https://www.instagram.com/reel/DUyv16ojAMn/?igsh=NmltaWNnMjU4YjVr
You may ask yourself...
https://x.com/reduxx/status/2022039093199446176?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
What???
https://x.com/tarabull/status/2022391983030010157?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
What???
https://x.com/billboardchris/status/2022451859961864285?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Nothing to see here.
https://x.com/lizmacdonaldfox/status/2025568579228246268?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Seems hypocritical to me.
From the Colson Center
" The Epstein Files, Pagan History, and Christian Morality
Years ago, before Epstein, the
#MeToo movement, or even same-sex “marriage,” talk show host and Jewish theologian Dennis Prager wrote a fascinating article called “Judaism’s Sexual Revolution.” In it, he described how the pagan world was a sexual free-for-all that debased women and children in the service of male lust. Nearly every aspect of life was sexualized. The pagan gods engaged in no-holds-barred sex, and so did the people. As philosopher Martha Nussbaum, quoted by Prager, wrote, children and women were “very often treated interchangeably as [simple] objects of [male] desire.”
The very same awful treatment of God’s image bearers is on display again in the revelations emerging from the Epstein files. An incredible number of victims were trafficked and abused. An incredible number of evildoers were involved. A bunch of powerful people worked to keep it all hidden. That so much evil could have continued for so long staggers the imagination.
A remarkable difference today is that, unlike pre-Christian pagan societies, such behavior is considered evil rather than normal. That’s because the claim that God created sex only for a man and a woman in marriage was so revolutionary. As Prager wrote,
"This revolution forced the sexual genie into the marital bottle. It ensured that sex no longer dominated society, it heightened male-female love and sexuality (and thereby almost alone created the possibility of love and eroticism within marriage), and it began the arduous task of elevating the status of women."
As Christianity, which shared the Genesis account of creation, grew and expanded in influence, it collided with Roman paganism, which also victimized women and children. Except for some in the elite class, Roman women were often treated worse than Roman cattle. Even upper-class women were little more than possessions, and when it came to sexuality, they were at their husband's beck and call and could be disposed of at will.
Slave women, who were a full third of Rome’s female population, could expect beatings and rape. The “fortunate” ones were sold into prostitution. Unwanted girls were left to die of exposure.
Into that world came Christianity, specifically the writings of St. Paul. As historian Sarah Ruden wrote in her 2010 book, Paul Among the People, to call Paul an “oppressor of women,” as modern scholars do, could “hardly be more wrong.”:
"It is profoundly ignorant to think of the Apostle Paul as a dour proto-Puritan descending upon happy-go-lucky pagan hippies, ordering them to stop having fun.” On the contrary, “Paul’s teachings on sexual purity and marriage were adopted as liberating in the pornographic, sexually exploitive Greco-Roman culture of the time . . ."
Christianity “worked a cultural revolution,” Ruden wrote, “restraining and channeling the male Eros, elevating the status of both women and of the human body, and infusing marriage—and marital sexuality—with love.” In Ruden’s words, Christian ideas about marriage were “as different from anything before or since as the command to turn the other cheek.”
“No wonder,” Prager wrote, that the “improvement of the condition of women has only occurred in Western civilization.” It is also no wonder that biblical sexual morality was so despised by the ancient pagans in power. Not because it robbed them of “fun,” but because they could no longer rationalize their predations.
Of course, modern pagans also despise Christian sexual morality, but they are also forced to borrow from it as they condemn the kind of horrific treatment of women and children revealed in the Epstein files. The “uncomfortable truth about the Epstein accusations,” as Paul Anleitner posted on X, is that…
"We only find them morally reprehensible because of Christianity.
"Before the spread of Christianity, “civilized” Greek and Roman elites openly flaunted underage s*x slaves. This was normal. Emperor Hadrian built an entire city in honor of his favorite boy. We’ve heard for decades that Christianity is a barrier to moral progress, but if you undercut the moral foundations of Christianity from the West, culture reverts back to pagan norms."
That is why it’s so tragic when Christians abandon the clear, life-giving vision of human sexuality that liberated the pagan world. Yet that’s what many have done, even thinking themselves “loving” and “tolerant” in the process. It is, in fact, cruel—not loving—to withhold truth from broken people in a confused culture.
And that is not our only betrayal. To protect churches, Christian institutions, and favored leaders, Christians have often turned a blind eye to, or even covered up abuse, harassment, or worse happening within. That’s a betrayal of people made in the image of God, as well as of the Truth that can set them—and us—free.
In other words, the correct response to our failure to live up to the biblical vision of human dignity is not to pat ourselves on the back for that vision. Rather, it is to confess our own hypocrisy and to repent of our own sins. No matter who is implicated in this horror, we should pray that, as Jesus said, “there is nothing hidden that will not be made manifest, nor is anything secret that will not be known and come to light.”
We should also pray that the long, continued, evil efforts to keep these files hidden will fail, and that God will bring justice that is long overdue. Finally, we should, as professor Paul deHart posted on X, “Thank God that pagan morality was overthrown.” If it had not been, there would be no movement to reveal this evil, punish the evildoers, and offer the victims justice."
https://www.instagram.com/p/DVJQU9pjhaf/?igsh=MTcyb25paGN5OTVjZA%3D%3D
https://x.com/lilagracerose/status/2022415482276516211?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
If this is the case, then why is the ASPL so up in arms about pedophiles? We literally have two branches of the ASPL arguing two contradictory positions.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DVKUlKNDYy-/?igsh=MTBvbWl1bGxsMTRjYw%3D%3D
BVMLTT
https://x.com/blightersort/status/2026716680949293480?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
What?
https://x.com/wallstreetapes/status/2026757284718936086?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Not to be outdone by Walz, Newsome gets in on the fraud as well.
https://x.com/dreahumphrey/status/2026907427531272523?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
No, this is not a pattern at all. Pay no attention to what your eyes tell you.
https://x.com/dc_draino/status/2027375810760286685?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
I could be wrong, but this seems like something that is a bad thing.
https://x.com/matthewwielicki/status/2028140636218737077?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
One more example of the problems with the whole process of peer reviewing science.
https://x.com/alisa_childers/status/2019262214067372070
It's always strange when Leviticus all of a sudden becomes holy writ to be taken in a woodenly literal fashion as a line from a book used to justify leftist immigration policies.
https://x.com/robertajgagnon1/status/2027258698494554331?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
" John Piper, is it too hard to distinguish between the legal alien (the ger in Lev 19:34) who is to be treated "as the native among you" and other types of foreigners who don't have the same status in Israel? The ger in our day is the legal immigrant, not illegal immigrants.
"Foreigners [including the nekhar, nokri, zar] had few rights in ancient Israel (Exod 12:43; Deut 15:2-3; 17:15; 23:20), in contrast to the sojourner (ger), who ... was subject to and protected by the law (e.g., Exod 12:19, 48ff.; Num 9:14; Deut 31:12)" (New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, 2:478).
See further James K. Hoffmeier's The Immigration Crisis (Crossway, 2009; Hoffmeier is an OT professor emeritus from Trinity U International). According to Hoffmeier:
//Zar and nekhar indeed refer to foreigners or visitors, people passing through a foreign land. But ger or the verb gwr, which together occur more than 160 times in the OT, refer to foreign residents who live in another land with the permission of a host.
//A good example of this is found in Genesis when Joseph asks permission of pharaoh for his family to move to Egypt (Gen. 45:16-18). When they arrived, the brothers asked pharaoh if they could sojourn in the land (Gen. 47:1-4), and Pharaoh allotted them a section of the land of Goshen or Rameses (Gen. 47:5-7).
//The law is clear that ger is not to be oppressed, but to receive equal justice, and have access to the social support system of ancient Israel…. The ger in Israelite society, for instance, could receive social benefits such as the right to glean in the fields (Leviticus 19:9-10; Deuteronomy 24:19-22) and they could receive resources from the tithes (Deuteronomy 26:12-13). In legal matters, “there shall be one statute for you and for the stranger who sojourns with you, a statute forever throughout your generations. You and the sojourner shall be alike before the LORD. One law and one rule shall be for you and for the stranger who sojourns with you” (Numbers 15:15-16). In the area of employment, the ger and citizen were to be paid alike (Deuteronomy 24:14-15). In all these cases, no such provision is extended to the nekhar or zar….
//It is well known that within Israelite society, money was not to be lent with interest, but one could loan at interest to a foreigner (nekhar). These passages from the Law make plain that aliens or strangers received all the benefits and protection of a citizen, whereas the foreigner (nekhar) did not. It is wrong, therefore, to confuse these two categories of foreigners and then to use passages regarding the ger as if they were relevant to illegal immigrants of today.//
//And there was a provision for religious inclusion (of the ger), but they were also obligated to live in accordance with the laws just like the Israelites….
//In a sense, the ger were not just aliens to whom social and legal protections were offered, but were also considered converts, and thus could participate in the religious life of the community, e.g. celebrate Passover (Exodus 12:13) and observe Yom Kippur, the day of atonement (Leviticus 16:29-30). They were, moreover, expected to keep dietary and holiness laws (Leviticus 17:8-9 & 10-12).//
// The mistake of some well-meaning Christians is to apply the biblical laws for the ger to illegal aliens in America even though they do not fit the biblical legal and social definition.//
If you are in the US illegally, which is a criminal violation, the honorable thing to do would be to return to your country and apply to become a citizen of the United States through legal channels, including, if need be, application for asylum.
The US government has a right as a sovereign nation to determine how many people, properly vetted, may be allowed in the country on an annual basis. We already naturalize a half million or more new citizens each year. It is not as if the US is not already a generous nation in taking in many from around the world.
There is absolutely no verse in Scripture that requires us as a nation to let in not only the hundreds of thousands each year through legal channels but also everybody in the world who wants to sneak into this country illegally--all the more so in the era of the welfare state that guarantees those in it a minimum income, food and housing welfare subsidies, and medical care.
We simply can't take in the over 800 million people around the world who live in *extreme* poverty. And those whom we should least take in are those who show disrespect for our laws from the get-go by entering illegally."
https://x.com/FischerKing64/status/2027426824406684008
