to be a pastor, in fact he wouldn't be allowed to stay in the church in an unrepentant state, let alone occupy any position of leadership.
There are extremists in all walks of life and unless their actions reflect upon the underpinnings of integrity and decorum as the mandates of the organization or institution they are trusted to follow, then the fault lies solely with the individual. Anything else is stereotyping.
I must disagree with you tonight, Cpt. Prickett.
This nitwit is no more a Christian fundamentalist than the author of the book he burned.
He doesn't represent fundamental Christianity any more than District Judge Elizabeth Halverson (Nevada) represents the dignity of the bench.
Under fundamental Christian rules of conduct, this man would never be allowed to be a pastor, in fact he wouldn't be allowed to stay in the church in an unrepentant state, let alone occupy any position of leadership.
There are extremists in all walks of life and unless their actions reflect upon the underpinnings of integrity and decorum as the mandates of the organization or institution they are trusted to follow, then the fault lies solely with the individual. Anything else is stereotyping.
(0)
(0)
LTC Wayne Brandon
Capt Gregory Prickett -
You are mistaken about this idea.
I am acquainted with many fine Christians who do not belong to a 'Brider' church.
By the way, the 'church' is neither a building nor a denomination rather it is that called out assembly, the body of believers that comprises the bride of Christ. Christ did not give up his life for a building or a denomination. He died for all sinners and those who trust in him are the church. Any other idea about that is simply unbiblical, man made doctrine; that very thing you abhor.
You are mistaken about this idea.
I am acquainted with many fine Christians who do not belong to a 'Brider' church.
By the way, the 'church' is neither a building nor a denomination rather it is that called out assembly, the body of believers that comprises the bride of Christ. Christ did not give up his life for a building or a denomination. He died for all sinners and those who trust in him are the church. Any other idea about that is simply unbiblical, man made doctrine; that very thing you abhor.
(0)
(0)
LTC Wayne Brandon
Capt Gregory Prickett
Not a Bishop, and frankly I'm not sure why you would ask.
The truth is found in the following scripture that is the word of God.
To help you better understand, here is a little exercise for you (Assuming you are really interested in knowing the truth of it)
The dictionary defines the word "church" as "a building for public worship." Let us see if the word is used this way in the New Testament.
(To complete this exercise, the use of the KJV is recommended)
Is the word "church" used in the New Testament to describe a literal church building?
See the following verses of Scripture listed below:
1. Acts 12:5. Can a building pray? _____
2. Acts 15:22. Can a building be pleased? _____
3. Acts 15:4. Can a building receive and welcome people? _____
4. Rom. 16:16. Can buildings send greetings? _____
5. 1 Cor. 15:9. Can a building be persecuted? _____
6. 1 Cor. 16:19. Can a building be in a house? _____
7. Rev. 2:23. Can a building know anything about God? _____
After reading these seven verses, is the dictionary definition given above a correct or incorrect way of describing the way the word "church" is used in the New Testament? __________________ And yet, there is some sense in which the church is a building. The Lord Jesus said that He would ______________ His church (Matt. 16:18). In 1 Peter 2:5 we discover that the church is indeed a building, a ___________________ house, composed of and built with (circle the correct answer):
a. Brick b. Steel c. Wood d. Living Stones e. Cement
Thus, the church is not a literal or physical building, but it is a spiritual building made up of those who have been quickened (made alive) in Christ (Eph. 2:5). Therefore Paul could write in 1 Corinthians 3:9 (at the end of the verse): Y___ (the Corinthian believers) are God's ______________________.
The word "church" as it is used in the New Testament always means "an assembly, a company of people gathered together for a certain purpose." Therefore as we read the New Testament we are not surprised to find the word "church" used with words that mean "gather together, come together, assemble together." Here are some examples:
1. Acts 11:26: "for a whole year they ______________ ______________ with the ____________."
2. Acts 14:27: "And when they were come, and had _______________ the ______________ ___________________."
3. Acts 19:32: "for the __________________ was in confusion; and the greater part knew not for what reason they were __________ _________________." [The word "assembly" in this verse is the word that is usually translated "church." This verse is not talking about a New Testament church but it is talking about an angry mob of people in the city of Ephesus who had come together and had assembled together for the purpose of stirring up trouble.]
4. 1 Cor. 11:18: "For first of all, when ye __________ ___________________ in the ___________________."
5. 1 Cor. 14:23: "If, therefore, the whole ______________ be _________________ ___________________ into one place"
6. Hebrews 12:23: "To the general ___________________ and _______________ of the first-born"
Did the early Church assemble together (Acts 2:42,46)? _______ Since the word "church" means "assembly," it would be unfitting and inappropriate for a person who is a member of the church not to assemble together with others who also belong to the church. If you are part of the assembly then you should assemble! Thus GOD tells us that we are not to forsake the __________________________________________ (Hebrews 10:25) as the manner of __________ is. Some refused to assemble.
What kind of people assemble together in all the assemblies (churches)--(see 1 Cor. 14:33)? S____________ (those people who have been set apart and separated unto the Lord).
The word "church" is the translation of the Greek word EKKLĒSIA which is really made up of two Greek words: 1) EK which means "out, out of " and 2) KLĒSIS which means "a calling" (from the verb KALEŌ which means "to call"). If we put these two meanings together we have "a calling out." Therefore the term "church" (EKKLĒSIA) means "an assembly of called-out ones, a called-out assembly."
In Acts 7:38 we learn about a called-out assembly, the nation Israel: "This is he (Moses) who was in the _____________ (assembly)." Where was this assembly (Acts 7:38)? _____ ______ _____________________ The children of Israel had been brought out of what land (Acts7:39-40)? ______________________ Read Hosea 11:1. Whom did the LORD love? ________________ Who is God’s son according to Exodus 4:22? ___________________ God says in Hosea 11:1, "I loved him, and _______________ My son ______ _____ Egypt." Was Israel God’s called-out assembly (Acts 7:38)? ________ NOTE: This does not mean that the assembly of Israelites who gathered in the wilderness was the same as the New Testament Church. They were different, but there are similarities. The same word "church" is used to describe both.
Looking forward to reading your response once you have completed the lesson.
Not a Bishop, and frankly I'm not sure why you would ask.
The truth is found in the following scripture that is the word of God.
To help you better understand, here is a little exercise for you (Assuming you are really interested in knowing the truth of it)
The dictionary defines the word "church" as "a building for public worship." Let us see if the word is used this way in the New Testament.
(To complete this exercise, the use of the KJV is recommended)
Is the word "church" used in the New Testament to describe a literal church building?
See the following verses of Scripture listed below:
1. Acts 12:5. Can a building pray? _____
2. Acts 15:22. Can a building be pleased? _____
3. Acts 15:4. Can a building receive and welcome people? _____
4. Rom. 16:16. Can buildings send greetings? _____
5. 1 Cor. 15:9. Can a building be persecuted? _____
6. 1 Cor. 16:19. Can a building be in a house? _____
7. Rev. 2:23. Can a building know anything about God? _____
After reading these seven verses, is the dictionary definition given above a correct or incorrect way of describing the way the word "church" is used in the New Testament? __________________ And yet, there is some sense in which the church is a building. The Lord Jesus said that He would ______________ His church (Matt. 16:18). In 1 Peter 2:5 we discover that the church is indeed a building, a ___________________ house, composed of and built with (circle the correct answer):
a. Brick b. Steel c. Wood d. Living Stones e. Cement
Thus, the church is not a literal or physical building, but it is a spiritual building made up of those who have been quickened (made alive) in Christ (Eph. 2:5). Therefore Paul could write in 1 Corinthians 3:9 (at the end of the verse): Y___ (the Corinthian believers) are God's ______________________.
The word "church" as it is used in the New Testament always means "an assembly, a company of people gathered together for a certain purpose." Therefore as we read the New Testament we are not surprised to find the word "church" used with words that mean "gather together, come together, assemble together." Here are some examples:
1. Acts 11:26: "for a whole year they ______________ ______________ with the ____________."
2. Acts 14:27: "And when they were come, and had _______________ the ______________ ___________________."
3. Acts 19:32: "for the __________________ was in confusion; and the greater part knew not for what reason they were __________ _________________." [The word "assembly" in this verse is the word that is usually translated "church." This verse is not talking about a New Testament church but it is talking about an angry mob of people in the city of Ephesus who had come together and had assembled together for the purpose of stirring up trouble.]
4. 1 Cor. 11:18: "For first of all, when ye __________ ___________________ in the ___________________."
5. 1 Cor. 14:23: "If, therefore, the whole ______________ be _________________ ___________________ into one place"
6. Hebrews 12:23: "To the general ___________________ and _______________ of the first-born"
Did the early Church assemble together (Acts 2:42,46)? _______ Since the word "church" means "assembly," it would be unfitting and inappropriate for a person who is a member of the church not to assemble together with others who also belong to the church. If you are part of the assembly then you should assemble! Thus GOD tells us that we are not to forsake the __________________________________________ (Hebrews 10:25) as the manner of __________ is. Some refused to assemble.
What kind of people assemble together in all the assemblies (churches)--(see 1 Cor. 14:33)? S____________ (those people who have been set apart and separated unto the Lord).
The word "church" is the translation of the Greek word EKKLĒSIA which is really made up of two Greek words: 1) EK which means "out, out of " and 2) KLĒSIS which means "a calling" (from the verb KALEŌ which means "to call"). If we put these two meanings together we have "a calling out." Therefore the term "church" (EKKLĒSIA) means "an assembly of called-out ones, a called-out assembly."
In Acts 7:38 we learn about a called-out assembly, the nation Israel: "This is he (Moses) who was in the _____________ (assembly)." Where was this assembly (Acts 7:38)? _____ ______ _____________________ The children of Israel had been brought out of what land (Acts7:39-40)? ______________________ Read Hosea 11:1. Whom did the LORD love? ________________ Who is God’s son according to Exodus 4:22? ___________________ God says in Hosea 11:1, "I loved him, and _______________ My son ______ _____ Egypt." Was Israel God’s called-out assembly (Acts 7:38)? ________ NOTE: This does not mean that the assembly of Israelites who gathered in the wilderness was the same as the New Testament Church. They were different, but there are similarities. The same word "church" is used to describe both.
Looking forward to reading your response once you have completed the lesson.
(0)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
LTC Wayne Brandon - first, by not knowing why you should ask your bishop and your follow up questions, you demonstrate that you have fallen to the sola scriptura heresy, one of the five solae* of the protestant church movement. Below is a link to an article by a former protestant minister who is now an Orthodox priest in the Houston area and his explanation to help other misled protestants. BTW, his archbishop is Archbishop Peter (Paul A. Loukianoff), who in turn reports to the First-Hierarch, Metropolitan Hilarion Kapral, who is under the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow. All of these men can trace their ordination as bishops back in an unbroken line to the original apostles.
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/tca_solascriptura.aspx
When you finish reading it, come back if you have any questions. BTW, instead of the KJV, I would recommend the Orthodox Study Bible. For one thing, it is a complete bible, and has not been abridged as most protestant bibles have been.
*the other four are sola fide, sola gratia, solo Christo, and soli Deo gloria.
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/tca_solascriptura.aspx
When you finish reading it, come back if you have any questions. BTW, instead of the KJV, I would recommend the Orthodox Study Bible. For one thing, it is a complete bible, and has not been abridged as most protestant bibles have been.
*the other four are sola fide, sola gratia, solo Christo, and soli Deo gloria.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google