The tragedy of those labels is the right can sell hope, based on fantasy, Ronald Reagan was the personification of this during his presidency he concealed the greatest betrayal of the American people in the history of the country, yet most have not a clue.
The left identifies problems and injustice and attemp's to deal with it, which is not sugar coated. It can be a bitter pill to swallow. I was a typical Christian conservative for over 20 years. I feel like a fool, I feel I was deceived, and the deeper I look the worse it gets. Many of my former friends have rejected me, I am mocked and ridiculed but my faith in God and conviction sustain me.

The progressive movement is full of flaws, NO LEADERSHIP, LACK OF FOCUS and worst of all NO BATTLE PLAN; nobody has created a document such as the “Powell Memo” which was one of the key eye openers for me.

it has something to do with the difference between experience-based faith and piety-based faith.

theologic tradition as a basis for religious practice, versus the Bible as basis for religious practice.

And with diachronic versus achronic interpretation of the Bible, which bears a close relation to the question of the tradition.

There is also -and that's point # 4 - a question of orthopraxis versus orthodoxy.

So how did the Christian Right form? It happened when conservative Chrisitanity and Politics, got mixed up together.

Both conservative politics and conservative religion, are "conservative." And so at times they sought an alliance; moving from the "Christian Coalition" to the "Conservative Coalition." But of course? There have always been conflicts between politics, the "traditions of men," and religion, Christianity. And religion is strained, distorted, when it tries to adapt itself to politics. Particularly, American Fundamentalism was strained, when it tried to tie Christianity, to nationalism. Since the Bible often spoke against "nations." And Christianity is international.

If anything, Christianity seems less nationalistic than the Right; progressive, liberal politics seem to fit the Bible and an international Christianity, better. Christ having come to save "all nations."

You had Christians sending missionaries to the Middle East since our earliest dealings with the Ottoman Empire in an effort to convert people to this brand of Christianity (worked hard on converting the Eastern Orthodox Christians). They had a goal of returning Jerusalem to the Jews and converting them to Christianity to usher in Christs Kingdom since the early years of our nation. I've been reading a history book on the U.S. dealings with the Middle East that went into some detail on these missionaries, and had another one that got ruined that charted the entire history of Christianity up until present day.

This is the book that got ruined, though I didn't get past the early days of the Catholic Church before my book got ruined:
http://www.amazon.com/Christianity-First-Three-Thousand-Years/dp/0143118692/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1345494531&sr=8-1&keywords=christianity+the+first+three+thousand+years

Though the author inserts his opinion occasionaly in spots, it is an excellent book compiled from extensive historical research (and it has many references listed).

The other is this one that I've been working through:
http://www.amazon.com/Power-Faith-Fantasy-America-Present/dp/B00509CS7O/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1345494683&sr=8-2&keywords=America+and+Middle+east+history

And like everything else I have read from him, it is excellent. I particularly recommend The Reformation, which is thorough and well written.

you can't be both.

As a Catholic this is something I struggle with. Right now I am considering leaving the Catholic Church because they have become so political over the one issue of abortion. I am against abortion as well but disagree with the idea that to end abortions you have to do it through ending Roe v. Wade. The GOP claims the moral high ground on abortion but, the way I see it, that is the ONLY right to life issue they embrace. The proliferation of all kinds of guns, environmental issues, the way they want to deny a path to citizenship for immigrants (some going so far as wanting electric fences at the borders); the way they portray the poor and people on welfare. All of that makes it impossible for me to support them. There is no direct mention of abortion in the Bible. There are over 1,000 mentions of helping the poor. I have to wonder why my Church has tunnel vision on all issues except abortion. Any help with my inner struggle with this would be appreciated.

The abortions issue is like an old southern fable, "Tar Baby" once you touch it, you cannot let it go, and if you do, you have tar all over you. So let me share what I have come up with: First Abortion is murdering the only innocent thing in the human race an unborn child, correct. The bible states we are born into sin. So being sinless in theory, never committing a sin in an unlived life, my conclusion is an aborted baby's sole goes straight to heaven with God. They are lucky enough not to go through this mess we are living through today. So what are we fighting against? If abortion was something God wanted to end, it would be ended. My theory after 30 years of fighting abortion is this; I put it in God’s hands. It is no longer a political litmus test. Now I look at how they vote, who they take money from and especially their net worth before being elected and after. If their wealth increased dynamically after being elected, they are corrupt and crooked. Yet we still keep electing them, which in my opinion is the real sin.

how can we work together to eliminate as many abortions as possible? Everyone who has ever examined this question states that the best deterrence of abortion is adequate available contraception

What brought us to a point where aborting babies was the answer, access to birth control, ignorance, lack of child care and zero funding for a comprehensive program to help single mothers who for the most part were victims of single men who practice "Hit and run" relationships.
A head in the sand leadership greed and tight fisted politics, no moral compass since the supreme court outlawed teaching the bible in public school and adopted "humanism" as the official religion of america. by default.
What you suggested is noble, honorable, charitable and absolutely the right thing to do, but for the life of me with all the stuff screwed up in our once great country. The unborn have few advocates and even fewer supporters. My real concern is what God really thinks about all of this and what He is going to do, or is He already in the process of dealing with it?

I think the Christian Right seems less than Christian because...well, people are human. We take what we want from the Bible and act on those beliefs that seem to line up to the way we want to behave anyway. So, if as a person, you're more inclined to be generous and giving, the scriptures in the Bible that pertain to being giving and generous appeal to you. If you enjoy attending church, you're quick to recall that the Bible says we should not forsake the assembly. If you don't enjoy attending church, that's a scripture, you're quick to forget. Wherever humans are involved, chaos is sure to follow. You know what I mean? We tend to emphasize what we want to emphasize. I guess we all do.

Do you remember the scriptures about the woman caught in the act of adultery who was about to be stoned in the Bible? Ask anyone (familiar with the scriptures) which part stands out. I like the part that says (ad lib), "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." Which meant, none of them had a right to throw a stone at her. And, I also liked when He asked where were her condemners (they had left, of course), and He said, "I don't condemn you, either." I want to remember Jesus as loving and forgiving. But, in those same verses, He also told her, Go and sin no more. So, even though He was loving and forgiving, this didn't mean He approved of her behavior. To me, it means, He actually told her to cut it out.

So, I guess the answer is...they need to spend more time reading their Bibles and living what they preach. But, then again, so do I.

Part of why I posed the question is because I've written a book on the subject. I agree that most of us read the scriptures selectively. Nonetheless, it seems to me the social gospel is central to both Judaism and Christianity. Accordingly, I put together "Are We Not Righteous Men? Favorite Bible Passages (If Written by Conservatives." To my mind it satirizes the Christian Right, parodizing well known passages such as The Good Samaritan and The Prodigal Son and making them mean spirited. Who knows if it will do any good, but I'd like to think it advances the progressive cause. And the Social Gospel. Progressive Partisan

On Patrol 98- I appreciate your post and the reminder about "throwing the first stone". I have not always been a Democrat but after seeing what is going on during the past several years...I had to vote Democratic because, frankly, the right scares me to death. I don't think Jesus would be a member of either political party because both are flawed. But all and all, I think the Democratic Party is much more Christian than are the Republicans. You can't put down programs to help the poor and be a Christian in my mind. It is comical how the GOP talks about religion all the time yet sees nothing wrong in signing a pledge to a billionaire. I will never stop laughing over that one....that alone should be grounds to send them all home.

After all!

I wish I could sit that fool down and debate with him, but he is not a real person and I doubt he really believes all the crap he says on that show of his. Just red meat for the mentally challenged.

How Jesus wrote down on the sand each of their "sins" how he knew them well enough to show them they were not "righteous men" throwing stones, but flawed men judging according to a flawed system.

Thing is God hates sin period, but doesn't love the sinner any less is what I've always gotten out of it.

I pretty much tie this in with "Judgement is mine," says the Lord. I'm so flawed, I don't feel I can judge anyone else. I know I'm not a "bad" person, but I've made some pretty stupid mistakes that affected others and I've withdrawn into myself at times people needed me. But without faith and forgiveness, that stuff could have been reason enough to just keep going down that road instead of making changes and constant course corrections.

What you say is true, because of human nature, I know that in my walk I am guilty as charged but I do try to change when I recognize that I am wrong. THAT is the reason I will never support the republican politics anymore, because for one thing, they all want to be the "rich young ruler" that Jesus told to sell all he had and give the money to the poor, then he could follow Christ.

but the Christian Right ignores the majority of Christ's teachings.

IMO the thing that's often missing in religious conservatives is curiosity.

The ability to ask "what did Jesus actually say (forget what my pastor or some guy on TV says)"?

Also, the ability to look at the totality of the religion, the spirit of it, and not get fixated on one piece of minutiae.

That applies equally to Islam, Buddhism and other religions too.

This is a tough concept to discuss; most pastors get angry for a whole range of reasons. I have studied the word for several decades and I cannot come to any other conclusion. Calling him a socialist might be more palatable to some, however that would betray what Jesus taught and what is recorded in the gospels. He had nowhere to lay his head, Homeless, the group had a common purse, and they did not even have a place to bury HIM. During his crucifixion the guards gambled for his possessions, it was not a very long list. My last point is this: What did He tell the rich young ruler that wanted to follow Him, “Sell all you have and give the money to the poor, the rich young ruler turned away very sad, because he had much”, I submit the rich has been doing that for the past 2000 years and it is even more popular today. So how many politicians would follow Christ today? My guess is zero, but I hope I am wrong.

C. S. Lewis wrote an interesting essay, ""Meditation on the Third Commandment", in which he says that a specifically Christian political party would be a bad idea. He gives two reasons: First, that even among Christians who want a state run on Christian principles, there are genuine differences in how to bring this about, so no single party could claim to represent all Christians. Second, there will inevitably come a point where any such party must choose between power or Christian principles.

I don't believe that Jesus was a communist; he believed in charity. Jesus said for the man to sell his things to give to charity. I think there is a common misconception between communism and charity. Charity comes from the heart, where as communism takes from one to give it to another.

"Acts 4:32: All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had."

to improving one's self financially. Check out some of those wealthy preachers with those pricey suits and fancy cars. Not too Jesus like I would say.

Riches can be a curse and is for most people who do not have discipline and purpose for money. A large sum dropped on them usually destroys them. Just check out what happens to most lottery winners within five to eight years after winning. Bankruptcy normally.

was not Christ. He taught in error. He let his own personal greed color his interpretation of the bible, it seems. Like most other Protestants.

That's one of those silly claims floated against Calvinist on the internet.That cannot be found anywhere in the works of Calvin. At least not resorting to misinterpretations. Calvinist teach that someone being rich is not a blessing of God,but merely bounties of providence. Calvinist certainly believed Nero was not blessed despite his wealth same goes for Pharaoh.

NO hard question, just the warm and fuzzy stuff on Sunday with lots of emphasis on the collection plate. Some have evolved into a entertainment show with music, stand up comedy and very little drama. Get them in, get them into a happy mood, then pass the plate.

.. was what preached at my last church. Very little involving worshipping Christ, more on making people feel good, like you say.
=-O

Can't we all just get along long enough to stand outside correctly chosen Christian churches this next Sunday as parishioners come and go, with signs saying, "Christians must vote against the Mormon heresy"?

They have millionaires, and billionaire paying tithes into their churches, and they don't want to lose the money. So they tell them what they want to hear, and what they want to hear is their greatest thing since sliced bread. And that poor people are poor, because their lazy and stupid, not because their being paid lousy wages.

...to all you say. Those megas want money and happy people on camera.
I had lost my dad and was physically blocked from sitting up front with the cameras.
Guess I did not look happy enough....

o_O

That mega pastor is on national television.
He looks like imo, "The Toecutter" from the Mad Max movies. :-D
Go Figure

I see little difference between their goals and those of the extremist Muslim sects that want to impose Sharia Law on the people and totally discard secular law that recognize the right of the citizen to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. They are determined to instate religious education in public schools in which they dictate what is taught, along with creationism, the denouncement of evolution, and with some stringent form of abstinence sex education.

Ever come across Rousas J. Rushdoony or Dominionism?

...the Acme of the Right (wrong) is the use of vouchers...to their children to private, faith- based schools.

It can't be done.

Things do look sinister (sinestra) coming from them

The one hit answer is that the republican party upholds, protect, and cares more of our social values. They hold my position on same-sex marriage, abortion and capital punishment. As for feeding the poor, counseling people, healing the sick... well in short, I'm pretty sure we don't care about the government doing those things because we Christians already do them at Church. Its funny that you mention all this things... feeding the poor, counseling people and healing the sick... and I immediately thought about Church. And as a result see other issues as more important, like capital punishment, abortion, same-sex marriage or anything relating to our Christian faith.

I'm personally am okay with well-fare to an extent but I know people that have benefited and taken advantage of it. But, since the republican party best represents me, I'll cast my vote to it.

So in short, Church feeds the hungry, clothes the poor, counsels people.... heck personally I got a homeless person off the streets and drove him to a Christian shelter. That's why it's not the biggest concern because Christian rights have it covered... so we worry about other issues.

Edit: I just wanted add.... God told us Christians to be Christ and we're doing so. Just because you don't see Christians overwhelmingly voting for well-fare and all those problems doesn't mean Christians are not ALREADY supporting well-fare and other programs, we are.

Hello, I'm a Democrat-voting Christian. Thank You and congrats for helping your fellow man. The discussion is not whether to help or not. It is whether government should help their very own citizens. The churches are not doing enough to help everybody. They can't. They do not have the money, professionals to help all of the people. That is why people are on welfare. As long as people are selective as to whom is worthy or not, then the government will have to provide help to it's citizens.



If things are covered by churches, why do we continue to have problems?

I think I'd prefer to show it to only Christians so the democratic party doesn't have it floating around. I have a certain idea on wel-fare and how it can be (possibly) absolutely ideal.

So, no comment. But, I think there's a way to do it that involves the government and it can also work without the government.

You can share your ideas with other Christians here.
You can and will get the credit.
I for one promise. O

In other words, he has no response.

How does a Christian support the Republican Party that votes to cut government funding for children lunch programs, hospice care, Meals on Wheels that feed elderly citizens, etc. etc. etc.

Its the republican party that vocally and publicly looks to represent me. While the democratic party does the opposite.

I'm going to add more to this. My behavior and Christ-like behavior are not judged by what I vote for nor by what you or anyone around me thinks. My behavior and Christ-like behavior are judged by God first and only and simply the truth of what I do in my everyday life... not in a moment in the voting booth. And the truth of what I do is that I look live my life from the waking morning to night on doing the right thing.

I can help the poor. I can feed the poor. I can donate money to people but I can't influence same-sex marriage, abortion, protect my freedom to practice my religion which would in part be helping the poor, feeding the poor, and donating money and other issues without voting republican.

I care about people too but and literally/physically/mentally actually do care for people in real life. Its just that the republican party seems to listen to me much more easily than the democratic party.

Does that make sense?

I don't think so. As far as I can tell, I don't see the policies of the republican party aiming to hurt the defenseless.

And just so we're on the same page...by defenseless, I'm guessing and assuming you mean poor and homeless people.

And my reason for supporting the republican party is for influence on issues that I can't do anything about by myself.

And again, I'm okay wel-fare and a medical plan from the government... possibly. The medical plan is a tad scary cause of government control. However, abortion, same-sex marriage... etc etc social values are much more important to our nation. Let me try to break it down to you...

What's more important?

The WILL to help the poor and the homeless

OR

The power to help the poor and the homeless


The social value of WILLING to help the poor and the homeless is a more important and fundamental value, right?

Of course, if you don't have that social value than you don't help them even if you had the value.

That's why social values are that much more important. That's why I vote republican because social values are what change a nation, Christian social values. The kind of social values that don't wait for government to help the poor but instead go off and DO help the poor. That's why Christian rehab centers exist. That's why Christian hospitals exists. That's why Christian missionary doctors and pastors go to 3rd world countries to help people. Not Muslims, not Buddhist, not Atheists... we see that the vast majority of the time its Christians actively helping people. And that's just what we SEE, imagine what is done down to the bottom, individually. Take me for example, just this morning I noticed a young woman... probably around 20. She was pretty. I glanced at her and the truth is I lusted after her.

RIGHT THERE

I had two choices. I could let my lust lead me and go up to her and talk to her and try to seduce her for sex. (eventually)

or

I could decide to not think of her that way because of my belief in God. That God/Jesus has said that whoever looks at a woman with lust is already an adulterer at heart.

I decided to be led by God. As a result, she was no longer a sex toy to me but a young girl, a person. This is what we need. It is like that that people will NOT accept bribes and make racial divides (John 7:24 Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.” )

I'll leave it at that. God Bless you

You had better read a few more chapters in the Good Book. For example as when Jesus says when you the hungry, the unclothed, etc. you see Me. The ones that address those needs are the ones that will be saved, the people just like the ones you admire will be cast in the flames. Good luck. By the way, you might not have noticed that all those Christian institutions you are so proud of rely heavily on government support for their very existence. The only thing I see Republicans lusting for is the almighty dollar.

People don't go to heaven for good works. Its not like Buddhism... Islam or any other religion where IF you are doing good works... you go to heaven. Its far "harder" than that. In Christianity, better said in Gods word.. the standard for being good is so high that nobody is considered good.

Romans 3:23

23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

Nobody goes to heaven via their own "goodness." This was the whole point of Jesus Christ. Jesus (God) came to the world as a man so that he may be good for us. In short, its those who believe in Jesus Christ and his finished work.. good work that will go to heaven.

As a result, as a Christian myself... naturally because of my commitment to God, I will do good works because I know that's what God would like me to do and because I love God. I love honesty, charity, love itself.

And because I love God, I disapprove of abortion (murder), same-sex marriage and the removing of God off our country which is exactly what the Democratic party approves of.

I don't know how much more clear I can be... THIS is the reason I choose the republican party because the Democratic party directly and fundamentally oppose me and my social values and my God.


The most important question for you is this...........Is wel-fare the ONLY... ONLY... ONLY way to help the poor? Can I as a Christian... POSSIBLY... POSSIBLY practice my Christian desire to help the poor a DIFFERENT way?

The answer is an obvious yes. You fail to realize that the fundamental SOCIAL VALUE of WANTING TO DO CHARITY is more important than ONE... ONE... way of helping the poor, wel-fare and social programs.

AGAIN, AGAIN, and AGIAN.... I like... I like... I like wel-fare and certain programs like that. But, FUNDAMENTALLY... the Democratic party opposes me and FUNDAMENTALLY... the Republican party supports me. How does the Democratic party oppose me....well...

I disapprove of abortion (murder), same-sex marriage and the removing of God off our country which is exactly what the Democratic party approves of.

So, summing it up being a Christain doesn't mean voting for wel-war. However, being a Christian DOES mean that you have that natural reaction to do goodworks and I can do that to my hearts content without having to vote democrat but if I do vote democrat... I'm supporting murder and perversion and helping the poor ONE.... ONE... way. I compromise my values with the Democratic party... but not so with the Republican party. Please re-read this last paragraph if you have to because I think this is as clear as it gets.

Do you understand now?

Second, do you know why the government got into the welfare business? Because private charities, including churches, were unable to do the job properly.

Abortion is a complex moral question. Simply saying "it is murder" is simplistic. I shall say no more on that just now.

Same-sex marriage does not harm you or your religion in the slightest. The Catholic Church opposes civil divorce, yet seems to get along quite well in countries, such as the US, where it exists. Essentially, you are insisting that those who do not share your values should be forced to live by them. I keep saying that when conservatives say "I believe in personal freedom," they actually mean "I believe in personal freedom, just as long as the person is doing what I, personally, approve of." Or, to put that more simply, the conservative is saying "I do not believe in personal freedom."

"Removing God off our country" seems to mean that you disapprove of the First Amendment.

You support a party which wants tax cuts for the rich, and cuts in Social Security and Medicare. In other words, the Republicans want the billionaire Koch brothers to get richer, and my 91-year-old mother-in-law, who depends on Social Security and Medicare, to live in poverty with no access to healthcare. As Adam Smith wrote, "All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind". That is certainly the "vile maxim" of the Republican Party.

Why don't you slime back to the Right Wing fundamentalist and quit taking up valuable space.

Last edited Mon Jul 14, 2014, 12:31 AM - Edit history (1)

The idea of godly entities has always intrigued me. I am deeply religious and strongly drawn to the Christian concept of the Jewish God, Yahweh. No one seems to know exactly what the word Yahweh means, except that it means something like “I am I am”, which seems redundant. I suspect its actually a startled response, something like, “It’s me!,” or “I am who I am,” suggesting the idea of a god without the company of other gods.

But, going back to the idea of gods and where it came from. Being an Evolutionist as well as being deeply religious, I suspect it had something to do with the evolution of human speech. Evolution is seldom sudden and it must have taken thousands of years for articulation to attain some semblance of coherence, but there must have been some survival value to the articulation of sound without words for it to be an advantage strong enough to develop into speech.

I suspect that the manipulation of sound became an advantage when it was used to lure prey close enough to make it the next meal. As manipulating sound became physically more precise, there may have been an attempt to call to the invisible spirits that moved the leaves of trees and whispered from the treetops. An awareness of the power of these invisible creatures may have occurred later when powerful winds (storms and tornadoes) hit and hurt.

The next step would be to try to placate (“Please do not kill me!”) these entities by attempting to figure out the sounds that would summon the murmur of seemingly benevolent entities for comfort and advantage, and other sounds to placate or divert the more powerful and destructive ones. When the sounds developed into actual words in a societal context, an attempt may have been made to discover what these invisible creatures were and how not only to understand why they did what they did, but how to communicate with them and, being human, how to manipulate them.

Worship, putting ourselves in a position of absolute submission (rolling over on our backs or prostrating ourselves on our bellies as the natural sign of submission), was an obvious response to overwhelming power, and flattery an obvious attempt to manipulate. Thus we had the power of sound to summon gods and the power of words to negotiate with these invisible beings.

The irony is that the words we created to protect us from something that does not exist have seduced us into creating other entities that do not exist, but nevertheless control our behavior so much that they could in themselves be considered deities. The words that can have such an overpowering control over our lives are societal words when they cease to be tools, and become living (though non-existent) entities.

Friendship, when it becomes more important than our friends, is one. Marriage, when it becomes more important than our spouse, is another. When Family is more important than the members of our families, Community, city, state, even country can take control of us at the expense of family, friends and countrymen, justifying even their extermination and even our own.

We, of course, can exercise our freedom, our expression of ourselves, in walking away from a friend, a spouse, a family, a community, a city, a state, a country, but to do so because a word requires it is worship just as much as the worship of Greek gods, the gods of other more recent religions, or the one god of the Judaic/Christian/ Islamic religion,

Interestingly enough, we seem powerless in their clutches, as if some inner compulsion draws us into their machinations. The only avenue to a clear view of the control words have over our attitudes and our actions, I would suggest, would be an entity with which we struggle (much as a child wrestles a parent or dances with a trusted partner); an entity that guides rather than controls us; an entity that does not encumber us with dogma or literal translations of some Sacred Text that could otherwise be helpful in guiding us in our decision making. The problem we create in this relationship is when we wrestle to win, to hurt, to bend our opponent to our will or when we draw away from our dance partner and seek to impress it/he/she with our devotion to the dance and our enthusiasm to perform perfectly (to purify), what was a shared experience.

And finally, in my opinion, it doesn't make any difference if such an entity exists or not. I can’t imagine why any deity worth worshiping would care if we believed it existed or not.

Let Atheists pretend they have no gods. It is just my opinion, of course, but I would maintain that they have lots of them.

They are truly "not" Christians. They are simply taking cover under the guise of religion. Most but not all of the Christians in my extended family are filled with greed when the rubber hits the road

They never do go away. They just change their forms.

So-called "Christians" who like Paul of Tarsus look down with contempt on all kinds of people, as I show in Paul's own words at http://LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/PaulvsAll .

But JESUS wasn't one to promote contempt for any but THE CLERGY (or the "Religious Right" of his day, as I show at http://LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/clergysins .

(red letter KJV) when I was a teenager and saw the awful stuff he said about women and others.

I always loved reading the red letter parts. Proverbs, too.

I think it's more social than theological. I grew up around those people, and I have no idea how to reason with them.