The hippie counterculture movement and their offspring all hail the Obamanation
I always said wait until the counterculture hippies grew up and they got into positions of power. Well that day has arrived and they have taken control of the education system, political system, national media, and the religious systems of America. They also produced postmodern brainwashed children who now believe themselves to be the norm. So unless real Christians and real conservatives win this cultural war it is the end of this nation. When the far left hippies and their offspring gain total control they will embrace a totally pagan fascist world system. Woe to any who oppose them.
Had anyone said that America would decline this rapidly fifty years ago people would have thought you were smoking dope. Now half of our society is smoking dope or worse and they all think that they are perfectly sane. The Democrat running for President even claimed to be a crack user himself but does anyone care? The Democrat running for President never distinguished himself in any position he ever held but does anyone care? The hippies and their offspring just want change toward a secular idealism that is not possible with man’s evil nature. They like murder of the unborn being their own choice, so they all hail the Obamanation. They like it that homosexuality is destroying morality in America so they will have no moral restraints, so they all hail the Obamanation. They think Christianity is creating a world utopia on earth for people to continue in their abominations, so they all hail the Obamanation. All the idol worshipers now worship the Obamanation because he has the same demented values of the old hippies and their young offspring.
Christian Worldview Network – Brannon Howse – Jezebel and the Cultural Creatives
The Emergent Village and “progressive” Christian liberalism are but a drop in the progressive bucket. To their left, “cultural creatives” or “new progressives” are brimming over with an optimistic vision for taking political power.
Who are the “cultural creatives”? They define themselves as the “organic food-buying, national-health-care-supporting, yoga-practicing, misunderstood counter-culturalists.” According to the high-end spirituality magazine, What Is Enlightenment? (August/October, 2008), their ranks continue to swell, thanks to Al Gore’s movie, Barack Obama’s “change”, and Eckhardt Tolle and Oprah Winfrey’s “New Earth” webinar (see NC #47). This movement favors “ecological sustainability (read: green collectivism), non-traditional spirituality (neo-pagan religion), civil rights (rights for all sexual expressions) and grassroots politics (non-democratic, non-governmental organizations working under the geo-political umbrella of the United Nations). They also distinguish themselves from “modernism” (secular humanism) and “traditionalism” (Christianity).
Their appearance is of immense historical and religious significance. They explicitly identify themselves as inheritors of the “values revolution [of] the Sixties [that] is still developing and maturing.”
They are the maturing fruit of a development that no one expected. We all thought the Sixties was an ephemeral social event driven by marginal drop-out hippies. Whoops, they dropped back in! In the Left Coast New Age spirituality we witnessed the first signs of a major religious and social revolution. Its conquering march through the institutions has established as normative a worldview of drug-aided mystical, neo-pagan spirituality, radical egalitarianism and total sexual license. The marginal cult has now morphed into a master plan, a full-blown all-inclusive spiritual worldview to transform every aspect of life on the planet. The bizarre views of the Sixties counter-culturalists, though few knew it, signaled the disturbing germination, in “Christian” America, of the age-old alternative to biblical theism, namely spiritual paganism.
Date posted: Wednesday, August 27th, 2008 7:11 pm | Under category: Apostasy, Emerging/Emergent Church, New Age/New Spirituality, Politics, dangers, discernment
RSS 2.0 | Comment | Trackback
That’s exactly what the Neo-Evangelical movement has become. A bunch of hippies that want to rebel against the materialistic Capitalist establishment. Christian environmentalists that will tell you to wear 2nd handed clothing, limit your consumption of meat or becoming a vegetarian (over my dead body!), buy environmentally friendly products, avoid using your car, buy “fair” trade products. They are full of talk about the dangers of materialism but fail to realize it ’s a moral problem. Instead, they go on adopting Marxist rhetoric and demonizing free enterprise as if business owners were all a bunch of greedy bastards and the cause of the problems we have today (e.g. the pole caps melting due to man-made global warming… oh my) . They can’t even correctly identify the real problems! They focus entirely on outward things and they hardly say anything about real sins and the fundamental importance of the traditonal family because that might seem too intolerant and old-fashioned for a group of young rebels with long hair and tattoos, “rocking for Christ!” Oh and we must be politically “nicer” to immigrants that would like to impose the Sharia on us, too. In fact, they are even an example to us in their devotion to Allah! Read your Bibles and study some Church history instead if you want some GOOD and biblical examples of what godly and devoted lives are supposed to be for us Christians!
Another problem is they can’t distinguish between the role of gov’t, the individual, the family and the role of the Church. They are spiritually immature people with little understanding and they don’t interprete Scripture as God’s Word and will for us, but read it as if it were some guide to economics. Not in its Wealth of Nations version, though. They adopt all sorts of worldliness and become hardly distinguishable from the unsaved out there in the world under bondage to sin – but they claim to do so just to attract those “materialistic” people to church? Yeah, right. I’ve seen enough of that and I conclude it is because they are worldly themselves. That new, “sustainable and Christian lifestyle” they promote is nothing more than outward display that really has little to do with sound Christian doctrine – if anything at all.
I don’t wish to be part of that new politically correct hippie Christianity. It’s not Christian. It stinks and makes me want to vomit. I’d rather doing things like sharing the Gospel with Muslims, reading Puritan literature or defending my family instead of singing hallelujah to the nth power on some Rock tune and going on a vegetarian diet! Anyone who tries to force me to give up my beliefs in favor of this new, enlightened and tolerant “Christianity” can quite frankly kiss my butt.
I once read about some (neo) Evangelical Christian hypocrit I think it was in the Netherlands who actually stopped working and now lives of a gov’t granted minimum wage and suggested us to do the same since we should live simple! Is that how to take care of your family? I call it parasitism! What’s wrong with productiveness? You’re doing society a greater service by working and taking care of your family than you are doing by living of other people’s money!
As for those hippie politicians, where the heck is McCarthy when you need him?!
El Nasrani, you are correct on SIN being the reason for societal ills. But you are not suppose to tell anyone that their sin is why everything is going to hell in a hand basket. It is just not politically correct to let anyone know that they are a sinner. Oh, and I am not even suppose to tell my self that either because of my low self esteem problem. I hope you can see the sarcasm dripping from this statement.
shut up im 16 and yes im the product of the hippies in which you speak.
Shut up… me thinks you are putting us on, the product of the hippies can hardly read or write…. Hmmm
you guys are so childish…….why cant we all jsut get along…….what would jesus do?
Hay worst nightmare, You have no clue what Jesus would do. I once wrote an article just for people who think like you.
http://www.thepropheticyears.com/comments/What%20would%20Jesus%20do.htm
There are many Christians out there today that say it is ok to have a tattoo. They say we are not under the law in Leviticus. Jesus said that He came to fulfill the law not to do away with it. I know we do not have to do the ceremonial and sacrificial laws because these laws represented what Jesus was going to do in the future. These Christians also think like if a law is not repeated in the new testament then Jesus has done away with a law. I guess these Christians think that Jesus “sanctified” certain sins.
I would just like to say that I agree with that view, Justin. Those people you are talking about are like the Red Letter Christians that like to present Jesus as some commie hero. Although we are not under the Law, the Spirit does not teach against it. People who say that we’re under grace and not under the Law and therefore none of the Law is relevant to us simply miss the whole point of the Law. The Law reveals sin and many of the laws that we don’t have to adhere to anymore were there to set the Israelites apart from the pagans. Even the Law itself literally says that it ought to be written in the hearts of people and that Law is summed up by a love for God and secondly, the love of your neigbor. Jesus was not a revolutionary but a reactionary who responded to the corrupted teachings of men that went against the true purpose of the Law. Of course, His sacrifice did mark the end for the ceremonial and other laws, and we also know that we are not expected to follow the dietary laws thanks to a direct revelation to St Peter.
Many of the moral laws (which I believe are still applicable today) went against the practises of various ancient pagan cultures that were and are a reflection of man’s and nature’s corruption. As such, people who support homosexuality and tattoos might want to ask themselves whether they are Christians or pagans, or how they wish to be known to the world. I recommend that they go read about pagan practises such as tattooing and all sorts of piercings. It was not merely to appear more “beautiful” (not that I find such things beautiful myself). These practises were linked to religious beliefs and rituals. Go watch the tattoo ceremonies in Buddhist countries, for instance, where people go in trance after being tattooed in a traditional way by monks. There are many parallels that can be drawn between the ancient and modern world, and the Law can still be a moral guide to us. After all, Christians are like the ancient Israelites, set apart and freed by Christ. I believe the Church hasn’t replaced the people of Israel since God still has plans for them, but we are children of Abraham and Israelites, albeit in a spiritual way.
nasrani
nasrani, u are right.
There are many Christians that do not know purposes of certain laws in the Bible.
To me tattoos has a evil scent even though some will try to “Christianize” it by tattooing a cross or some christian logo on their skin. Tattoo is a perverse form of art.
I personally think for example if a government of a country took the principles of the Old Testament to run a country. They would not have problems like the US and others in the world.
I have a question. when Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:23 when he states “All things are lawful for me” what does he mean by this? Some people will use this part of the passage to justify tattoo wearing and body piercing or other sins. I believe this is the verse some Christians will use to support their “freedom in Christ”. Now I do believe that we are free in Christ but we are freed from the bondage of sin, not to commit sin. I just wanted to make sure I understand what that part of the passage is saying so that I can refute those who tries to use Scripture to justify Christian tattoos and other stuff.
Paul was talking about the Church not being bound by the Jewish laws of ritual since the Church is under a higher Law of Faith. But our freedom in Christ from keeping the letter of the Jewish Law does not mean that we are free to harm others in the Body. But lets also put this in proper perspective so we don’t tend toward legalism. Many in the Church at that time were Jews and they took offense to those who did not follow Jewish customs. Paul was saying not to offend them. Today Obviously the things Paul was talking about in that passage is not much of a factor in the western Church.
Nevertheless, those who use this passage as some sort of freedom to abuse their bodies are missing the point and are wrong for other reasons. If we abuse our bodies we will reap the consequences and how does this abuse bring honor to Christ and His Church? We should also remember that anything not done in faith is sin (Rom 14:23). How can one have faith that God’s will is for people to abuse themselves when God’s law clearly forbids such abuse? They also overlook the subsequent passage that says “Give none offense, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:” Obviously some in the world are offended by tattoos and stuff so Christians should avoid such practices.
Thank you for answering my question.
Another observation I’d like to me here. Basic Christianity correctly holds that God is a Trinity and God does not change. The same God who took on the flesh and died on the cross for the forgiveness of sins, created the heavens and the earth, and this is the same God who gave the Israelites the Law – not to punish and opress, but to guide the Israelites and lead them to salvation. Apparently a lot of self-professed Christians don’t realize the implications of believing in the Trinity.
Jesus nowhere acted against the Law. It is by His sacrifice that parts of the Law were annulled. Later revelation made it clear we were not expected to follow the dietary laws either. The Spirit teaches against immorality and in that it affirms the moral parts of the Law. Why is that? Because the Holy Spirit and Jesus are God, period. God does not simply change His mind and He certainly will not teach against His own teachings. People who mock and disregard the Law as if it were backward and barbaric are really blasphemers who do not know the Triune God. Yet they all seem to agree on the virtue of the Ten Commandments. Never mind that the Decalogue as well as Jesus’ Golden Rule were taken from that barbaric Law. The same God who gave the Law to the prophet Moses, preached the Gospel through His Son.
“Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.” — Matthew 7:12
Here’s an article that I largely agree with that gives a good explanation of how I see the relationship between Law and Gospel:
http://www.the-highway.com/law1_Alderson.html
I don’t want to make any theological debate out of this. The bottomline is clear, no matter what your theological take you have on Law and Gospel might be:
God is Triune, His will is eternal, and neither Jesus or His Spirit teach us Christians anything that goes against the underlying moral principles of the Law. We are supposed to be God’s people, saved and elected by God’s grace. Like the ancient Israelites, we are urged not to conform to the ways of those who don’t walk in Christ, our Savior, and our God.
nasrani
I agree with u nasrani except I do not see the Law as a guide. I see the Law as the Law. If we disobey the Law bad consequences shall follow. Most churches in America do not know the purposes of certain laws. The website link u posted did a good job of explaining the different types of Laws in the Old Testament.
I know what you are saying but we have to careful here so no one reading this post is misled to think that keeping the written law is what Christianity is about. If man could keep the law we would not need Christ. The law was given to show us our sin and our need for God’s Savior. Believers always have been and always will be justified by “the Law of Faith”.
Rom 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.
31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
1 ¶ What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.
9 ¶ Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.
11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.
13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:
15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,
Ga 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Ga 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
Therefore, the righteous walk by faith. Those who walk in the Spirit fulfill all law.
Ga 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
We are getting off the post topic here.
Allow me just add the following. The article is written from an orthodox Reformed point, and the article is entirely compatible with its teachings affirming Sola Fide (justification through Faith alone) and Sola Gratia (salvation by God’s grace alone). It’s important to realize that they do NOT advocate that Christians keep the Law like the Messianic Jewish groups do at all. In the article this is actually correctly refuted as legalism. What they are saying is that moral Law is applicable but not in the sense that we are bound under the entire Law as the ancient Israelites were. Rather, the Moral Law is God’s universal and unchanging Law which we as Christians are only enabled to live by through God’s grace and through the indwelling of the Spirit. Christians nevertheless do have to obey God’s universal moral laws, and so do all people. But man has nevertheless always been saved by God’s grace because he’s fallible and sinful.
Christian liberty does not amount to lawlessness, I think we can all agree on that. The problem is, what does “lawlessness” imply if we are said not to be under the Law? Does that mean we have to keep the Jewish (”Mosaic”) Law or that there is some kind of Law we have to live by after all? The article I posted elaborated on that. Jesus lived by the Law and for good reason. We, as Christians, live by “Christ’s Law” of grace and faith through God the Holy Spirit. Christ’s Law is the same as the virtues of the Holy Spirit which affirm God’s Moral Law and therefore also the moral principles written in the Mosaic Law.
Justin, or anyone reading this, please be careful not to draw the wrong conclusions from what I said. For instance, living by the Moral Law does not imply that we are to stone adulterers, because that is civic law and not applicable to Christians, as the sacrifice of Christ fulfilled the need for such penalties. For more info on the different takes on Law and Gospel, the Wikipedia article might be a good start. Also, if anyone disagrees with the Reformed stance of the article, the principles of Sola Fide and Sola Gratia still apply because this is really basic Christianity no matter how you look at it. I’m totally with Don on that. Having said that, I would also recommend any serious Christian of whatever theological background to actually read the Mosaic Law. It is full of wisdom and truth that is equally important for Christians in these days where the Church is like Israel, infested with and surrounded by paganism.
I agree it’s gone too far off topic so this was my last reply on this topic. Thanks a lot for publishing the comments though.