Well well well. It seems that both Barack Obama and Pastor Rick Warren are on the defensive concerning the Presidential Inauguration.
Both have been under fire, Obama for inviting an anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage evangelical to give the invocation, and Warren for accepting the invitation from a rabidly pro-abortion and pro-gay rights President-elect.
As for Obama, the choice was one of political expedience and payback. Warren in all likelihood delivered some evangelical votes for Obama that otherwise would have gone to McCain.
But Warren's involvement in the entire Obama-mania is much more complicated and problematic.
Obviously the Baptist Pastor believes that Christians share with Obama a fairly liberal social agenda that places government programs at the center of dealing with poverty, AIDS, and hunger.
He is absolutely, positively 100% wrong.
I know something about Warren's history. His self-admitted mentor in the faith is the late Dr. W.A. Criswell, PhD., former Pastor of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas, one of the first mega-churches in the nation.
Criswell would turn over in his grave if he knew Warren was collaborating with liberals such as Obama and Hillary Clinton. He would also sharply disagree with Warren that Christianity in any way teaches government intervention in matters that should be left to individual initiative.
As a Baptist I feel free to say this. Rick Warren is an embarrassment to Baptists. His views on government social programs are entirely antithetical to everything I believe as a Christian.
Frankly, when a Christian minister is forced to 'explain his actions' and 'defend himself' to a vast segment of the faithful, I take that as a pretty good indicator that the minister in question has taken the wrong path, although there are certainly exceptions to that.
I hope Pastor Warren has lots of fun up there at the Socialist-fest in Washington on January 20. I, for one, won't be watching.
Showing posts with label Christianity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christianity. Show all posts
Monday, December 22, 2008
Sunday, December 21, 2008
'Here is Love'
Here is love, vast as the ocean,
Lovingkindness as the flood,
When the Prince of Life, our Ransom,
Shed for us His precious blood.
Who His love will not remember?
Who can cease to sing His praise?
He can never be forgotten,
Throughout Heav’n’s eternal days.
On the mount of crucifixion,
Fountains opened deep and wide;
Through the floodgates of God’s mercy
Flowed a vast and gracious tide.
Grace and love, like mighty rivers,
Poured incessant from above,
And Heav’n’s peace and perfect justice
Kissed a guilty world in love.
Let me all Thy love accepting,
Love Thee, ever all my days;
Let me seek Thy kingdom only
And my life be to Thy praise;
Thou alone shalt be my glory,
Nothing in the world I see.
Thou hast cleansed and sanctified me,
Thou Thyself hast set me free.
In Thy truth Thou dost direct me
By Thy Spirit through Thy Word;
And Thy grace my need is meeting,
As I trust in Thee, my Lord.
Of Thy fullness Thou art pouring
Thy great love and power on me,
Without measure, full and boundless,
Drawing out my heart to Thee.
The words posted above are the lyrics to an old Welsh hymn, and, being of Welsh descent, I immediately took to it as a beautiful expression of the Christian faith from a Welsh perspective. The full context can be found HERE.
(H/t to Paul Davis).
Sunday, May 25, 2008
A Marxist Because of Religious Faith?
Seen on a bumper-sticker today, along with other Leftist propaganda--'A Democrat Because of My Faith.'
Since when did Marxist-Socialist-Communist ideology become part of one's religious faith?
It has always been assumed that since Marx was anti-religion and since Communism always mandated atheism, religious faith has been antithetical to the principles espoused by those whose political ideology leads them to embrace the concepts affirmed in Marxist Socialism.
Just as Democrats for the last 30 years have wrapped themselves in the flag to hide their unpatriotic and outright anti-American sentiments, including a disdain for our military, it appears that this year they are going to wrap themselves in religion to hide their disdain for traditional Christianity and conservatism, using their faith to justify their embrace of radical, extremist schools of thought.
A Commie is still a Commie no matter how 'religious' they claim to be.
Since when did Marxist-Socialist-Communist ideology become part of one's religious faith?
It has always been assumed that since Marx was anti-religion and since Communism always mandated atheism, religious faith has been antithetical to the principles espoused by those whose political ideology leads them to embrace the concepts affirmed in Marxist Socialism.
Just as Democrats for the last 30 years have wrapped themselves in the flag to hide their unpatriotic and outright anti-American sentiments, including a disdain for our military, it appears that this year they are going to wrap themselves in religion to hide their disdain for traditional Christianity and conservatism, using their faith to justify their embrace of radical, extremist schools of thought.
A Commie is still a Commie no matter how 'religious' they claim to be.
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Hillary Gets Standing Ovation at Evangelical Church
Hillary Rodham Clinton went to a major evangelical church on the west coast this week to deliver a speech, and received a standing ovation.
When one considers the church and its Pastor, it is easy to see why the candidate would receive such an overwhelming welcome.
Saddleback Community Church is not your normal evangelical church. In fact, you would never know it is a church at all except for the name. Visitors are treated to jazz and rock music upon entering the facility, which can hardly be called a 'sanctuary.' The minister has been known to deliver his 'talks' in shorts and a tee-shirt, or his signature wild-Hawaiian shirts.
The minister in question is Rick Warren, author of the best-selling book, The Purpose-Driven Life.
Warren is the founder of the Saddleback Church, which he claims is purely an evangelical enterprise that seeks to win over the non-church crowd in California. An ordained Southern Baptist minister who graduated from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, and who claims that Fundamentalist icon W.A. Criswell, long-time Pastor of the megachurch, First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas, is his spiritual hero, Warren has nonetheless discarded most of the accoutrements of the evangelical Christian culture that Southwestern and Criswell held so dear. Warren claims his only goal is to reach people who are turned off by church.
And, to that end, he has been quite successful. The church is now one of the largest in the world. And most of the 'congregants' never cared much for the churchy stuff of which American evangelical Christianity is made.
Hence, everything is informal. There are dance routines, musical groups that sing the popular music one might hear on the radio, and there are no 'sermons' but talks that are geared toward the interests of the non-church suburbanites in California.
The controversy of the church does not stop with its methods, however. For the past two years Warren has made the controversial decision to invite two of the most liberal icons in American politics to speak at his annual AIDS conference.
Last year the special guest was Barack Obama. This year it was Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Warren's hero, W.A. Criswell, surely must be turning over in his grave. Criswell was an unabashed political conservative who made no secret of supporting Barry Goldwater, Gerald Ford, and Ronald Reagan. He was also known to deliver a zinger or two aimed at liberals in his sermons if he felt they had betrayed not only the Christian faith but the ideals of the Founders of the Republic.
Warren, on the other hand, embraces these liberals, and his congregants love it, as the standing ovations exhibit.
It is not clear as to Warren's true motives, his rhetoric notwithstanding. This is an election year, and we are in the middle of a campaign. To invite Clinton to speak at this particular time has a symbolic endorsement written all over it.
In case you are wondering, I have no use for the Rick Warren methodology. The fact that he tends to wrap himself in liberal politics only further raises my suspicions as to just how 'evangelical' he and his congregation actually are.
When I go to church, I want to feel like I have been to church and not to a bar. Yes, I have tried out these so-called 'seeker-friendly' type churches that are modeled after Warren's Saddleback experiment. I departed the building thinking that the only thing lacking in the experience were the drinks and the cocktail waitresses.
Spare me the informalities, the jazz music, and the 'hip-pop' culture. I can get that at the bar.
Oh, and if I had been in attendance at Warren's Hillary-fest, I would have stood up and booed at the end.
When one considers the church and its Pastor, it is easy to see why the candidate would receive such an overwhelming welcome.
Saddleback Community Church is not your normal evangelical church. In fact, you would never know it is a church at all except for the name. Visitors are treated to jazz and rock music upon entering the facility, which can hardly be called a 'sanctuary.' The minister has been known to deliver his 'talks' in shorts and a tee-shirt, or his signature wild-Hawaiian shirts.
The minister in question is Rick Warren, author of the best-selling book, The Purpose-Driven Life.
Warren is the founder of the Saddleback Church, which he claims is purely an evangelical enterprise that seeks to win over the non-church crowd in California. An ordained Southern Baptist minister who graduated from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, and who claims that Fundamentalist icon W.A. Criswell, long-time Pastor of the megachurch, First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas, is his spiritual hero, Warren has nonetheless discarded most of the accoutrements of the evangelical Christian culture that Southwestern and Criswell held so dear. Warren claims his only goal is to reach people who are turned off by church.
And, to that end, he has been quite successful. The church is now one of the largest in the world. And most of the 'congregants' never cared much for the churchy stuff of which American evangelical Christianity is made.
Hence, everything is informal. There are dance routines, musical groups that sing the popular music one might hear on the radio, and there are no 'sermons' but talks that are geared toward the interests of the non-church suburbanites in California.
The controversy of the church does not stop with its methods, however. For the past two years Warren has made the controversial decision to invite two of the most liberal icons in American politics to speak at his annual AIDS conference.
Last year the special guest was Barack Obama. This year it was Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Warren's hero, W.A. Criswell, surely must be turning over in his grave. Criswell was an unabashed political conservative who made no secret of supporting Barry Goldwater, Gerald Ford, and Ronald Reagan. He was also known to deliver a zinger or two aimed at liberals in his sermons if he felt they had betrayed not only the Christian faith but the ideals of the Founders of the Republic.
Warren, on the other hand, embraces these liberals, and his congregants love it, as the standing ovations exhibit.
It is not clear as to Warren's true motives, his rhetoric notwithstanding. This is an election year, and we are in the middle of a campaign. To invite Clinton to speak at this particular time has a symbolic endorsement written all over it.
In case you are wondering, I have no use for the Rick Warren methodology. The fact that he tends to wrap himself in liberal politics only further raises my suspicions as to just how 'evangelical' he and his congregation actually are.
When I go to church, I want to feel like I have been to church and not to a bar. Yes, I have tried out these so-called 'seeker-friendly' type churches that are modeled after Warren's Saddleback experiment. I departed the building thinking that the only thing lacking in the experience were the drinks and the cocktail waitresses.
Spare me the informalities, the jazz music, and the 'hip-pop' culture. I can get that at the bar.
Oh, and if I had been in attendance at Warren's Hillary-fest, I would have stood up and booed at the end.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Obama and Fundamentalist Liberalism
Democratic Presidential hopeful Barack Obama issued a package of proposals last week which he described as 'the attempt to usher in the Kingdom of God in America.'
Many observers were caught off-guard by the statement. Yet the concept is nothing new.
Obama belongs to a tradition within Christianity that has been around since the latter part of the 19th century and the early part of the 20th century which maintains that the concept of the 'Kingdom of God' as mentioned in the Bible is a mandate for political and social structures.
Thus, 'Christian liberalism' was born and encompassed a vast segment of the Church in a variety of old, mainline denominations in Europe and the U.S. The adherents to Christian liberalism believed that the Kingdom of God could be ushered in by the activities of man. This could be accomplished by changing social and political structures to reflect what adherents believed was the 'teachings of Jesus' regarding the poor.
The ultimate objective was to wipe out poverty and war by implementing governmental policies that supposedly made society more just and fair. Humanitarian pursuit was the order of the day with the goal of not only alleviating human suffering but preempting that suffering in the first place by making sure that society was structured in such a way as to minimize the risk of poverty, disease, and war.
This, of course, meant that capitalism had to go. Human freedom and personal choice had to be minimized in such a way as to insure that wealth was spread as evenly as possible throughout society.
The remnants of Christian liberalism are still alive in Europe today. The only change is that the masses generally do not recognize that the secular Socialism that governs their nations had its roots in a segment of Christianity.
The main reason that Europe and the rest of Western society in general have forgotten that fact is the rampant disillusionment that occurred in the wake of two World Wars and the Great Depression. Man's best attempts to 'usher in the Kingdom of God' resulted in disaster.
In short, you may be able to change social and political structures externally, but you cannot change the internal darkness that leads to such horrors as the Holocaust.
Further, under the influence of liberal theologians such as Rudolf Bultmann, who sought to 'demythologize' Christianity, there arose in Europe a securalized version of Christian liberalism. The mass suffering that occurred on the continent during the first half of the 20th century led to a growing distrust of church structures, which of course, fed the securalized version of Christian liberalism.
Yet the basic premise of Socialism is just as bound for failure as its religious equivalent.
Much of Europe seems to have failed to learn that lesson.
Despite the obvious failures of Christian liberalism and its secular equivalent, Socialism, that segment of Christianity that embraces such a point of view is alive and well. Barack Hussein Obama belongs to that segment of Christianity.
Obama would mandate certain key tenets of Socialism in the name of 'ushering in the Kingdom of God' just as his spiritual forebears did in Europe in the early 20th century. The problem, of course, is that Christian Liberalism as it stands today is just as unwilling to allow any deviation from its prescriptions as the Fundamentalists on the extreme Right.
This is why I do not hesitate to refer to Christian Liberals as 'fundamentalists.' They have a dogma that must be strictly followed just as surely as the rightwing fundamentalists.
For example, a speaker before the annual meeting of the National Council of Churches, which represents those Christian denominations that adhere to liberalism, stated that 'government should have a monopoly on the use firearms.' Period, end.
This, in a nutshell, is the mindset. Government, in their view, truly IS the means by which to usher in the Kingdom of God. And to them, that means government must have ultimate power to confiscate wealth in order to distribute it to others, confiscate firearms in order to insure a 'peaceful society,' withdraw U.S. troops from every region of the world to show in good faith that we 'mean no harm,' and to exhibit a literal reading of Jesus' words to 'turn the other cheek' by allowing our enemies to strike us without any response that uses force.
Those who dissent from this liberal dogma are vilified every bit as thoroughly as the most rabid rightwing Fundamentalist preacher you can imagine. In fact, in many ways the leftwing fundamentalists are worse.
Various and sundry organizations that are dominated by the leftwing mainline denominations, such as Barack Obama's United Church of Christ and others, are known for their intolerance of dissenting points of view. Talk to many of our military Chaplains, for example, and you will discover that organizations such as the Association for Clinical Pastoral Education, the Association of Professional Chaplains, and others, are notorious for making it difficult if not impossible for a conservative Christian to be recognized professionally by those groups.
One of these organizations in particular, the ACPE, demands that its members adhere to standards that many conservative Christians find to be against Biblical teaching.
This is not to say that these organizations do not have the right to set their own standards. For certainly they do. Further, this is not to say that their standards are necessarily wrong. That is not the point at all. The point is that there is within Christian liberalism a fundamentalist mindset that is every bit as exclusionary and dogmatic as rightwing fundamentalists.
And this is the problem with Barack Obama. In the name of Christianity he would unleash on the Republic a plethora of tyranny that flies in the face of every single principle of liberty for which our Founding Fathers fought and died.
Many observers were caught off-guard by the statement. Yet the concept is nothing new.
Obama belongs to a tradition within Christianity that has been around since the latter part of the 19th century and the early part of the 20th century which maintains that the concept of the 'Kingdom of God' as mentioned in the Bible is a mandate for political and social structures.
Thus, 'Christian liberalism' was born and encompassed a vast segment of the Church in a variety of old, mainline denominations in Europe and the U.S. The adherents to Christian liberalism believed that the Kingdom of God could be ushered in by the activities of man. This could be accomplished by changing social and political structures to reflect what adherents believed was the 'teachings of Jesus' regarding the poor.
The ultimate objective was to wipe out poverty and war by implementing governmental policies that supposedly made society more just and fair. Humanitarian pursuit was the order of the day with the goal of not only alleviating human suffering but preempting that suffering in the first place by making sure that society was structured in such a way as to minimize the risk of poverty, disease, and war.
This, of course, meant that capitalism had to go. Human freedom and personal choice had to be minimized in such a way as to insure that wealth was spread as evenly as possible throughout society.
The remnants of Christian liberalism are still alive in Europe today. The only change is that the masses generally do not recognize that the secular Socialism that governs their nations had its roots in a segment of Christianity.
The main reason that Europe and the rest of Western society in general have forgotten that fact is the rampant disillusionment that occurred in the wake of two World Wars and the Great Depression. Man's best attempts to 'usher in the Kingdom of God' resulted in disaster.
In short, you may be able to change social and political structures externally, but you cannot change the internal darkness that leads to such horrors as the Holocaust.
Further, under the influence of liberal theologians such as Rudolf Bultmann, who sought to 'demythologize' Christianity, there arose in Europe a securalized version of Christian liberalism. The mass suffering that occurred on the continent during the first half of the 20th century led to a growing distrust of church structures, which of course, fed the securalized version of Christian liberalism.
Yet the basic premise of Socialism is just as bound for failure as its religious equivalent.
Much of Europe seems to have failed to learn that lesson.
Despite the obvious failures of Christian liberalism and its secular equivalent, Socialism, that segment of Christianity that embraces such a point of view is alive and well. Barack Hussein Obama belongs to that segment of Christianity.
Obama would mandate certain key tenets of Socialism in the name of 'ushering in the Kingdom of God' just as his spiritual forebears did in Europe in the early 20th century. The problem, of course, is that Christian Liberalism as it stands today is just as unwilling to allow any deviation from its prescriptions as the Fundamentalists on the extreme Right.
This is why I do not hesitate to refer to Christian Liberals as 'fundamentalists.' They have a dogma that must be strictly followed just as surely as the rightwing fundamentalists.
For example, a speaker before the annual meeting of the National Council of Churches, which represents those Christian denominations that adhere to liberalism, stated that 'government should have a monopoly on the use firearms.' Period, end.
This, in a nutshell, is the mindset. Government, in their view, truly IS the means by which to usher in the Kingdom of God. And to them, that means government must have ultimate power to confiscate wealth in order to distribute it to others, confiscate firearms in order to insure a 'peaceful society,' withdraw U.S. troops from every region of the world to show in good faith that we 'mean no harm,' and to exhibit a literal reading of Jesus' words to 'turn the other cheek' by allowing our enemies to strike us without any response that uses force.
Those who dissent from this liberal dogma are vilified every bit as thoroughly as the most rabid rightwing Fundamentalist preacher you can imagine. In fact, in many ways the leftwing fundamentalists are worse.
Various and sundry organizations that are dominated by the leftwing mainline denominations, such as Barack Obama's United Church of Christ and others, are known for their intolerance of dissenting points of view. Talk to many of our military Chaplains, for example, and you will discover that organizations such as the Association for Clinical Pastoral Education, the Association of Professional Chaplains, and others, are notorious for making it difficult if not impossible for a conservative Christian to be recognized professionally by those groups.
One of these organizations in particular, the ACPE, demands that its members adhere to standards that many conservative Christians find to be against Biblical teaching.
This is not to say that these organizations do not have the right to set their own standards. For certainly they do. Further, this is not to say that their standards are necessarily wrong. That is not the point at all. The point is that there is within Christian liberalism a fundamentalist mindset that is every bit as exclusionary and dogmatic as rightwing fundamentalists.
And this is the problem with Barack Obama. In the name of Christianity he would unleash on the Republic a plethora of tyranny that flies in the face of every single principle of liberty for which our Founding Fathers fought and died.
Saturday, April 07, 2007
Easter, Passover Take a Beating
Washington, DC (TLS). At the time of year when Christians and Jews celebrate some of their holiest days, the mongrels of the secular progressive movement in the mainstream press work overtime to bash the beliefs of both faiths.
This year, during Lent, Passover, and Easter, we have been treated to endless attacks on Judaism, Israel, the Bible, Jesus, and Christianity. One art exhibit in New York featured a life-sized image of a chocolate Jesus--'anatomically correct.' A commentator claimed that Judaism is by its very nature racist.
As I write this, it is Good Friday--the day that Christ died on the Cross for our sins. This day and what it represents is central to my belief system, that we see what God is like most fully in the person of Jesus Christ who exhibited unconditional, sacrificial love for all humanity by dying on a Roman Cross.
For the attack dogs of CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, the Washington Post, and the New York Times (and many others) to undermine my convictions about these matters is nothing but sheer bigotry at its worst.
Wonder what would happen if they did that to Muslims?
Well, here's a hint. They would be afraid to. Look at Great Britain, where teachers have stopped teaching about the Holocaust and the Crusades for the fear of inciting the ire and violence of Muslims.
But Christianity and Judaism are fair game.
Read more here:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27735
This year, during Lent, Passover, and Easter, we have been treated to endless attacks on Judaism, Israel, the Bible, Jesus, and Christianity. One art exhibit in New York featured a life-sized image of a chocolate Jesus--'anatomically correct.' A commentator claimed that Judaism is by its very nature racist.
As I write this, it is Good Friday--the day that Christ died on the Cross for our sins. This day and what it represents is central to my belief system, that we see what God is like most fully in the person of Jesus Christ who exhibited unconditional, sacrificial love for all humanity by dying on a Roman Cross.
For the attack dogs of CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, the Washington Post, and the New York Times (and many others) to undermine my convictions about these matters is nothing but sheer bigotry at its worst.
Wonder what would happen if they did that to Muslims?
Well, here's a hint. They would be afraid to. Look at Great Britain, where teachers have stopped teaching about the Holocaust and the Crusades for the fear of inciting the ire and violence of Muslims.
But Christianity and Judaism are fair game.
Read more here:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27735
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)