There is no such thing as a neutral public space, so which is a more significant threat to the Church and society: Christian Nationalism or Christian apathy?
There is nothing in his first article that makes him an anti-vaxxer. He opposed the COVID-19 "vaccines" because of their link to aborted fetal material.
Where did Pr. Ristau defend the "scary people" Christian Nationalists, or is this just more guilt by association?
That does not make Pr. Ristau an anti-vaxxer; it makes him a concerned realist about his own health.
Yes, any medicine that involves development through ungodly means is immoral. If we find out that research from Japan's Unit 731 produced a potential medical benefit, would you consume it?
"Scary people" was in quotes because you failed to define it, but now you have: anyone who opposes female suffrage and the demand for unlimited religious freedom.
The separation of "Church and State" does not mean the separation of the Church from the State, but the State from the Church. Obvious religious testing abound in the States during political appointments before Congress. Letting casinos stay open, and not churchgovernance. the pandemic,is another obvious example. One can believe whatever, in private, or in a religious congregation, but one MUST burn a pinch of incense to the Caesar(s) by not letting religious world-views inform their public goverance. The West is losing to the neo-pagans.
“Christian Nationalism” is a phrase applied only to those who are deemed “Conservative” or “Evangelical.” Yet there is a greater push among the other side, call them “liberal” or “revisionist”, who adopted social and political positions as their lens to view scripture. Their implication is to infuse external views void of scripture on the church. There appears to be a greater argument to be made that the “Christian Nationalism” label applies to the ones who throw it upon others.
There is nothing in his first article that makes him an anti-vaxxer. He opposed the COVID-19 "vaccines" because of their link to aborted fetal material.
Where did Pr. Ristau defend the "scary people" Christian Nationalists, or is this just more guilt by association?
That does not make Pr. Ristau an anti-vaxxer; it makes him a concerned realist about his own health.
Yes, any medicine that involves development through ungodly means is immoral. If we find out that research from Japan's Unit 731 produced a potential medical benefit, would you consume it?
"Scary people" was in quotes because you failed to define it, but now you have: anyone who opposes female suffrage and the demand for unlimited religious freedom.
Thanks for your comment Dr Benke, we would be happy to have you write an article for us that addresses these issues.
Thank you! We look forward to hearing from you. You can email us here: Wanita@adcrucem.com
The separation of "Church and State" does not mean the separation of the Church from the State, but the State from the Church. Obvious religious testing abound in the States during political appointments before Congress. Letting casinos stay open, and not churchgovernance. the pandemic,is another obvious example. One can believe whatever, in private, or in a religious congregation, but one MUST burn a pinch of incense to the Caesar(s) by not letting religious world-views inform their public goverance. The West is losing to the neo-pagans.
“Christian Nationalism” is a phrase applied only to those who are deemed “Conservative” or “Evangelical.” Yet there is a greater push among the other side, call them “liberal” or “revisionist”, who adopted social and political positions as their lens to view scripture. Their implication is to infuse external views void of scripture on the church. There appears to be a greater argument to be made that the “Christian Nationalism” label applies to the ones who throw it upon others.