Oh no, I read it. Hence my response. My rebuttal stands.

He does not refer to himself as a pagan. He does not understand the difference between paganism and believing everyone who does not believe a narrow interpretation to religious texts is an infidel. He used the term pagan when he meant infidel, hence the original thread and everyone’s response.

His tone clearly allies him with Christian jihadists who are pushing for an American theocracy with restrictive evangelical philosophy at the helm. They’re willing to destroy an entire nation and turn from God to do it.

My comment speaks to a growing rift within the faith between Evangelicals and Non-evangelical Protestants. At it’s heart, the conflict is over church power and the churches use of power for political motivations and ends. This philosophical difference is not a minor issue; it is as core deep as the rift that led to the Reformation over papal indulgences.

Evangelicals act like they are being persecuted because their version of the faith is unpopular, but this is a rejection of religious interpretation based on core beliefs surrounding Christ, not persecution.