American Christianity

[JackRT]

The Problem With American Christianity Isn’t Jesus
July 19, 2020 / John Pavlovitz

I meet thousands of people every year who rightly recoil against Christianity in America, who are fully sickened by its insidious influence in our political system; who see it as a toxic presence in our nation—one that serves only to divide and perpetuate inequity and inflict injury.

Yet, it’s almost universally true, that these same people recognize that the problem with American Christianity isn’t Jesus.

They’re usually really cool with him.

That’s because they know what Jesus actually said and did.

Most people outside Christianity know that Jesus said, “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” (Luke 16:13)

That’s why they can’t understand so many American Christians’ myopic fixation with capitalism; their obsession with accruing wealth and protecting the economy and having more—and why any proposed move toward systemic equity or generosity is immediately labeled “Socialism,” loudly condemned, and dismissed out of hand.

Non-Christians know that Jesus said, “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. (Matthew 6:18-20)

Because of this, they can’t reconcile how many professed followers of Jesus are so afflicted with materialism; so burdened to have more and better; why they live beyond their means, why they are addicted to upsizing—and why they imagine someone else having more, automatically means them having less.

People who are exasperated with American Christianity, know that Jesus taught a parable about professed believers, who showed disregard for the poor and foreigner and the imprisoned, and who were condemned by God because of it:

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ (Matthew 25:44-45).

This is why they’re rightly incredulous at so many American Christians’ cruelty toward migrants and their callousness toward outsiders and their resistance to help those with less than they have—whether food or health insurance or opportunity. They recognize the sharp disconnect, of supposed disciples of this hospitable, effusively-generous Jesus, treating people in need as lazy, seeing foreigners as a threat, blaming the poor for their plight.

Non-believers know that the Bible records Jesus saying, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16)

This rightly makes them wonder how so many American Christians have shrunken down the expansive, planet-sized love of God, into a nationalistic, America First tribalism that resents Muslims and refuses to acknowledge the value of black lives and nurtures antisemitism. They know that this white, MAGA, exclusionary religion would be unrecognizable to a Middle Eastern, Jewish Jesus, whose ministry knew no barriers, whose love made no walls, and whose table was always expanding.

People who have no use for so much of American Christianity, know that Jesus said, “Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 6:1).

This is why they stand fully sickened watching a president’s tear gassed, Bible-wielding photo op; showy displays of staged White House prayer meetings; and politicians who tweet scripture verses that show up nowhere else in their lives or legislation.

Incredulous outsiders, know that Jesus taught that the greatest commandment, the very pinnacle of incarnating his life in ours was to, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind—and to love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matthew 22:37-39)

Knowing this, they understandably can’t fathom why so many American Christians not only refuse to love their transgender neighbor, their black neighbor, their Muslim neighbor, their sick neighbor, their undocumented neighbor—but seem intent on causing them harm. It defies explanation.

Jesus himself said that he was bringing good news for the poor, the imprisoned, the vulnerable, the oppressed—and until American Christianity passionately and powerfully ushers in these things, it isn’t making good on the promise.

The people who have a problem with American Christianity, know that the problem with American Christianity isn’t Jesus—it’s that so many professed Christians in America simply refuse to listen to him.

If they were to let the actual words of Jesus take root in the deepest recesses of their hearts, they’d transform a movement that has become such a source of injury and such a perpetuator of pain and such an incubator of injustice—into an unstoppable revolution of love that simply could not be denied.

If more American Christians listened to Jesus, they’d reject the white supremacy, toxic nationalism, and ugly xenophobia of America First.
If more American Christians listened to Jesus, they’d be hopelessly burdened to make sure everyone has enough to be whole and healthy, whether they were born here or not.
If more American Christians listened to Jesus, they’d find generosity rising up like yeast in the dough, overcoming the selfishness and individualism America is so defined by right now.
If more American Christians listened to Jesus, they’d immediately reject Donald Trump and hollow, exclusionary MAGA religiosity, because it bears to resemblance to him.
If more American Christians listened to Jesus, they’ve be the first ones wearing masks in a pandemic, the first ones opposing children taken from their parents, the first ones demanding refuge for exhausted foreigners fleeing violence, the first ones opposing police brutality, the first ones declaring that Black Lives Matter.

Those of you who are sickened by this version of American Christianity, who recognize it as a perversion of its namesake, who can’t comprehend how it passes as a movement of Jesus—and who so desire something redemptive to take its place:

Take heart.

Many of us are with you

So is Jesus.

 

[dzheremi]

Christ also said "the poor you will always have with you", and "My kingdom is not of this world", and many other similar things that the utopianists (whether capitalist or communist or whatever) would need to ignore to make Jesus Christ -- the Lord and God of all -- into a proto-Marxist/proto-Capitalist.

So chill out, John Pavlovitz (and whoever his equivalent would be of the other position).

 

[hedrick]

Christ also said "the poor you will always have with you", and "My kingdom is not of this world", and many other similar things that the utopianists (whether capitalist or communist or whatever) would need to ignore to make Jesus Christ -- the Lord and God of all -- into a proto-Marxist/proto-Capitalist.

So chill out, John Pavlovitz (and whoever his equivalent would be of the other position).

I think you're misusing those passages.

Jesus didn't say we will always have poor so we should ignore them. Rather, we can do more than one thing. The fact that we have obligations to poor and others doesn't mean that we shouldn't spend time and resources worshipping God.

Jesus said his Kingdom wasn't from this world, i.e. it was from God. But it was still his job to bring it into being here. Remember in the Lord's prayer, we pray for his Kingdom to come on earth.

If the Logos interlinear is right, there's a textual issue. The Greek used by the KJV doesn't actually have "the world". It translates a word meaning "from here" as "of this world." However looking at an online parallel Greek site, this seems wrong. The phrase "not of this world" actually uses "ek". This indicates origin. Jesus' Kingdom is in the world but is not from the world. It's from God.

 

[dzheremi]

I think you're misusing those passages.

Jesus didn't say we will always have poor so we should ignore them.

I know. That's why I didn't say that either. You're reading something into my post that isn't there. Your entire reply is not a reply to what I wrote, but to what you assumed my intention is by quoting those verses. I really do not appreciate that,. and I'm not going to get into such a malformed, uncharitable discussion.

 

[Crimson Dragon]

Sadly, what was said in the article is true and I think it is spot on. My initial thought after reading the OP was this quote: "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ" (Mahatma Gandhi). And this quote came to mind: "The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips and walk out the door and deny Him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable" (Brennan Manning).

 

[Andrewn]

Obviously, the portrayal of Christians in the OP doesn't apply to all Christians. But it does apply in some sense to Christian celebrities and those who follow their lifestyles and consider them paradigms of Christianity. I think the Lord had those kinds of leaders in mind when He said:

Mat 7:22-23 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in Your name, and drive out demons in Your name, and perform many miracles in Your name?’ Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you. Get away from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’”

Since this thread is in the Current News & Events forum, I'll add that Christian celebrities have failed to correct some of Trump's actions and Bush before him, while surrounding and applauding those two presidents.

 

[JackRT]

Obviously, the portrayal of Christians in the OP doesn't apply to all Christians. But it does apply in some sense to Christian celebrities and those who follow their lifestyles and consider them paradigms of Christianity. I think the Lord had those kinds of leaders in mind when He said:

Mat 7:22-23 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in Your name, and drive out demons in Your name, and perform many miracles in Your name?’ Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you. Get away from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’”

Since this thread is in the Current News & Events forum, I'll add that Christian celebrities have failed to correct some of Trump's actions and Bush before him, while surrounding and applauding those two presidents.

People like Franklin Graham and Pat Robertson?

 

[tbstor]

Most people outside Christianity know that Jesus said, “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” (Luke 16:13)

That’s why they can’t understand so many American Christians’ myopic fixation with capitalism; their obsession with accruing wealth and protecting the economy and having more—and why any proposed move toward systemic equity or generosity is immediately labeled “Socialism,” loudly condemned, and dismissed out of hand.

One can care about their financial situation, and the financial situation of their nation, without being in violation of what Jesus said in Luke 16:13. The general provision of not serving two masters isn't limited to just God and money. It is also true of God and health. God and videogames. God and sex. God and drugs. Neglecting God in favor of serving another end is the problem.

With that said, capitalism just is the freedom of exchange and contract with a monetary system so as to help inform economic decisions, i.e. free market. It does not make any value judgments. An individual in a capitalist system may choose to pursue monetary accumulation as their end. Another may choose to be a philanthropist. Capitalism leaves it up to each individual to make their own subjective value judgments.

Let's also take a moment to dismiss the notion that being opposed to "systemic equity or generosity" is anti-Christian. Christianity teaches us to voluntarily and freely give to those in need of our own volition. Socialists, social democrats, or whatever you'd like to call them, prefer to force others through the authority of the state to give up their wealth. This is not a Christian ethic. Taking wealth from someone with or without their consent so as to give it to another is, arguably, morally wrong.

Non-Christians know that Jesus said, “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. (Matthew 6:18-20)

Because of this, they can’t reconcile how many professed followers of Jesus are so afflicted with materialism; so burdened to have more and better; why they live beyond their means, why they are addicted to upsizing—and why they imagine someone else having more, automatically means them having less.

There is something true of this (partially). It could be argued that it is wrong for a Christian to live outside of their means. Though the pursuit of living a better life isn't inherently problematic or anti-Christian. It just is the case that capitalism has immensely improved the lives of those in America and around the world, raising our living standards. It is to the point where even the poorest of Americans own things such as cars, air conditioning units, refrigerators, microwaves, televisions, computers, etc. More than half of all Americans own their own home. These luxuries weren't possible in pre-capitalist societies. And it should be anticipated that living conditions won't stop improving.

People who are exasperated with American Christianity, know that Jesus taught a parable about professed believers, who showed disregard for the poor and foreigner and the imprisoned, and who were condemned by God because of it:

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ (Matthew 25:44-45)

I do find this one to be a bit sneaky. Of course, Christians should care for the poor, sick, imprisoned, and the stranger. I don't think you'll find anyone disputing this. However, taking a passage such as this one and attempting to make it a blanket statement about something as political as immigration would be silly. See below.

This is why they’re rightly incredulous at so many American Christians’ cruelty toward migrants and their callousness toward outsiders and their resistance to help those with less than they have—whether food or health insurance or opportunity. They recognize the sharp disconnect, of supposed disciples of this hospitable, effusively-generous Jesus, treating people in need as lazy, seeing foreigners as a threat, blaming the poor for their plight.

It isn't anti-Christian to be anti-immigrant, an immigration patriot, or whatever you'd like to call it. There isn't anything anti-Christian about having a prioritized concern for your own kinsmen. Consider Paul's words in Romans 9:1-5 (KJV):

1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,

2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.

3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:

4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.​

Note that this proclamation of kinsmanship by Paul is done on behalf of unbelievers. We of course should embrace our Christian brothers and sisters, but this need not be to the neglect of the concerns of our kinsmen. Let's consider Paul's words again, this time in 1 Timothy 5:4-8 (KJV):

4 But if any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to shew piety at home, and to requite their parents: for that is good and acceptable before God.

5 Now she that is a widow indeed, and desolate, trusteth in God, and continueth in supplications and prayers night and day.

6 But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.

7 And these things give in charge, that they may be blameless.

8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.​

Here we see Paul stressing the importance of keeping your own house in order. Again, this isn't to be done to the neglect of the considerations of those outside of your home. But it also doesn't mean we should sacrifice our own home, community, nation, or church for the sake of foreigners. We could go on with this discussion, but I see no real point since the author didn't take much time to justify his position.

Non-believers know that the Bible records Jesus saying, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16)

This rightly makes them wonder how so many American Christians have shrunken down the expansive, planet-sized love of God, into a nationalistic, America First tribalism that resents Muslims and refuses to acknowledge the value of black lives and nurtures antisemitism. They know that this white, MAGA, exclusionary religion would be unrecognizable to a Middle Eastern, Jewish Jesus, whose ministry knew no barriers, whose love made no walls, and whose table was always expanding

Christ's work on the cross transcends nations. This is why Jesus told his disciples to "teach all nations." The Great Commission, however, does not teach us to diminish the nations. Rather, it is a call to redeem the nations. We can engage in the Great Commission without having to embrace multiculturalism, globalism, federalism, etc. And this has clearly been the case throughout the history of the Church. Of course, this author seems content to paint nationalists as the worst of individuals, but I think that is his own personal prejudice. His politics are informing his condemnation of brothers and sisters in the faith. Let's consider the words in Acts 17:24-28 (KJV):

24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;

25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;

26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;


27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.​

It need not be the case that we tear down walls and indiscriminately allow for immigrants into our nation. God is fully aware of the nations, for he has appointed them. And these nations can remain in "the bounds of their habitations" while also being near to God. Revelation tells us that there will be "a great multitude [...] of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues" standing before the throne. The divisions of humanity are not diminished. Rather, they are maintained while the redemptive work of Christ is universal.

People who have no use for so much of American Christianity, know that Jesus said, “Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 6:1).

This is why they stand fully sickened watching a president’s tear gassed, Bible-wielding photo op; showy displays of staged White House prayer meetings; and politicians who tweet scripture verses that show up nowhere else in their lives or legislation.

The mask, if there ever were one, is slipping. The president didn't use "tear gas." This has been known since at least June 2nd:

On Monday, June 1, the USPP worked with the United States Secret Service to have temporary fencing installed inside Lafayette Park. At approximately 6:33 pm, violent protestors on H Street NW began throwing projectiles including bricks, frozen water bottles and caustic liquids. The protestors also climbed onto a historic building at the north end of Lafayette Park that was destroyed by arson days prior. Intelligence had revealed calls for violence against the police, and officers found caches of glass bottles, baseball bats and metal poles hidden along the street.

To curtail the violence that was underway, the USPP, following established policy, issued three warnings over a loudspeaker to alert demonstrators on H Street to evacuate the area. Horse mounted patrol, Civil Disturbance Units and additional personnel were used to clear the area. As many of the protestors became more combative, continued to throw projectiles, and attempted to grab officers’ weapons, officers then employed the use of smoke canisters and pepper balls. USPP officers and other assisting law enforcement partners did not use tear gas or OC Skat Shells to close the area at Lafayette Park. Subsequently, the fence was installed.​

Of course, it is much more convenient to just lie about what happened in order to promote a political position. There is nothing wrong with being publicly Christian. While I am much more reserved in my expressions of faith, I have no issue with others who are not. There is nothing wrong with holding national prayers, hosting revivals in public areas, preaching on the streets, etc. Bragging about how righteous one is would be problematic, however.

Incredulous outsiders, know that Jesus taught that the greatest commandment, the very pinnacle of incarnating his life in ours was to, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind—and to love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matthew 22:37-39)

Knowing this, they understandably can’t fathom why so many American Christians not only refuse to love their transgender neighbor, their black neighbor, their Muslim neighbor, their sick neighbor, their undocumented neighbor—but seem intent on causing them harm. It defies explanation.

Most Christians are not "intent on causing harm" to transgendered individuals, blacks, Muslims, the sick, etc. As with almost all other ridiculous claims, this author refuses to give any examples. And the reason why is painfully obvious to any reader: all examples he could give would be contentious. By providing examples, he would undermine his own statements.

If more American Christians listened to Jesus, they’d reject the white supremacy, toxic nationalism, and ugly xenophobia of America First.

I'd be interested to know if the author could name a mainstream Christian denomination or sect that openly embraces white supremacy. Something like "toxic nationalism" is a personal judgment on the part of the author. The "toxicity" of nationalism isn't an objective metric. America First is, as I have shown, not anti-Christian.

If more American Christians listened to Jesus, they’d be hopelessly burdened to make sure everyone has enough to be whole and healthy, whether they were born here or not.

Except Jesus didn't teach this. Nor has it been the historic position of the Church. The Christian should care for his own first and foremost. If you can't get your own house in order, don't expect to be successful in trying to order the house of another.

If more American Christians listened to Jesus, they’d immediately reject Donald Trump and hollow, exclusionary MAGA religiosity, because it bears to resemblance to him.

And they'd embrace who? Joe Biden? The same man that was complicit in the bombing of foreigners in the middle east? The same man that helped develop and pass the 1994 crime law? The same man that said "you ain't black" if you don't vote for him?

If more American Christians listened to Jesus, they’ve be the first ones wearing masks in a pandemic, the first ones opposing children taken from their parents, the first ones demanding refuge for exhausted foreigners fleeing violence, the first ones opposing police brutality, the first ones declaring that Black Lives Matter.

Imagine being so full of yourself that you'd explicitly condemn your Christian brothers and sisters over political differences. This whole article by Mr. Pavlovitz is a cry for help, I'd say.

 

[Rachel20]

Just a point on Matthew 25:44-45. I often see this used in the context here, but this is the sheep & goat judgement, where the nations are gathered and judged according to their treatment of the Lord's brethren Israel (not reckoned with the nations and not judged here with them - Numbers 23:9).

This isn't to say it's not good to help the poor. Scripture encourages this (but never condones theft). It just isn't what this passage is about imo.

 

[hedrick]

Just a point on Matthew 25:44-45. I often see this used in the context here, but this is the sheep & goat judgement, where the nations are gathered and judged according to their treatment of the Lord's brethren Israel (not reckoned with the nations and not judged here with them - Numbers 23:9).

This isn't to say it's not good to help the poor. Scripture encourages this (but never condones theft). It just isn't what this passage is about imo.

Is there any particular reason to see Israel as the people whose treatment is looked at? I can't see anything in the text, nor does Matthew as a whole suggest this.

Hermeneia reviews the history of interpretation. There have been three interpretations:
* Before 1800, it was assumed that everyone, or sometimes just Christians, was being judged, based on how they treated Christians.
* After 1800, a somewhat uncommon interpretation held that only non-Christians ("the nations") were judged, and they were judged based on their treatment of Christians
* Currently most people hold another fairly recent interpretation, that everyone, Christian and non-Christian, is judged on how they treat their neighbor, Christian and non.

Luz (in the Hermeneia series) adopts the first, with the understanding that everyone (Christian and non-Christian) is being judged on how they treat Christians. The problem with limiting "the nations" to non-Christians is that 24:30-31 sees elect in all nations. Hence nations doesn't seem to mean non-Christians, but the whole world, with Christians everywhere. He notes that in the major passage about judgement in 24, no particular interest is shown is Israel.

25:40 identifies the beneficiaries of this charity as "brothers", and later as the least. Luz sees in Matthew's "little ones" a reference to Christians, and sees that here as well. It's an interesting theory, for which I'm not equipped to argue. It claims that in both 10:42 and 18:6, little ones seem to be believers. Hence both this commentary and the Word commentary see Mat 18:5 as about believers, not children.

The modern interpretation depends upon understanding things such as the Good Samaritan as saying that we are expected to treat everyone right. If our neighbor is everyone, so is "brother" in this context. But a number of commentators don't think that's what Matthew had in mind.

I'm skeptical. 18:2 seems to identify the people as children. Similarly, I'd understand "brother" in 25 as like neighbor.

To substantiate his claim that the traditional interpretation before 1800 saw the beneficiaries as Christians, I looked at Calvin's interpretation. He acknowledges that there is a common humanity that unites all children of Adam. But he believes that "those who belong to the household of faith ought to be preferred to strangers." The only problem with this is that Mat 25 specifically refers to the beneficiaries as strangers, and condemns those who don't see Christ in the stranger.

So altogether, I see no real way to avoid the current standard interpretation, that the judgement includes everyone, and we are judged on the basis of how we treat even the "stranger," those that we wouldn't ordinarily see as mattering to God.

 

[Sistrin]

The Problem With American Christianity Isn't Jesus

What are you trying to accomplish by posting this?

 

[redleghunter]

Pavlovitz is just another liberal theologian pawning off the post modern “Jesusanity” which loves to pick and choose what Jesus said, while dethroning the Jesus Christ of revealed Holy Scriptures.

Christianity vs. Jesusanity: The Postmodern Temptation

 

[redleghunter]

What are you trying to accomplish by posting this?

I thought that was clear.

 

[Bobber]

The Problem With American Christianity Isn’t Jesus
July 19, 2020 / John Pavlovitz

I meet thousands of people every year who rightly recoil against Christianity in America, who are fully sickened by its insidious influence in our political system; who see it as a toxic presence in our nation—one that serves only to divide and perpetuate inequity and inflict injury.

Yet, it’s almost universally true, that these same people recognize that the problem with American Christianity isn’t Jesus.

They’re usually really cool with him.

That’s because they know what Jesus actually said and did.

Or rather they may THINK they know what Jesus actually said and did. You are aware JESUS, warned about people who would want to see Christian believers killed or put down all the time thinking they they were doing God a favor?

Sorry but I'm not a fan of the sweeping generalities the OP makes insinuating Christians universally around the world don't struggle with what we call the works of the flesh! It's absolute nonsense to suggest otherwise.

 

[JackRT]

What are you trying to accomplish by posting this?

Just trying to encourage a little introspection.

 

[Sketcher]

John Pavlovitz's problem with American Christianity is that it's not liberal enough for John Pavlovitz. So-called progressivism seems to be his idol.

If you want a better life for the poor, then you have to want a strong economy. A strong economy enables goods and services to flow to more people. Capitalism is the best engine for strong economies and lifting people out of abject poverty known to man. If people want to earn an honest living, they need to be employed doing honest work. Capitalism provides that - it allows private businesses to easily start and thereby provide work to people, putting money in their pockets and providing the tax base through which the government can afford to hire people to perform its necessary functions. And while international trade is a complex subject, the America First agenda as presented by Donald Trump seeks to return manufacturing to the US. When that manufacturing began to go away, the inner city crime rates began to rise because there were factory workers who were put out of work, many of them were unable to move to the neighborhoods with better access to work because of redlining (which began with the New Deal), and many unfortunately turned to drugs - either to numb the pain, or to sell so they could put food on the table. So speaking out against America First to correct this wrong makes no sense if you actually care about the poor.

He mentions immigration issues - the "children in cages" was done under Obama, and if he spoke against that policy of Obama's, please provide a link to that - but many on the left were silent when Obama's administration was doing the exact same thing, which undercuts their credibility in speaking against it now. If that was compassionate with Obama in the White House, why is it not compassionate with Trump in the White House? Furthermore, why did Democrats in the House and the Senate choose to not work with Republicans to legislate a solution that didn't depend on the judgment of the administration? If you want to protect people from the Bad Orange Man, and you're a lawmaker, you have to work to pass laws that will force him to act/not act in certain ways. This will often mean working with the other party. Chuck Schumer specifically refused to do that.

Furthermore, a strong welfare state like many on the left want needs to be sustainable. Sustaining it means strong immigration enforcement to keep the pool of people with needs that it has to meet small enough to be managable. The more people you want to let in, the smaller the government footprint needs to be in sustaining people's standard of living. Tax money is limited.

The so-called progressive agenda ignores this, and seems to be preaching that Jesus would ignore it too. This molds Jesus in the image that these so-called progressives find suitable - an ignorant person amenable whatever agenda they set. But while I will not do what they do and claim that Jesus would vote the way I would as a matter of doctrine, I will say that Jesus would not have been ignorant enough to fall for the so-called progressive message. He would actually understand the system, and the risen Jesus who sits at the right hand of the Father certainly knows it.

What conservatives in the church need to do is devote at least some of their money and time to charity work through the church, listen to people's needs, and articulate why small-government captialism is the best system for meeting those needs - and where there isn't a way to easily meet those needs, make one with the resources that the grace of God and the capitalist system that they support have provided them with. This is what I try to do.

 

[JackRT]

In an ideal world everything above would be perfectly true. But we don't live in in a an ideal world. We live in a world where resources are finite and unevenly distributed, a fragile world whose natural balances can be upset, a world which seems to be governed by human greed. In this real world governments have had to act to prevent the worst abuses and keep greed in check. This has worked to some extent but past government protections can and have been rolled back or cancelled by thoughtless administrations. Some of the most successful nations with the highest quality of life are those nations that have adopted an approach of democratic socialism.

Is that a perfect system? Certainly not. Does it have problems? For sure. But it does work a whole lot better than unfettered capitalism.

 

[Andrewn]

Just trying to encourage a little introspection.

Some of the answers in this thread prove the point in the OP, that there is indeed a big problem in American Christianity.

 

[JackRT]

Some of the answers in this thread prove the point in the OP, that there is indeed a big problem in American Christianity.

That is certainly true. There seems to be a strong notion in American Christianity that we can only assist our fellow man through voluntary individual charity through the church. In other nations where Christianity is strong they have voluntarily chosen to act collectively through their governments in such things as medical insurance, unemployment insurance and disability supports. Those same nations are also those with the highest quality of life.

Pierre Burton the famous Canadian historian once pointed out that a Canadian will ask for "Peace, order and good government" while an American will ask for "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" ---- even if that means walking over his fellow citizens.

 

[JohnDB]

In an ideal world everything above would be perfectly true. But we don't live in in a an ideal world. We live in a world where resources are finite and unevenly distributed, a fragile world whose natural balances can be upset, a world which seems to be governed by human greed. In this real world governments have had to act to prevent the worst abuses and keep greed in check. This has worked to some extent but past government protections can and have been rolled back or cancelled by thoughtless administrations. Some of the most successful nations with the highest quality of life are those nations that have adopted an approach of democratic socialism.

Is that a perfect system? Certainly not. Does it have problems? For sure. But it does work a whole lot better than unfettered capitalism.

As a world traveler I can agree that you have a few positive points that have great merit.

Most Americans that travel abroad for missionary purposes have inverse culture shock. They become disgusted with their own lives and the amount of wealth they have.
"A man's life does not consist of his possessions" quote of Jesus' own words come ringing repeatedly through their ears.

But

Then you went off on a tangent about how American Christiandom doesn't accept sinful lifestyles as if this was some kind of mental illness.

When I have visited other countries people were blatantly committing all sorts of offenses. Usually in the form of abuse, racial intolerance, and lording power over others because the laws of the land allowed them to.
The charges you made aren't really in existence here. Sure the media loves to point a finger and pick at nits...but the intolerance doesn't exist... only the lack of acceptance.
Outside of America it's not only a lack of acceptance but utter intolerance of the innocent and abuse of those who are weaker. From mother's threatening to further blacken an eye of her child she originally blackened to the murder of a prostitute who had $20 hidden... even police who could be bought with as little as $100 to murder anyone.
So where you have some good ideas you, for some reason, expect Christiandom to embrace sin and those who refuse to give them up.
Not going to happen.