The elephant in the room: the massive, looming problem of the Christian Right.

[Dan the Man]

I could write a lengthy thread on all of my issues with the Christian Right, but I don't really feel like it. I am, however, proud of myself for cleverly naming this thread. You know...since the elephant is the symbol of the Republican Party.

I understand the social issue part of it: gay marriage, abortions. What I don't understand is the perpetuation of massive wealth inequality, and the valuing of the rich above the poor, since Jesus was totally a champion of the poor. It's no small stretch of the imagination to say that, if Jesus were to be transplanted to our modern times, he would be some kind of religious socialist.

Another thing I don't get is the glorification of the military. War is bad. I mean, of course there are such things as a just war, but I think we should do everything we can to prevent wars. Maybe I'm just a silly young idealist?

Also, the whole gun culture. You know, if Jesus were around today I'm sure he would have a large collection of guns in his basement.

And the environment. I'm not sure, don't you think Jesus would want us to protect the environment?

And the ridiculous, fervent nationalism. Do you think God has some kind of special destiny for America? We're just a country, like any other country. Nations are a human construct. Do you really think the God of the universe cares about flags and anthems? He doesn't love an American more than a Frenchman or a Mexican or a Nigerian or even a filthy, godless Chinese communist heathen.

It just all makes me facepalm, folks. A lot of Christians claim to love the Bible and the Constitution. But the Constitution is not a religious document. It is a secular document. America really, truly is a secular nation. That is what the Founders intended. They were sons of the European Enlightenment, a movement that was skeptical of God. In our republic, you aren't supposed to have laws based on a particular religion (gay marriage in mind here).

But yeah...anyone out there agree with me? You've got poor southerners signing on with the party of the rich simply because of religion.

And a lot of Republicans don't believe in global warming even though they know absolutely nothing about it.

I agree with you ryukil. many Christians have no idea (or maybe don't even care) what they "believe" as long as it falls in line with the religious right. i also agree that if Jesus was alive today he would most certainly be a religious socialist and pacifist.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I agree with you ryukil. many Christians have no idea (or maybe don't even care) what they "believe" as long as it falls in line with the religious right. i also agree that if Jesus was alive today he would most certainly be a religious socialist and pacifist.

There's as equal a danger of trying to identify Jesus with the modern political left as there is in identifying Jesus with the modern political right.

Me? I'm rather left-leaning as far as modern politics go. And my social politics have been shaped by my Christian conviction through the reading of Holy Scripture and the grand ethical tradition of the Christian Church down through the ages.

But the ever-looming danger in trying to take Jesus and make Him after our own image is not one unique to any one political persuasion, but is the temptation and the idolatry of everyone, of which we are all potentially (and often are in actuality) culpable.

I agree with the thrust of the thread, that the Religious Right does not represent the Christ of the New Testament and that it is often in conflict with what has been revealed to us; but I would temper that with the reality that the Religious Left is not always exactly an entirely healthy alternative, and fails just as often by swinging that pendulum toward the other direction.

We must instead resist the temptation, at every level, of fashioning for ourselves a Jesus in our own image; knowing that we are in every way sinful and enslaved to our flesh we simply cannot trust ourselves, we will always gravitate toward idolatry if given the opportunity. We always erect our own golden calves.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Dan the Man]

There's as equal a danger of trying to identify Jesus with the modern political left as there is in identifying Jesus with the modern political right.

Me? I'm rather left-leaning as far as modern politics go. And my social politics have been shaped by my Christian conviction through the reading of Holy Scripture and the grand ethical tradition of the Christian Church down through the ages.

But the ever-looming danger in trying to take Jesus and make Him after our own image is not one unique to any one political persuasion, but is the temptation and the idolatry of everyone, of which we are all potentially (and often are in actuality) culpable.

I agree with the thrust of the thread, that the Religious Right does not represent the Christ of the New Testament and that it is often in conflict with what has been revealed to us; but I would temper that with the reality that the Religious Left is not always exactly an entirely healthy alternative, and fails just as often by swinging that pendulum toward the other direction.

We must instead resist the temptation, at every level, of fashioning for ourselves a Jesus in our own image; knowing that we are in every way sinful and enslaved to our flesh we simply cannot trust ourselves, we will always gravitate toward idolatry if given the opportunity. We always erect our own golden calves.

-CryptoLutheran

I agree with that too. I honestly don't think religion and politics should ever be mixed. Jesus was above politics and trying to fit him into a particular political mold is ridiculous.
I don't pay attention to politics. I wasted 20 years of my life and gave up my body and mind for this stupid country and its politics. unlike someone else said here, I don't believe troops are innocent in war. you know damn well what you are potentially getting yourself into when you sign up...that is to defend your country and its beliefs no matter how backwards they may be. I know I am going to hell for all the evil I did.
anyway, very good points you make viacrucis.

 

[Albion]

Socialism is clearly in conflict with the Ten Commandments and also with the Gospel, so there's a much greater threat to our freedoms and to truth from the Left than from the Right, which, being conservative by definition, is mainly concerned to preserve rights already enshrined in law.

Still in all, I agree with those who feel that mixing any political platform with Christianity has risks if taken too far. The often unmentioned problem is that people who seem to care about the course of human events are content to be involved in their church BUT NOT with public and social issues.

What we need is more people who care enough about both that they will be activists in both...but not mix them unduly. As it is now, we have too many people who think that being a Christian means not caring about being a citizen and, on the other side, there are those who think that being a responsible citizen means squelching everyone's religious freedom at every opportunity.

 

[Psalm 91]

I agree with you ryukil. many Christians have no idea (or maybe don't even care) what they "believe" as long as it falls in line with the religious right. i also agree that if Jesus was alive today he would most certainly be a religious socialist and pacifist.

Oh! So Jesus wouldn't want people who work hard to have more than those who don't? I know of several Scriptures that would contradict that but, usually the true meaning is concerning spiritual growth rather than money. Ultimately though, Sloth is a sin. There is nothing in Scripture about stealing from the rich to give to the poor. There is much, however, about US giving to the poor.

God made us to be people willing to work for our daily bread. The Word says that we must work by the sweat of our brow. There were rich people in the Bible. I think that God likes variety. He made all of us different. He gave us all a free will and though the love of money is the root of all evil, He gave men the choice to be concerned with money or with the things of God. He therefore, must love freedom. There is nothing free in socialism. We might as well all be clones.

On a personal note, there is no such thing as a "religious socialist". Socialism's religion is atheism. Those who claim to be "religious" and "socialist" are for a religion that is against freedom or they can't be socialists and the only ones compatible are Islam and Atheism.

That "general" statement you made about Christians is not true. I am a Christian and though I used to agree with the religious right, I no longer do. I am fiercely against abortion and I think that homosexuality is a perverted lifestyle, I do not see any differences between Democrats and Republicans. I will most likely never vote again because an honest man or a Christian cannot win the presidency as long as the Freemasons rule here. No Catholic will ever be allowed to survive an entire presidency and no Christian will. The liberals will win every election from now on unless they can find a "Republican" who will follow their orders. So please don't make generalized statements about Christians as if we are all robots.

 

[Archivist]

On a personal note, there is no such thing as a "religious socialist". Socialism's religion is atheism. Those who claim to be "religious" and "socialist" are for a religion that is against freedom or they can't be socialists and the only ones compatible are Islam and Atheism.

Acts 2:44-45:


"All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need."

Acts 4:32:


"All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions were his own, but they shared everything they had."

Acts 4:34-5:


"There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from their sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need."

 

[Dan the Man]

Oh! So Jesus wouldn't want people who work hard to have more than those who don't? I know of several Scriptures that would contradict that but, usually the true meaning is concerning spiritual growth rather than money. Ultimately though, Sloth is a sin. There is nothing in Scripture about stealing from the rich to give to the poor. There is much, however, about US giving to the poor.

God made us to be people willing to work for our daily bread. The Word says that we must work by the sweat of our brow. There were rich people in the Bible. I think that God likes variety. He made all of us different. He gave us all a free will and though the love of money is the root of all evil, He gave men the choice to be concerned with money or with the things of God. He therefore, must love freedom. There is nothing free in socialism. We might as well all be clones.

On a personal note, there is no such thing as a "religious socialist". Socialism's religion is atheism. Those who claim to be "religious" and "socialist" are for a religion that is against freedom or they can't be socialists and the only ones compatible are Islam and Atheism.

That "general" statement you made about Christians is not true. I am a Christian and though I used to agree with the religious right, I no longer do. I am fiercely against abortion and I think that homosexuality is a perverted lifestyle, I do not see any differences between Democrats and Republicans. I will most likely never vote again because an honest man or a Christian cannot win the presidency as long as the Freemasons rule here. No Catholic will ever be allowed to survive an entire presidency and no Christian will. The liberals will win every election from now on unless they can find a "Republican" who will follow their orders. So please don't make generalized statements about Christians as if we are all robots.

ok. my apologies for offending you.
I won't post here anymore.

 

[Psalm 91]

Acts 2:44-45:


"All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need."

Acts 4:32:


"All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions were his own, but they shared everything they had."

Acts 4:34-5:


"There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from their sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need."

Those were ALL Christians. They did those things by choice, no one forced them to give up everything, which is what socialism does. The rich pay for the poor, which is a kind thing, but they are being forced to pay high taxes, etc.

The early Christians were persecuted and had to hide their faith to avoid arrest. Didn't they meet in caverns? I'm sure that if those things were happening today a small group of Christians could take care of each other. There are many more Christians now than there were then. It may be the perfect way and perhaps people would give more, especially the wealthy if the government wasn't taking the money from them and giving it to the poor. There is now not any choice in the matter so most people just let the government take care of the poor.

I do not believe that willingly selling one's house and giving it to the pastor to give to the poor is socialism. If everyone was forced to sell his house and give the money to the pastor and/or the government, THAT would be socialism.

 

[Psalm 91]

ok. my apologies for offending you.
I won't post here anymore.

I guess you're joking, right?

 

[South Bound]

What I don't understand is the perpetuation of massive wealth inequalityl

OK. I'll bite: How does the "religious right" perpetuate "income inequality"? And, while we're on the subject, why is "income inequality" a bad thing?

and the valuing of the rich above the poor, since Jesus was totally a champion of the poor.

What makes you think Jesus was a "champion of the poor"? Jesus called the poor to repentance just as often as He did the wealthy.

It's no small stretch of the imagination to say that, if Jesus were to be transplanted to our modern times, he would be some kind of religious socialist.

And you base this on...?

Another thing I don't get is the glorification of the military. War is bad. I mean, of course there are such things as a just war, but I think we should do everything we can to prevent wars. Maybe I'm just a silly young idealist?

I think we should do everything we can to prevent wars, too. Unfortunately, other nations do not always agree.

Also, the whole gun culture. You know, if Jesus were around today I'm sure he would have a large collection of guns in his basement.

Is there something wrong with "gun culture"? Was Jesus wrong to tell His disciples to buy swords for protection?

And the environment. I'm not sure, don't you think Jesus would want us to protect the environment?

Jesus came to call sinners to repentance, not to be an environmental activist.

And the ridiculous, fervent nationalism. Do you think God has some kind of special destiny for America? We're just a country, like any other country. Nations are a human construct. Do you really think the God of the universe cares about flags and anthems? He doesn't love an American more than a Frenchman or a Mexican or a Nigerian or even a filthy, godless Chinese communist heathen.

Is patriotism a bad thing?

It just all makes me facepalm, folks. A lot of Christians claim to love the Bible and the Constitution. But the Constitution is not a religious document. It is a secular document. America really, truly is a secular nation. That is what the Founders intended.

Of course. The United States was never meant to be a theocracy. But that doesn't mean that Christianity did not influence our founding.

They were sons of the European Enlightenment, a movement that was skeptical of God.

Have you ever read their writings? Their writings don't sound "skeptical of God" at all. In fact, they routinely praised Him and called on His providence and guidance.

Also, would you mind explaining why they routinely cited Locke, Blackstone, Montesquieu, as influences?

Finally, before you cite a couple of out of context sentences from the Treaty of Tripoli as "evidence", could you please explain why the SCOTUS declared that we are a Christian nation?

In our republic, you aren't supposed to have laws based on a particular religion

Don't tell us. Tell the founders. Christianity was a huge influence on them and the philosophy upon which our republic was founded.

(gay marriage in mind here).

What religion is the redefinition of marriage to suit homosexuals based on?

But yeah...anyone out there agree with me? You've got poor southerners signing on with the party of the rich simply because of religion.

Maybe they're signing on with the Republicans because they see them as a better alternative than the Democrats. Or maybe they remember the history of the Democrats and don't want any part of that.

And a lot of Republicans don't believe in global warming even though they know absolutely nothing about it.

How much do they have to know about it? How much does your average liberal know about it?

How many liberals corrected Al Gore when he claimed that the interior of the Earth is "several million degrees"?

 

[Dan the Man]

I guess you're joking, right?

no im not joking. i don't have any reason to joke around. i just don't need to make anymore people upset than i already do. i know i should never have posted here and im sorry.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

Jesus wasn't political. It is shameful to attach something as independent as religion to something as single minded as politics.

What happens when you do that? manifest destiny and the crusades.

 

[ebia]

Jesus wasn't political.

Jesus claimed the title "king" - it doesn't get any more political than that.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

Jesus claimed the title "king" - it doesn't get any more political than that.

being King of the Universe is a lot bigger than anything as small as inner country politics.

Isaiah said it best when it comes to trying to place something as inconsequential as politics with God.

"Surely the nations are like a drop in a bucket; they are regarded as dust on the scales; he weighs the islands as though they were fine dust."

..in the end.. all worldly pettiness like political division is meaningless to a christian.

 

[Albion]

being King of the Universe is a lot bigger than anything as small as inner country politics.

And of course Jesus went out of his way on more than one occasion to say that his "kingdom" was NOT of this world, and that he did NOT come as a political avenger in the way many Hebrews thought the Messiah would.

 

[ebia]

being King of the Universe is a lot bigger than anything as small as inner country politics.

But cannot exclude it.

 

[ebia]

And of course Jesus went out of his way on more than one occasion to say that his "kingdom" was NOT of this world,

More precisely "... not from this world" Emphatically for this world. "thy kingdom come ... on earth..."

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

But cannot exclude it.

Political divides are a creation of man, not God.

 

[ebia]

Political divides are a creation of man, not God.

North American political package deals are "a creation of man", if that's what you mean.

 

[revanneosl]

I'm pretty sure "a creation of humanity" is what you both mean.