"Easter Worshipers"

  • Thread starter Thread starter YHWH_Christ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Babaganoush said:
It should be Easter worshippers with two ps. That is how both Clinton and Obama spelled it. It is interesting that they both used the phrase and that they both used that particular spelling, which isn’t the normal spelling.
Click to expand...
That’s the standard British spelling, like traveller, leveller, and other nouns formed that way that double the final consonant of the verb.
 
Last edited:
I’m still amazed that those upset by this phrasing completely ignore that it was used a century ago by Anglicans. Who knew Christians started this conspiracy against Christians that long ago?
 
I’ve been praying for those that were murdered, injured and the families of those Christians. So I have felt the pain of both Notre Dame and our Christian Brothers and Sisters in this horrific terrorist attack! We should not be so quick to assume people on CAF don’t care or think less of the victims than they do of the fire at Notre Dame Cathedral. I would put money on it that the majority of people on this forum value life over the loss of a historical and significant Cathedral or Church. That does not mean we cant be upset about both.
 
Last edited:
gracepoole said:
I’m still amazed that those upset by this phrasing completely ignore that it was used a century ago by Anglicans. Who knew Christians started this conspiracy against Christians that long a
Click to expand...
You located the phrase in an Anglican parish magazine, where it was used to contrast Easter communicants with weekly communicants. Ergo… ? This doesn’t really have any bearing on the strange & synchronised way in which it was deployed in social media following the Sri Lanka attacks; nor does it support your position that it’s somehow more efficient than using the word Christian.
 
Finn said:
40.png
gracepoole:
I’m still amazed that those upset by this phrasing completely ignore that it was used a century ago by Anglicans. Who knew Christians started this conspiracy against Christians that long a
Click to expand...
You located the phrase in an Anglican parish magazine, where it was used to contrast Easter communicants with weekly communicants. Ergo… ?
Click to expand...
You can’t follow that?
 
gracepoole said:
You can’t follow that?
Click to expand...
This doesn’t really have any bearing on the strange & synchronised way in which it was deployed in social media following the Sri Lanka attacks; nor does it support your position that it’s somehow more efficient than using the word Christian.
 
I guess “Christians” wouldn’t work either, since we can’t know everyone in the hotels that were attacked were Christian. 🤔
 
Re: efficiency, I can’t imagine how that point could be made any more clearly.

Re: some vast conspiracy, the existence of this phrase as used by other Christians demonstrates the weakness of the theory.
 
gracepoole said:
Re: efficiency, I can’t imagine how that point could be made any more clearly.

Re: some vast conspiracy, the existence of this phrase as used by other Christians demonstrates the weakness of the theory.
Click to expand...
Re efficiency: the use of a single word - Christian - would clearly have provided maximum efficiency. I’m not sure how this is even at issue.

Re the phrase being found in an Anglican magazine from the 1800’s - what of it? It’s hardly in common parlance and its use confused a wide range of people, as evidenced by the amount of commentary surrounding it.

It’s an unusual phrase & its synchronised emergence has definite political spin attached.

You may not follow this line of thinking - that’s fine - but there’s no need to denigrate those who do by accusing them of seeking offence or characterising it as a ‘vast conspiracy’.
 
Last edited:
Finn said:
You may not follow this line of thinking - that’s fine - but there’s no need to denigrate those who do by accusing them of seeking offence or characterising it as a ‘vast conspiracy’.
Click to expand...
It does bear wondering about thought that in the entire world, only that by now well known ‘faction’ of US righty rights has taken offense at the phrase. It is a little bit humourous.
 
Emeraldlady said:
It does bear wondering about thought that in the entire world, only that by now well known ‘faction’ of US righty rights has taken offense at the phrase. It is a little bit humourous.
Click to expand...
Again, this is simply negative characterisation of people because of the view they hold, a view you presumably disagree with. It’s just another example of an ad hominem being used in lieu of an actual discussion point on this issue.

It’s also plain wrong - it’s not just a ‘well known faction of US righty rights’ who query this strange phraseology. A cursory Google search will show you a range of commentary from around the world - for example:

www.telegraph.co.uk

Calling the Sri Lanka bombing victims 'Easter Worshippers' shows just how afraid we are to admit that Christians are under attack

Easter Sunday was such a heavenly day.
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk

https://barnabasfund.org/en/news/de...ristian-easter-attacks-but-is-this-enough-for

Why attack a person or group rather than discuss the actual issue?
 
Last edited:
Finn said:
It’s also plain wrong - it’s not just a ‘well known faction of US righty rights’ who query this strange phraseology. A cursory Google search will show you a range of commentary from around the world - for example:
Click to expand...
You just found a couple of non-US righty-rights. 🤷‍♀️
 
claudine said:
I doubt that anybody fears Christians anymore. But the term Christianophobic draws a wry smile from me.

Lefties just don’t want to admit that there were Christian martyrs in Sri Lanka made by the attackers.

Somehow in their minds its better if ‘moderate’ Muslims, pregnant women with unwanted babies, the misunderstood transgendering, etc. etc. are martyrs nowdays.

I really don’t know why they do that, I doubt its fear though.

So Easter Worshippers sort of evades something that is supposed to sound less backlash provoking. Maybe thats what it is. Seems someone thought up a way to speak of this terrible terrorist attack to deflect emotion.

But in my case deflections like that aren’t working. This despicable violence has effected me more than any other terrorist attack.
Click to expand...
They do it because orthodox/traditional Christianity goes against a lot of their beliefs.
 
Emeraldlady said:
Is this insulting? “Synagogue victim”. Is he not a ‘Jewish’ victim?

Synagogue victim hailed as hero for saving kids after gunshot to leg, witness says | Fox News
Click to expand...
Hello @Emeraldlady - I think you misunderstand. “Easter worshipper” isn’t insulting. And it wouldn’t be a thing if it was just Obama or just Hillary.

It became a thing because it APPEARS that it was a coordinated messaging strategy from the DNC or some other left leaning group like Media Matters.

That’s why it because an issue.
 
phil19034 said:
40.png
Emeraldlady:
Is this insulting? “Synagogue victim”. Is he not a ‘Jewish’ victim?

Synagogue victim hailed as hero for saving kids after gunshot to leg, witness says | Fox News
Click to expand...
Hello @Emeraldlady - I think you misunderstand. “Easter worshipper” isn’t insulting. And it wouldn’t be a thing if it was just Obama or just Hillary.

It became a thing because it APPEARS that it was a coordinated messaging strategy from the DNC or some other left leaning group like Media Matters.

That’s why it because an issue.
Click to expand...
For the life of me I can’t see the point in the outrage. Putting my self in the shoes of ‘left leaning groups’, even if it was a organised conspiracy, it was surely just about triggering the melodrama of the ‘righteous right leaning commentators’. I feel that we are making fools of ourselves to make this an issue especially considering how we Christians by scandalous, disgusting behaviours have done more to damage the Christian name that anyone else could.
 
Emeraldlady said:
utting my self in the shoes of ‘left leaning groups’, even if it was a organised conspiracy, it was surely just about triggering the melodrama of the ‘righteous right leaning commentators’. I feel that we are making fools of ourselves to make this an issue especially considering how we Christians by scandalous, disgusting behaviours have done more to damage the Christian name that anyone else could.
Click to expand...
  1. it’s not “outrage,” it annoyance regarding double standard
  2. it’s not a conspiracy, it’s a potential communication plan which could have negative, long term effects.
Finally, I THINK the reason why some people are very concerned with this is because Religious Persecution comes slowly and in increments. I’m NOT saying that people today are using such words with the goal of persecution. However, when we slowly lose our religious freedom (either from the govt or due to peer pressure), it slowly opens the door for more severe religious persecutions.

There are many who believe that their children or grandchildren will be alive when greater religious persecutions will exist in the United States against traditional Christians (and perhaps even against all religions). So any time they see ANY trend that could lead to that, they are quick to point it out.

God bless
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top