Much of the "woke" and "cancel" culture of the last seven years or so (it really started ramping up around 2014) is basically softening up the culture for an all-out attack on the #Bible and Christians. Just wait. It won't be pretty. | via startthis.org/?p=1265
I wish I was wrong, but I'm not.

Gay marriage? Totally unbiblical.

gotquestions.org/gay-marriage.h…
Women preachers? Well, let's just say that the people who endorse the practice are the same sort of people who are comfy with creative interpretations of large parts of the Bible.

biblestudytools.com/bible-study/to…
The Bible is full of verses that fail to condemn slavery. Slavery!

Christians can (and some often have to) explain. But pretty soon this is going to be a massive issue on which the Good Book will be attacked.

openbible.info/topics/slavery
For that matter, sorry, but...genocide. Yes, the Old Testament Lord God certainly seems to command genocide in many places. That in fact is how the Promise Land was to be secured.

Again, Christians (and Jews) can explain. But...yeah. Look out.

openbible.info/topics/genocide
Those Christians sure do seem to be intolerant to keep to themselves. It's because the Bible tells them to.

I'm telling you, this thing is a powder keg. The major trends of the last 40 years couldn't have been better constructed to dismantle the Bible.

openbible.info/topics/separat…
And look, beyond gay marriage, homosexuality is clearly a sin in the Bible. And if those creative interpreters of the Bible are capable of creatively interpreting this away, fine. That won't stop the attacks on suspect Bible texts and on fundamentalists.

carm.org/homosexuality-…
The Bible is SO anti-feminist! It's incredibly old-fashioned when it comes to feminine roles.

Look at the verses! Liberal denominations wring their hands a lot. Another reason the Bible will soon be viciously attacked by mainstream culture.

openbible.info/topics/against…
I could go on. Now, the only reason the Bible isn't daily attacked on CNN and MSNBC and the NYT is that politicians are expected to genuflect before Christianity. So they embrace liberal denominations.

That requirement is going to change soon.

And when it does...look out.
Liberal denominations will instantly become even more liberal, not exactly totally repudiating the Bible, but getting very, very clear and open about how it is merely inspired. Ecumenicism and interfaith will be everywhere in the liberal denominations, even more than now.
But this will give the majority of Democrats who, even if they say they're Christians, cover to attack the Bible itself and then *really* demonize fundamentalists, or evangelicals, or however they'll be described.

Christians will be called extremists and terrorists. Just wait.
I don't mean the village atheist or even the new atheists. I'm talking about a massive left-wing and mainstream media movement to cancel the Bible and all vestiges of traditional Christianity.

I hope I'm wrong. I doubt I am. It's the direction we're moving in.

When? This decade
or maybe next. But not long now.

If you think I'm wrong, explain why, in spite of massive trends that you and I know are happening now. How can belief in the Bible survive as a generally "OK" stance for even one more generation?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Larry Sanger

Larry Sanger Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @lsanger

26 Jul
A "counterterrrorism" org formed by Big Tech is expanding a database of "extremist content" they share, "aiming to crack down on...white supremacists and far-right militias".

I suppose I'm an "extremist," or will be soon.

msn.com/en-us/news/wor… | via ...
My views haven't changed; but the Overton Window is sliding left all the time.

We need to know their real, operational definition of "extremist," etc. Is Covid skepticism extremism? Supporting Trump? Skepticism about the 2020 elections?
Read 6 tweets
19 Jul
Whatever you're tweeting about is not as important as the fact that the Biden administration announced last wk that it coordinates with Facebook to censor online content. Thread:

Biden update:
nypost.com/2021/07/16/psa…

Psaki/Murthy admissions:
nypost.com/2021/07/15/whi… | via ...
Why so important?

Because it's real, live government censorship. They can say, "Well, we're just having our experts flag misinformation," but, and this is the important point:

That is the government participating in censorship.

It's illegal. Seriously.
How did we get here? A combination of things.

(a) There has been a steady drumbeat from governments and NGOs (to say nothing of other influential institutions) globally about "misinformation" and "fake news." So it is an Establishment talking point.

msn.com/en-us/news/new…
Read 10 tweets
19 Jul
Sharing because I promised I would. What do you Westerners reckon? Or should we stay out of such things?
I'm muting all future notifications about this.

I retweeted the thread. I also explained why I refuse to do more. I cannot chase down every supposed miscarriage of justice Wikipedia is involved in.
I permanently cut ties with Wikipedia in early 2003. I can't control Wikipedia; they hate me there. It is unreasonable to expect me to use my voice in every case where Wikipedia does something seriously wrong.
Read 5 tweets
16 Jul
In today’s irony, the Daily Mail, which WIkipedia forbids as a source, publishes an article...on my birthday...about my blog post, in which I defend the Daily Mail as a source...and gets the first fact wrong (I’m 53 today). 🙄
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9… | via startthis.org/?p=1167
Don’t ever say I didn’t have an eye for self-deprecating ironies.
ALERT, @DailyMail! Fact corrected by the subject of the article! 😁
Read 4 tweets
11 Jul
Help me out with articles, videos, etc., providing evidence and illustrations of the push to normalize pedophilia. I've talked about this before, but I might want to do a thread. Reply below, please.

I'll start:
redstate.com/streiff/2016/0… | via startthis.org/?p=1123
A good example was Salon's short-lived push to normalize it by promoting one pedophile's claim that he is "not a monster":

breitbart.com/the-media/2016…

We wouldn't want stuff much older than ten years or so. The point is to show a growing trend.
The Coalition of African American Pastors sees a trend and has declared their undying opposition to it.

caapusa.org/2021/01/the-se…
Read 7 tweets
8 Jul
If you’re still using Gmail as your main email driver, you’re behind the times. For me, it’s becoming like AOL used to be—a Gmail address marks you as a trusting fool, easily led, maybe in need of extra hand-holding. OK for grandma... | via startthis.org/?p=1107
OK, since people keep asking: I recommend owning your own domain name and paying a bit annually for hosting.

Firstname@LastName.AltTLD can be nice. There are lots of alternative TLDs today. My address is first@last.io.

ProtonMail or Epik, I guess, for hosting. I use InMotion.
And why?

Because Google violates your privacy, even in some ways your autonomy, and your Gmail address means you accede to the centralizing dominance of one of the most evil corporations in history.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(