Britain First Denounced By Every Major Christian Denomination In The UK

Britain First has been denounced by every major Christian denomination in the UK, The Huffington Post UK can reveal today, a week after the far-right group held a so-called 'Christian patrol' targeting Muslims in Luton. Representatives of 14 churches and Christian groups have variously described the political party as "extremist", "self-serving" and "blasphemous" and condemned its actions as "hi-jacking the name of Jesus Christ to justify hatred and spread fear". Britain First claim to be defenders of "traditional British Christian values" and Leader Paul Golding has regularly invoked religious rhetoric to justify their actions.

Here are the reasons the Christian groups claim a group of racists are not Christian:

Unfortunately for Golding, none of the organisations approached by The Huffington Post UK, which represent the overwhelming majority of the country's 33.2 million Christians, agree. Their comments are listed in full below.

Groups ranging from the Church of England to the Evangelical Alliance has distanced themselves from the far-right political party.

A spokesman for the Evangelical Alliance said: "Let's get this straight. Britain First do not speak for Christians. Their message of hate is entirely at odds with the Christian faith."

The universal condemnation - unprecedented against a political party in recent times - comes after a controversial march staged by Britain First in Luton last weekend.

The so-called "Christian Patrol" saw the group march through what they labelled an "Islamist hotspot", handing out leaflets and arguing with local Muslims.

In a heavily-edited video released on its Facebook page, deputy leader, Jayda Fransen, can be heard shouting: "Britain is our country, not your country, it's a Christian country."

The patrol, which consisted of around 15 Britain First members, was widely condemned. Tell Mama, a project which records anti-Muslim crimes, said it was carried out in an "intimidating" fashion aimed at "inflaming" tensions.

On Saturday, the group are carrying out another march in Dewsbury.

In its 'Statement of Principles" Britain First claim to be "committed to maintaining and strengthening Christianity as the foundation of our society and culture".

But these comments from the Christian groups now clearly undermine much of the ethos driving the far right party.

As well as the Churches, a number of prominent Christian organisations, including CARE and the Fellowship of Reconciliation, also condemned Britain First.


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/01/29/britain-first-denounced-every-christian-group_n_9111138.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&utm_hp_ref=uk


Like I say the groups is as backward as a couple of far right posters and left wing regressive posters, but am intrigued again where there is 42,000 Christian denominations, they can claim blasphemy and that they are not Christian?
Is this based on omitting or including the Old Testament?

The reason I post this is not for Britain First who are idiots, but that Christian groups yet again lay claim to what is Christian based off subjective, lacking corroborating supportive writings, let alone zero evidence for the existence of their deity.

Now this march was classed as controversial, but the left can smash up a speech , if they hate who is speaking?
So on that riot they caused where the speech was closed down, where is the left wing politicians, in mass numbers condemning the backward hateful violent and aggressive acts committed by the BDS?

What is also interesting here where they claim to go off British Christian values, which I would like to think such values went the way of the Dodo a century ago now that we have humanist morals through secularism.

They claim this far right racist group is blasphemous.

Where then state this in one statement.


Representatives of 14 churches and Christian groups have variously described the political party as "extremist", "self-serving" and "blasphemous" and condemned its actions as "hi-jacking the name of Jesus Christ to justify hatred and spread fear". Britain First claim to be defenders of "traditional British Christian values" and Leader Paul Golding has regularly invoked religious rhetoric to justify their actions.


Does not this Christian group not do the same hi-jacking views in the name of Jesus Christ by being against Gay marriage, even though Jesus never made ever any comments on homosexuality.
So are they not also guilty of invoking the name of Jesus in their stance on homosexuality?

You see this is a fine example of a regressive article, done with the intention of doing good to get many Christian organisations to condemn the Far Right group, but whilst doing so promote groups who also hold justifying prejudice with hate and fear of homosexuals.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/may/major-ministry-kicked-out-evangelical-alliance-chalke-oasis.html


You can always rely on the left to end up using groups to condemn one for being hateful for not being diverse and accepting people, by condemning Britains first, to then have a those who did condemn as the Christian group, who views homosexuality as a sin, thus also hateful because of their faith towards homosexuals, making it as hypocritical as can be

I think the comments fall short of saying this group is not Christian.

Raggamuffin wrote:I think the comments fall short of saying this group is not Christian.

Explain Blasphemy?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I think the comments fall short of saying this group is not Christian.

Explain Blasphemy?

It probably means that they're taking the piss and showing contempt towards Jesus or God, but it still falls short of saying they're not Christians.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Explain Blasphemy?

It probably means that they're taking the piss and showing contempt towards Jesus or God, but it still falls short of saying they're not Christians.

Really?
How is claiming they are Blasphemers, a Christian concept , joking?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It probably means that they're taking the piss and showing contempt towards Jesus or God, but it still falls short of saying they're not Christians.

Really?
How is claiming they are Blasphemers, a Christian concept , joking?

Huh? I didn't say anyone was joking. I mean that describing this group as "blasphemous" is not necessarily accusing them of not being Christians.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Really?
How is claiming they are Blasphemers, a Christian concept , joking?

Huh? I didn't say anyone was joking. I mean that describing this group as "blasphemous" is not necessarily accusing them of not being Christians.

Again what does Blasphemy mean?

Is Jesus also not God based on Christian ideology?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Huh? I didn't say anyone was joking. I mean that describing this group as "blasphemous" is not necessarily accusing them of not being Christians.

Again what does Blasphemy mean?

Is Jesus also not God based on Christian ideology?

Are you claiming that blasphemy means that someone is not a Christian?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Again what does Blasphemy mean?

Is Jesus also not God based on Christian ideology?

Are you claiming that blasphemy means that someone is not a Christian?

Again what does Blasphemy mean?

Is Jesus also not God based on Christian ideology

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Are you claiming that blasphemy means that someone is not a Christian?

Again what does Blasphemy mean?

Is Jesus also not God based on Christian ideology

It depends on which site you read. According to Wiki, it means this:

Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for (a) God(s), to religious or holy persons or sacred things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable.

According to other sources it means this:

the action or offence of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things; profane talk.

Someone could blaspheme but still be a Christian. For example, a non-Catholic could talk in a disrespectful manner about the Pope or the specific beliefs of Catholics, but that doesn't necesarily mean they're not a Christian.

What exactly is the point of this thread? Some Christian denominations have denounced what this group said and have distanced themselves from them. Isn't that what you want Muslims to do when other Muslims do or say bad things? You're never happy are you?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Again what does Blasphemy mean?

Is Jesus also not God based on Christian ideology

It depends on which site you read. According to Wiki, it means this:

Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for (a) God(s), to religious or holy persons or sacred things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable.

According to other sources it means this:

the action or offence of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things; profane talk.

Someone could blaspheme but still be a Christian. For example, a non-Catholic could talk in a disrespectful manner about the Pope or the specific beliefs of Catholics, but that doesn't necesarily mean they're not a Christian.

its very straight forward what it means based off the view of being sacrilegious


The two telling parts made by the evangelicals connect to them denying them being Christians


Representatives of 14 churches and Christian groups have variously described the political party as "extremist", "self-serving" and "blasphemous" and condemned its actions as "hi-jacking the name of Jesus Christ to justify hatred and spread fear".

Now i thought the purpose of Jesus in dying was to save all sins and spread the word.
If as Britain first claimed often in the video that this is a Christian country, would they then be acting sacrilegious?

I'm saying that the comments fall short of claiming that this group is not Christian. One can criticise other Christians but that's not the same as saying they're not Christians.

It's not like saying "ISIS are not Muslims", for example. None of these people said that Britain First are not actually Christians. If they had, I would agree that they're not in a position to decide that.

Raggamuffin wrote:I'm saying that the comments fall short of claiming that this group is not Christian. One can criticise other Christians but that's not the same as saying they're not Christians.

as seen they do when in context of the invoking views in the name of Christianity/Jesus, stating it is a Christian country, which it still is, as the Queen is the head of the church of England, to then charge this as being Blasphemy.
That would be the only context to place both in.

So on carrying crosses and continually stating this is a Christian country, what other things on Christianity were used to add or prove different to the claim of blasphemy Rags?

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I'm saying that the comments fall short of claiming that this group is not Christian. One can criticise other Christians but that's not the same as saying they're not Christians.

as seen they do when in context of the invoking views in the name of Christianity/Jesus, stating it is a Christian country, which it still is, as the Queen is the head of the church of England, to then charge this as being Blasphemy.
That would be the only context to place both in.

You'd have to ask the person who mentioned blasphemy what they meant. As you've seen, it has various meanings. To say someone is blaspheming is not necessarily the same as accusing them of not being Christian.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

as seen they do when in context of the invoking views in the name of Christianity/Jesus, stating it is a Christian country, which it still is, as the Queen is the head of the church of England, to then charge this as being Blasphemy.
That would be the only context to place both in.

You'd have to ask the person who mentioned blasphemy what they meant. As you've seen, it has various meanings. To say someone is blaspheming is not necessarily the same as accusing them of not being Christian.

I know exactly what they mean when they also added to a claim olf hate being endorse in the name of Jesus

As much as they are idiots and they did fuel tensions, that is not blasphemy stating the country is a Christian country, where again daily Christians try to convert people based on telling them, that what they believe is wrong and that they have to believe in order to be saved.

The one thing that just about all Christians agree on is that he died to save all sins an d spread this word.

The word "blasphemy" is too vague to draw any meaning from whoever said it. It certainly does not necessarily mean that a person or group who blasphemes is definitely not Christian.

Raggamuffin wrote:The word "blasphemy" is too vague to draw any meaning from whoever said it. It certainly does not necessarily mean that a person or group who blasphemes is definitely not Christian.

its not vague, its claiming a group as being sacrilegious
The only thing where it will vary is based on what is covered by the beliefs of each group to being sacred, ie namely the derity, Jesus and other sacred things like for Catholics the holy trinity, confessionals etc

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:The word "blasphemy" is too vague to draw any meaning from whoever said it. It certainly does not necessarily mean that a person or group who blasphemes is definitely not Christian.

its not vague, its claiming a group as being sacrilegious
The only thing where it will vary is based on what is covered by the beliefs of each group to being sacred, ie namely the derity, Jesus and other sacred things like for Catholics the holy trinity, confessionals etc

Exactly. It does not necessarily mean that the person or group being blasphemous is not Christian.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


its not vague, its claiming a group as being sacrilegious
The only thing where it will vary is based on what is covered by the beliefs of each group to being sacred, ie namely the derity, Jesus and other sacred things like for Catholics the holy trinity, confessionals etc

Exactly. It does not necessarily mean that the person or group being blasphemous is not Christian.

Again there is no point explaining as you fail to grasp that Blasphemy is not vague, as its a charge of being sacrilegious
They made such a charge
Has the penny dropped yet?.

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Exactly. It does not necessarily mean that the person or group being blasphemous is not Christian.

Again there is no point explaining as you fail to grasp that Blasphemy is not vague, as its a charge of being sacrilegious
They made such a charge
Has the penny dropped yet?.

It's still not the same as saying that a group is not a Christian group.

Also, it doesn't say which spokesperson said it.

Mr NOBODY said it as usual.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Again there is no point explaining as you fail to grasp that Blasphemy is not vague, as its a charge of being sacrilegious
They made such a charge
Has the penny dropped yet?.

It's still not the same as saying that a group is not a Christian group.

It fundamentally is, based off what I pointed out to you and what also Britain first said in the name of Christianity

Either they believe the opinions of Britain first are hateful and based on fear but not invoked in the name of Jesus, which is what they claimed. Which is stating with a charge of blasphemy off this.

Or the charge of Blasphemy is false

Also Blasphemy is also stated in the bible as the one and only eternal sin

So they claimed they had invoked hate through the name of Jesus.

Stating the UK is a Christian country, is not hate
Carrying large crosses is also not hate or sacrilegious.
arguing and claiming Christianity is going to take control again in the country would firmly be in keeping with spreading the word
Considering conversion is fundamentally based on trying to make people fear eternal punishment in order to convert, shows how absurd and how very much the charge of Blasphemy was very much claiming thy are unChristian

Why do Christians have to be denounced for being loyal to their own homeland?

Ya can denounce me all ya want but I support MY country against any outsider.

So what exactly is your complaint about Christian groups denouncing Britain First Didge?

good on the Christians

Stormee wrote:Why do Christians have to be denounced for being loyal to their own homeland?

Because ... read, man! Representatives of 14 churches and Christian groups have variously described the political party as "extremist", "self-serving" and "blasphemous" and condemned its actions as "hi-jacking the name of Jesus Christ to justify hatred and spread fear".

Raggamuffin wrote:So what exactly is your complaint about Christian groups denouncing Britain First Didge?

Complaint?

Wrong

I have been very clear how some would be hypocritical based on their beliefs and hows
Everyone has a right to cendemn, I just find it ironic Christian groups to do so when the bible is made up of so much inequality and discrimination

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:So what exactly is your complaint about Christian groups denouncing Britain First Didge?

Complaint?

Wrong

I have been very clear how some would be hypocritical based on their beliefs and hows
Everyone has a right to cendemn, I just find it ironic Christian groups to do so when the bible is made up of so much inequality and discrimination

Your first two posts in this thread sure looked liked you were complaining, and what you just said also sounds like a complaint.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Complaint?

Wrong

I have been very clear how some would be hypocritical based on their beliefs and hows
Everyone has a right to cendemn, I just find it ironic Christian groups to do so when the bible is made up of so much inequality and discrimination

Your first two posts in this thread sure looked liked you were complaining, and what you just said also sounds like a complaint.

Not my problem you constantly fail to read things correctly

Its as plain as day the points being made throughout

My views were on claiming blasphemy and the hypocrisy

Glad I cleared that up for you

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Your first two posts in this thread sure looked liked you were complaining, and what you just said also sounds like a complaint.

Not my problem you constantly fail to read things correctly

Its as plain as day the points being made throughout

My views were on claiming blasphemy and the hypocrisy

Glad I cleared that up for you

So you're not complaining then - you're actually praising these Christian groups.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Not my problem you constantly fail to read things correctly

Its as plain as day the points being made throughout

My views were on claiming blasphemy and the hypocrisy

Glad I cleared that up for you

So you're not complaining then - you're actually praising these Christian groups.

Neither complaining or praising them, with pointing out the hypocrisy

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

So you're not complaining then - you're actually praising these Christian groups.

Neither complaining or praising them, with pointing out the hypocrisy

That would fall under the definition of a complaint.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Neither complaining or praising them, with pointing out the hypocrisy

That would fall under the definition of a complaint.

Wrong

hypocrisy is where people show double standards

Britians First is prejudiced and conflicts with equality


Christianity is fundamentally prejudiced and denies equality

How is pointing out this making a complain?>

I just think its ironic for religious groups to condemn a racist anti-Muslim group as hateful and spreading fear when Christianity spreads fear first and foremost and its views on non-Christians is about as hateful as you can get

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That would fall under the definition of a complaint.

Wrong

hypocrisy is where people show double standards

Britians First is prejudiced and conflicts with equality


Christianity is fundamentally prejudiced and denies equality

How is pointing out this making a complain?>

I just think its ironic for religious groups to condemn a racist anti-Muslim group as hateful and spreading fear when Christianity spreads fear first and foremost and its views on non-Christians is about as hateful as you can get

If you say that someone is being hypocritical, obviously you are complaining about them.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:



Wrong

hypocrisy is where people show double standards

Britians First is prejudiced and conflicts with equality


Christianity is fundamentally prejudiced and denies equality

How is pointing out this making a complain?>

I just think its ironic for religious groups to condemn a racist anti-Muslim group as hateful and spreading fear when Christianity spreads fear first and foremost and its views on non-Christians is about as hateful as you can get

If you say that someone is being hypocritical, obviously you are complaining about them.

Wrong

Pointing out the double standard

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

If you say that someone is being hypocritical, obviously you are complaining about them.

Wrong

Pointing out the double standard

In other words, you're complaining about them.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Wrong

Pointing out the double standard

In other words, you're complaining about them.

Wrong

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

In other words, you're complaining about them.

Wrong

I'm right.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Wrong

I'm right.

No just simple wrong and breaking the forum rules twice in two days and on something you whinge about ha ha ha lol

Seriously go and look in the mirror and fight with yourself if you are starved of attention Rags

If i was complaining I would of claiming they should not have condemned based on the double standards

I never did, hence why I am neither praising or condemning

szee ya

Stormee wrote:Why do Christians have to be denounced for being loyal to their own homeland?

Ya can denounce me all ya want but I support MY country against any outsider.

No Christians of Britian Are Denoucning an Evil Anti Western organisation.

England First is an Enemy of Western Values, should be declared Enemies of the state.
it is even enemy of the old christian values.

It is Important that it is completely wiped out THIS generation before it's evil is allowed to spread.
we should not make the same mistake we did with ISIS
go in NOW and have no mercy on the Followers of England First

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I'm right.

No just simple wrong and breaking the forum rules twice in two days and on something you whinge about ha ha ha lol

Seriously go and look in the mirror and fight with yourself if you are starved of attention Rags

If i was complaining I would of claiming they should not have condemned based on the double standards

I never did, hence why I am neither praising or condemning

szee ya

I haven't broken any forum rules. You're the one complaining about my posts, just like you're complaining about these Christian groups.

veya_victaous wrote:

Stormee wrote:Why do Christians have to be denounced for being loyal to their own homeland?

Ya can denounce me all ya want but I support MY country against any outsider.

No Christians of Britian Are Denoucning an Evil Anti Western organisation.

England First is an Enemy of Western Values, should be declared Enemies of the state.
it is even enemy of the old christian values.

It is Important that it is completely wiped out THIS generation before it's evil is allowed to spread.
we should not make the same mistake we did with ISIS
go in NOW and have no mercy on the Followers of England First

You don't need to concern yourself - you're a long way from the UK.

It's Britain First, not England First.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

No just simple wrong and breaking the forum rules twice in two days and on something you whinge about ha ha ha lol

Seriously go and look in the mirror and fight with yourself if you are starved of attention Rags

If i was complaining I would of claiming they should not have condemned based on the double standards

I never did, hence why I am neither praising or condemning

szee ya

I haven't broken any forum rules. You're the one complaining about my posts, just like you're complaining about these Christian groups.

Badgering over and over again on a subjective claim you are making, when whee iun the past I have repeated you went crying to admin, where they clarified continued badgering is wrong
I myself do not have an issue with being badgered over the same point and am neither complaining, where I have not reported this, but I am showing up your hypocrisy Rags, by stating this

lol How easy was that for me to reel you in and show that I do not necessarily have to complain to point out hypocrisy

lol see how easy it was for me to show up last in two days you have been very pedantic over two non issues, which I clearly put down to boredom on your part lol

Didge wrote:


Badgering over and over again on a subjective claim you are making, when whee iun the past I have repeated you went crying to admin, where they clarified continued badgering.
I myself do not have an issue with being badgered over the same point and am neither complaining, where I have not reported this, but I am showing up your hypocrisy Rags, by stating this

lol How easy was that for me to reel you in and show that I do not necessarily have to complain to point out hypocrisy

lol see how easy it was for me to show up last in two days you have been very pedantic over two non issues, which I clearly put down to boredom on your part lol

You're the one who made a histrionic fuss about my use of the word "complaint". However, I realise that your life consists of arguing on this forum and complaining about something every second of the day.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Badgering over and over again on a subjective claim you are making, when whee iun the past I have repeated you went crying to admin, where they clarified continued badgering.
I myself do not have an issue with being badgered over the same point and am neither complaining, where I have not reported this, but I am showing up your hypocrisy Rags, by stating this

lol How easy was that for me to reel you in and show that I do not necessarily have to complain to point out hypocrisy

lol see how easy it was for me to show up last in two days you have been very pedantic over two non issues, which I clearly put down to boredom on your part lol

You're the one who made a histrionic fuss about my use of the word "complaint". However, I realise that your life consists of arguing on this forum and complaining about something every second of the day.

Hypocrisy again, as you were the one making the accusations thus being argumentative

Doh


Its just hilarious that you in two days have badgered over something so trivial, which you whinged about before and went running to admin. Which proves youconcedes to a failing on your part, that you make it your main goal to attempt to prove me wrong and the thread and its debate is off lesser importance
Shows you love me really. lol


Doh