Trump Supporters Lose Their Minds When Church Shows Nativity Scene In Immigrant Cages

It's certainly fair to wonder how some would react if this were instead a mockery of Islam.

We all know the answer to that, but some will still lie about it and deny it and deflect from it.

I'd guess national outrage, protests and apology tours. Probably a training day at Starbucks.
.
 
So an article about an actual Methodist church, making a nativity scene based upon the story of the manger being played out in a real life scenario belongs in satire?
A 'real life scenario' that has NEVER happened. When did ICE agents rappell down to bust criminals?

Answer: NEVER.

And even if it did, it would have been done by President Deportation Obama before Trumps administration ever did anyway, but it's OK to Woketars if a Dem does it.

And the Woketards just get more twisted and stupid by the day.
 
Last edited:
trump-nativity.jpg

~S~
 
It's certainly fair to wonder how some would react if this were instead a mockery of Islam.

We all know the answer to that, but some will still lie about it and deny it and deflect from it.

I'd guess national outrage, protests and apology tours. Probably a training day at Starbucks.
.

I'm a Christian. I do not see it as a mockery.
 
It's certainly fair to wonder how some would react if this were instead a mockery of Islam.

We all know the answer to that, but some will still lie about it and deny it and deflect from it.

I'd guess national outrage, protests and apology tours. Probably a training day at Starbucks.
.

There is no reason to even mention Islam. This is not a dispute between faiths. It is a dispute between groups of people within the same faith: Christian v. Christian. Same as always.
 
It's certainly fair to wonder how some would react if this were instead a mockery of Islam.

We all know the answer to that, but some will still lie about it and deny it and deflect from it.

I'd guess national outrage, protests and apology tours. Probably a training day at Starbucks.
.

There is no reason to even mention Islam. This is not a dispute between faiths. It is a dispute between groups of people within the same faith: Christian v. Christian. Same as always.
Just pointing out an obvious inconsistency.
.
 
It's certainly fair to wonder how some would react if this were instead a mockery of Islam.
We all know the answer to that, but some will still lie about it and deny it and deflect from it.
I'd guess national outrage, protests and apology tours. Probably a training day at Starbucks.
.
There is no reason to even mention Islam. This is not a dispute between faiths. It is a dispute between groups of people within the same faith: Christian v. Christian. Same as always.
Just pointing out an obvious inconsistency.
.
Actually more Muslims believe in the Virgin Birth of Jesus today than Christians.
 
It's certainly fair to wonder how some would react if this were instead a mockery of Islam.

We all know the answer to that, but some will still lie about it and deny it and deflect from it.

I'd guess national outrage, protests and apology tours. Probably a training day at Starbucks.
.

There is no reason to even mention Islam. This is not a dispute between faiths. It is a dispute between groups of people within the same faith: Christian v. Christian. Same as always.
You're wrong THE OP WOULD BE OUTRAGED IF THIS WAS AN ATTACK THREAD ON ISLAM LIKE MOST LEFTIST.
The op started off with a lie since Joesph was traveling to his birth city of Bethlehem So neither Joesph or Mary were immigrants much less illegal immigrants.
 
It's certainly fair to wonder how some would react if this were instead a mockery of Islam.

We all know the answer to that, but some will still lie about it and deny it and deflect from it.

I'd guess national outrage, protests and apology tours. Probably a training day at Starbucks.
.

There is no reason to even mention Islam. This is not a dispute between faiths. It is a dispute between groups of people within the same faith: Christian v. Christian. Same as always.
Just pointing out an obvious inconsistency.
.

There really is no inconsistency. It is the best interests of a diverse society to keep the peace between major faith groups and promote social stability. This trivial issue involves only two factions that share the same faith, with some members of an unnamed faction disputing what some Methodists did. Other people might not even be aware of it or care.
 
It's certainly fair to wonder how some would react if this were instead a mockery of Islam.

We all know the answer to that, but some will still lie about it and deny it and deflect from it.

I'd guess national outrage, protests and apology tours. Probably a training day at Starbucks.
.

There is no reason to even mention Islam. This is not a dispute between faiths. It is a dispute between groups of people within the same faith: Christian v. Christian. Same as always.
Just pointing out an obvious inconsistency.
.

There really is no inconsistency. It is the best interests of a diverse society to keep the peace between major faith groups and promote social stability. This trivial issue involves only two factions that share the same faith, with some members of an unnamed faction disputing what some Methodists did. Other people might not even be aware of it or care.
I believe that you see no inconsistency.
.
 
It's certainly fair to wonder how some would react if this were instead a mockery of Islam.

We all know the answer to that, but some will still lie about it and deny it and deflect from it.

I'd guess national outrage, protests and apology tours. Probably a training day at Starbucks.
.

There is no reason to even mention Islam. This is not a dispute between faiths. It is a dispute between groups of people within the same faith: Christian v. Christian. Same as always.
You're wrong THE OP WOULD BE OUTRAGED IF THIS WAS AN ATTACK THREAD ON ISLAM LIKE MOST LEFTIST.
The op started off with a lie since Joesph was traveling to his birth city of Bethlehem So neither Joesph or Mary were immigrants much less illegal immigrants.

This is just a group of no-name, know-it-all fundie "Christians" who like to annoy other groups of Christians, and who seem to like to babble nonsense about Muslims, running their mouths about a group of Methodists. No need for any outrage or protests. This is just fundies butt-hurt by something that doesn't involve them, which is nothing unusual.
 
Whoever did this, they do realize that the birth took place in a stable, right? The Lord was not born at a place like the Las Vegas Hilton. Why couldn't they just leave the setting as is?

God bless you always!!!

Holly
In those days. How the women gave birth. They just get into a squatting position, and then pushed the baby out. And so she could have gave birth to Jesus out in the open. They worn long dresses in those days. Which that could act as a curtain to cover the baby while being born. But afterwards, they has laid Him into a manger, because there was no rooms available. But Baptism means to cleanse. And the Egyptians practiced immersion. And in the scriptures, that it csays we are born through water. And the Baptism is replicating the act of being born. And so I believe that the women in those days gave birth in ponds lakes or river, like the river Jordan, which means descend. And it makes a lot of sense that babies were being born through water in those days. It is because of the afterbirth or whatever you want to call it. Sticks all over the babies' body like glue. The doctors put on a vitamin E cream on the babies' eyes to prevent them from being glued together. But if the babies were born in water, that the stuff washes away as they came out of the water. And then they wraps them up in cloth so that they can dry off and be warm. And Moses was the one who introduced to them the Baptism.

Luke 2:7
and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them.




How long has water birth been around?
We tend to think of labouring in water as relatively new. However, a writer on water births, Janet Balaskas, says that's not so. She describes legends of South Pacific islanders giving birth in shallow sea water and of Egyptian pharaohs born in water. In some parts of the world today, such as Guyana in South America, women still go to a special place at the local river to give birth. The history of water birth


Acts 7:22
Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians and was powerful in speech and action.

Exodus 19:14
After Moses had gone down the mountain to the people, he consecrated them, and they washed their clothes.


2 Kings 5:10
Elisha sent a messenger to say to him, “Go, wash yourself seven times in the Jordan, and your flesh will be restored and you will be cleansed.”

Thank you. :) :) :)

Whoever did this, they do realize that the birth took place in a stable, right? The Lord was not born at a place like the Las Vegas Hilton. Why couldn't they just leave the setting as is?

God bless you always!!!

Holly
In those days the architecture of dwellings was that people lived above the animals. There was either a second floor or sometimes a hut built upon the roof of the animal enclosure accessible by ladders. This was to keep warm in the winter and protect against predators. The city was crowded because so many came to be counted in the census that the upstairs was full. Mary and Joseph like many others had to stay down stairs with the animals. It's not like they were in a separate building.
Thank you, but what I was meaning here is why did those who changed the setting feel the need to change it at all when the Lord's birth already took place where the animals resided instead of the other people? If they feel that placing him in a cage is a step up or a step down, they might only be fooling themselves. What if there really is no difference one way or another? A stable just happens to be where it all happened instead of a caged area.

God bless you two always!!!

Holly

Ohhhh because it wasn't depicting the actual story. This display was an accusation that this is what people would do if Jesus came today.

Right, but considering how it all really played out in the first place, I just don't see the point. Mary and Joseph already had no other place except for where they ended up going and so how much of a difference would it be for them now compared to how it really was for them then, so really? What was the point in putting a cage in the picture? How different is that really compared to a stable?

God bless you always!!!

Holly
 
MAGA supporters are losing their minds after a photo of the Nativity scene at Claremont United Methodist Church was posted to Facebook.

The scene depicts Mary, Joseph, and the baby Jesus separated and put in their own cages, a reference to the families separated at the U.S.-Mexico border. Inside the church, the family is shown as reunited.


Trump supporters lose their minds when church shows Nativity scene in immigrant cages

0be3b61081aacaaab7cfe46ed2b0040ebd22e5e9fbcaf14b35f9c23045ae676e.jpg


This ones in my pictures file for a nativity scene I will be putting up every Christmas from now on. You magats are good for something after all.

I can't wait to see the board after this Methodist church. But this is usmb, so there's no bar to low here.
What does Trump have to do with Obama's policies? Those pictures you peed yourself over, were from Obama's reign.
 
QUOTE="WillHaftawaite, post: 23630909, member: 42925"]another one that belongs in Satire.


(or the Rubber Room)

So an article about an actual Methodist church, making a nativity scene based upon the story of the manger being played out in a real life scenario belongs in satire?

That the way you see it halfwit?

Of that I have no doubt. But then again, the partisan moderation of this board certainly dictates that action by you doesn't it?

One thing is for sure. You damn sure can't move that scene put up by that church can you?

Once again you're just going to prove my point, and this time a church's to.

Merry Christmas asshole.[/QUOTE]
Was Jesus an illegal immigrant?
 
No one emotes more then the Prog Socialist Communist. They are method actors to the end. Hammy and self deserving of awards. They prove their points of what is right and wrong to them and then expect someone else to fund their journeys to nirvana. None question the costs of anything they propose and enact. Many reasons can derail a nation. One of them is the constant rise in taxation. When it hits a certain point people rebel or worse do not care and become slackers out of necessity due to being numbed and seeing producing things as not important. The churches seem to be on a collision course with mass poverty for most people. They blame the American citizen for the behavior of people who live overseas even though their doctrine is people acting better in their behaviors. We have enough of it here and need to improve them. It would do the churches involved on the liberal side to help their own first.
 

Forum List

Back
Top