J Walking

J Walking


Evangelicals, say no to poli-pastors

posted by David Kuo

Evangelicals are being seduced back into the GOP not by a politician, but by a pastor. Spiritually speaking, they should resist.
At the moment President Bush ascended to reelection in 2004, Christian conservatives had attained political power almost unequaled in modern American history – perhaps only the post-WW2 labor movement was its equal. From 1980 through Bush’s second term, religious conservatives had ushered in 20 years of republican presidents, a decade of Republican control of Congress, seven of the nine Supreme Court justices, and the sense that they controlled the GOP.
Then something strange happen. They went on a retreat of sorts. As their pastor-in-chief, George W. Bush, descended into scandal, presided over the Iraq debacle, and failed to live up to his pledge to “restore honor and dignity to the White House,” evangelicals went away. They stopped giving to Republican candidates – the latest report shows that only 30% of those who gave in 2004 gave to Romney, McCain, Giuliani, Huckabee or any of the other GOP candidates.
Preachers galore started telling their congregations to just say no to partisan politics. One need look no further than New Life Church in Colorado Springs where the pastor who succeeded the uber-political (and uber-fallen) Ted Haggard has declared his pulpit “politics free.” But one could also look to Minnesota where evangelical mega-church pastor Greg Boyd is preaching that the radical life of a Christian doesn’t include politics. Or even to California, where evangelicalism’s biggest star, Rick Warren, is decidedly absent from domestic politics preferring to spend his time working on HIV/AIDS in Africa.
I like to think that there is another reason that evangelicals have gone missing from politics. They sense how damaging it has been to the perception of their Christian faith.
Christian pollster David Kinnaman writes, “The number of young people in our culture who now embrace unflattering perspectives about Christians and politics is astounding. Three-quarters of young [non-Christians] and half of young churchgoers describe present-day Christianity as “too involved in politics.”
Adults aren’t too much different. More than half of the adult population in America describes the political involvement of Christians as a concern. Twenty percent of all evangelicals believe that adopting a conservative Christian political agenda has helped destroy the image of Jesus Christ.
For a community of believers, like evangelicals, for whom sharing the life-giving message of Jesus is an essential part of life, this sort of data is a shock to the system. It is evidence that perhaps they have been misplacing their priorities – focusing far more on the city of man than on the City of God.
Now, however, they are being tempted back into politics by the only person who could have reinvigorated them – a pastor named Mike Huckabee.
His Iowa “Believe” television ad testifies that he is a “Christian leader.” During campaign events he has taken to handing out “commitment cards” of the sort given to people in churches who have made a decision to follow Jesus. Except the commitment Huckabee is looking for is one of a different sort – a buck and a vote.
His repeat appearances in pulpits across Iowa (for votes) and Texas (for money) might have been the kind of thing he, as a Baptist pastor, would have railed against at one time in his life because they so blur the line between faith and politics…and potentially the law.
At one such event last month, televangelist James Robison introduced Huckabee, who was there to give a sermon on marriage entitled, “State of the Union: What God has joined together,” by exhorting the church to go to his website, and not so subtly asking them to consider giving him money, “It may just be that you will impressed not only to pray for him but to help him. …It is one thing to pray and another thing to become an answer to prayer, I have found great peace in prayer but I have found greater joy in becoming answers to prayers. You can be that.”
It is hard to watch that kind of introduction and not think of Jesus’ stern warning not to give Caesar more than his due. It is even harder not to think of Jesus storming the temple to rid it of the corruption that was found there.
This is precisely the kind of melding of conservative politics and Jesus’ Gospel that has moved many evangelicals to believe that too much focus on politics has hurt Christianity.
George W. Bush perfected the art of running for president while campaigning as pastor-in-chief. His was, however, a behind-the-scenes campaign. Although he very publicly professed that Jesus was his favorite philosopher, his public professions of faith were infrequent. It was the unseen stuff that mattered. His team brought in pastors aplenty to hear Bush’s personal conversion testimony – Jesus brought the man with a drinking problem to his knees and then to great heights. These pastors then went out and told their flocks about Bush’s faith. It was viral spiritual marketing. It worked. Evangelicals didn’t just love Bush the politician, they came to see him as a spiritual brother and a spiritual leader.
A recent poll found that more people thought of George W. Bush as a Christian leader than any American except Billy Graham. That isn’t a good thing because the words associated with Bush were “dishonest,” “hypocritical” and a “bad example of Christianity.”
Now evangelicals are being tempted back into the political by a pastor. They should resist. Evangelicals who have been burned by a president posing as pastor-in-chief shouldn’t think having a real pastor as president will make a difference.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(24)
post a comment
reddopto

posted December 31, 2007 at 12:31 pm


I recall the old phrase, “All it takes for evil to triumph if for good people to do nothing.” When Christian conservatives voted for Bush in 2000 they didn’t anticipate him getting us into Iraq. In 2004, they knew about Iraq, but also knew this campaign had to be finished to avoid regional calamity. They also knew that the man running against Bush was an anti-war activist who actually worked against the interests of our nation. How can one with such clouded judgment be trusted with the Presidency?
Bush’s regime has been a major disappointment! 1/6 of our industrial jobs have been exported to the orient. We’re nearly broke. But, Christians should reserve the right to be involved in politics. It’s time to develop some sophistication not disengage.
Those who hate the Christian faith (and there are a growing number of those)would like nothing better than for the Christians to disengage. They’d like to turn our nation into spiritual Babylon.



report abuse
 

Pete Ahlstrom

posted December 31, 2007 at 12:40 pm


Good, thoughtful comments. We appreciate what you said because we were among the minority of Christian voters who didn’t believe Bush in 2000 or 2004 and didn’t vote for him. Why not? My wife and I both grew up as strong conservatives (who later became more middle of the road). But we also developed the habit of checking what candidates say, when running for office, against what they’ve done in the past. And when we did that for Bush, in 2000, we quickly saw that what he was saying was entirely at odds with what he’d previously done, said, and supported. 180 degrees different! We thought, quite simply, “he’s lying through his teeth! Much too much so to be the Christian he claims to be! We decided he was more like the one who appears “as an angel of light,” but is in fact exactly the opposite. So we didn’t vote for him – and, though appalled at a lot of what he’s done and not done, haven’t been a bit surprised at it.
Huckabee? We’ll watch. Thanks again for your perceptive comments.



report abuse
 

liz

posted December 31, 2007 at 12:41 pm


If the Christians involved in politics actually lead Christian lives instead of pulling singular phrases from the Bible to justify their gluttonous behavior and lifestyles while denigrating those they disagree with, they might not be seen as the hypocritical threats to our way of life that are are in practice.



report abuse
 

Brian Horan

posted December 31, 2007 at 12:42 pm


“Twenty percent of all evangelicals believe that adopting a conservative Christian political agenda has helped destroy the image of Jesus Christ.” Sorry David, that’s not much of the evangelical crowd. Besides that we’re not even in the thick of the general campaign.
I believe like Martin Luther that the Antichrist is a force; not necessarily a person. I believe it has been alive and well in the Republican party and the Evangelical Fundamentalist movement.
First of all, Jesus never said that the rich should have preferential treatment so the benefits trickle down to the poor as the supply-side gospel proclaims.
Second, Jesus never lusted after political power: “My kingdom is not of this world.” It may be the reason that Judas saw fit to betray him.
Third, Jesus and his followers never advocated war.
Fourth, Jesus said not to cast stones. The Evangelical community is on witch-hunts.
I find it not only anti-scientific that Mike Huckabee has advocated quarantining AIDS victims, but anit-Christian. After all didn’t Jesus hang out with lepers?
I’ve always wondered too about the so-called abortion ‘holocaust.’ Instead of picketing and condemning people outside clinics; why not start adoption campaigns (especially to get older kids out of foster care)?
And look, Republicans just blocked giving more health care to lower income kids.
And this big preservation of marriage debate? The biggest threat to marriage for Evangelicals is their own overwhelming rate of divorce. Divorce rates are actually lower in the liberal Northeast than the Bible-belt.
I’d love to see actual responses to this post. I’m starting to suspect that Evangelicals are under some form of mind-control (I’m not kidding). When confronted with these things they seem to change the subject. It’s like they’ve been hypnotized to parrot GOP talking points as espoused by FOX or Rush.



report abuse
 

Swift

posted December 31, 2007 at 12:44 pm


The problem, I think, stems from a general evangelical inability to bifurcate realms of life. It is possible to have a set of values that informs a political philosophy, but many times that political philosophy must stand on its own and consider the vicissitudes and whims (and corruption) of politics. In other words, one can cognitively separate the two realms. Absent this ability, one ends up not voting for a man that has been married thrice and opting for a guy who has been a pastor SOLELY ON THOSE BASES. This is a pretty ill-informed metric when we consider the next “leader of the free world” (as we like to say).
Is it not possible for Christians to allow their Christianity to be Christianity and to keep it from being polluted by politics, and to let their politics be politics and keep it from being influenced by their Christianity? Doubtful. Thus, the extremes of their position: either we must leverage our Christianity into politics, or we must withdraw altogether.



report abuse
 

Sheilagh

posted December 31, 2007 at 12:54 pm


I think you’re right David. I’m in NH. I just received an email from the Liberty Counsel (12/26) inviting pastors to a series of ‘Pastors’ Policy Briefings’. The events are scheduled to be held in some of the early primary states in January – South Carolina, Florida, California.
Sin Against the Holy Spirit????
What was really troubling was the testimony included from an event already held in NH. It seemed to promise a great ‘spiritual’ experience to pastors and at the same time included this speakers list of pastors and politicians.
Drs. Tim and Beverly LaHaye, Hon. Newt Gingrich, Dr. Charles Stanley, David Barton, John Hagee, Don Wildmon, Dr. Laurence White, Hon. Bob McEwen, Sen. Jim DeMint and Dr. Mat Staver.
This is a quote.
“At a recent event in New Hampshire, a pastor who was called upon to deliver the benediction was so moved by the powerful messages that he was initially unable to speak. With a quivering voice, he grasped the pulpit and said that his life had been forever changed. He said he felt like he had been drinking from a fire hydrant for the past day and a half of the event.”
It really seems to me that this mixing of promises of ‘life giving water’ -that’s the reference right? And politicians like Newt Gingrich, and pastors like Hagee is what the bible meant when they talked about a sin against the Holy Spirit. And I don’t say this lightly.



report abuse
 

Sheilagh

posted December 31, 2007 at 1:07 pm


I’m from the Northeast. I think the lower divorce rates might also come from the fact that there is a much higher Catholic population. The NE isn’t all liberals. They just have an inordinate share of the power.
The population contains alot of Americans of Irish, Italian, Polish,Portuguese, Latino, Northern European descent.



report abuse
 

Doug

posted December 31, 2007 at 2:28 pm


I do think Huckabee, a good and godly man so far as I can tell, has gone way too far mixing religion and politics. It’s great to keep saying over and over into the cameras “I believe that a person’s religion is not a qualification for the presidency” and then run around to churches and airing ads asking for money and votes because you’re a Christian leader. Huckabee is starting to seem like the Jesse Jackson of the GOP.



report abuse
 

Brian Horan

posted December 31, 2007 at 2:41 pm


I’ve posted several times on David’s blog. I actually think he’s alright. I think he’s having withdrawl from the Evangelical-Republican drug. Just a few weeks ago he defended Huckabee’s remark on Mormon theology.
I grew up in the Evangelical movement and was born in 1974. My earliest political memories include folks handing out Reagan bumper stickers just outside the church parking lot.
I saw Billy Graham and Johnny Cash at Mile High Stadium in Denver in 1987.
Since then I’ve watched Evangelicals become ultra-mean-spirited.
Evangelical political opponents aren’t just vilified; they’re put on par with the devil.
The ‘Left Behind’ book series has unbelievers go through what the Nazis did at the end of ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’.
Interestingly there’s been a big emphasis on Old Testament judgment rather than New Testament inclusiveness. In the movie ‘Jesus Camp’ the director says Harry Potter would be put to death in Old Testament times. Ironically, at the same camp they prayed over a cardboard cut-out of George W. Bush.
My own brother is part of a group that thinks they’re descended from King David via English Royalty. He refused to come to my wedding because I married an African American.
It just so happens that Bush spoke at Bob Jones University where they forbid interracial dating/marriage.
These may seem like fringe elements, but Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson both said that we deserved 911 because of gays, the ACLU (how the heck is that), women’s rights groups, and pagans. I’ve never heard since then of even an Evangelical censure.
1 John says that God is love and whoever abides in love abides in God. I stopped seeing the love in the Evangelical movement in the early 90s when Clinton got in office.
Even though the consequences to Bush’s lies about Iraq are so much greater, my Evangelical family still has a visceral reaction to Clinton.
What’s even weirder is that they can accept Rudy’s marital infidelity X 2. Rudy never reconciled like Bill and Hillary. (I’m not a big Hillary fan, I’m just trying to make a point).
I think that the marriage of Evangelicals and Republicans borders on something out of the X-Files. My Evangelical family simply parrots talking points from FOX news, Glenn Beck, and Rush. (Garbage in – Garbage out).
One time my father complained that Clinton raised his taxes higher than any other president (I’m sure he heard it on FOX). Then he couldn’t even give me a vague estimate of how much higher his taxes were.
Evangelicals have been hypnotized by corporate powers that have no interest in there well-being. I’m sure the guys in the smoke filled room at Halliburton are having a good laugh.



report abuse
 

jstaple

posted December 31, 2007 at 5:53 pm


Thank you for your remarks. I agree with the disaster of politicizing religion by mr. Bush. Mostly I hate what it has done to me and the rest of the country who are not evangelicals. My parents brought me up strict Catholic, though I am now UU. The use of the pulpit to consistently push GOP policies that hurt the great middle class, the poor, the disabled, the military, the environment …on & on…I kept asking myself if these were the same people who try to live by the grat philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth. Every year I would get a worse attitude toward this abuse of our people, and it made me angry with myself for stereotyping based on the actions of the Evangelicals. I don’t like that, but I couldn’t help it. The last straw was when I read in the news that some Evangelicals were “teaching” in Africa with my tax dollars; telling the uneducated people that it wasn’t the antibiotic that healed them but Jesus. Preaching “no birth control” to starving women??? I think Jesus would weep. This mess has divided the country into hatred. Check out the vitriolic hate messages spewed to those who disagree with some of the “Christian” politicians & followers. Lincoln old us that a country divided can not stand. Dividing us politically by religion is an equal disaster.



report abuse
 

Larry Parker

posted December 31, 2007 at 7:01 pm


What happened to the Huck-love, David?
(Was it his disastrous news conference today by any chance?)



report abuse
 

Paul of Potomac

posted January 1, 2008 at 12:20 pm


I have expressed to David and also on this site, my deepest disappointment in the Bush and Republican administration. I did not vote for him in the first election because I did not feel he had distinguished himself in any particular area in life or had the requisite experience to be president. Competency matters. I did not vote for him the second time because, in addition to competency, I was very upset at his misappropriation of a publically avowed Christian faith with his personal beliefs/ambitions. I saw an interview of him saying that he prayed before he decided to bomb Bhagdad and felt at peace. He was trying to use God to justify his actions. Sounds familiar? In addition to genuine disgreement about priorities, war vs. health care, education, etc. I have become further disgusted by his willingnes to accept torture and ethical misconduct (even crimes) in his administration. I would have expected more from someone who claimed they were Christian regardless of their political views.
Abraham Lincoln was once asked that since Christians in the North and the South both prayed to God, which side was He on? He replied “let’s pray we are on His side.” I am very touched by the humility of that response.
As we look ahead to 2008, I am struck at the simplicity and power of the Beatitudes in Matthew 5. It is a guide to personal, and I believe, political action. Unfortunately, in the unholy alliance of politics and organized Christianity, and the willingness of some Christians to be taken in by “wedge” issues promulgated by the Republican party, the meaning of these verses are lost. Where is Christ? Where is his love and compassion in the political stands and actions of some of these Christians? In Jesus’ time, he criticized not only the Pharisees but the Sadducees, the collaborationists who used their religious position for political gain.



report abuse
 

Donny

posted January 1, 2008 at 10:33 pm


The reason so many youth have such a bad impression of Christians is because Christians are ONLY portrayed to them by Hollywood and MTV, HBO, ABC, CBS, NBC, Vanity Fair, Cosmo, etc., etc., etc., as bad, intolerant and bigoted. Our youth are fed this mind-altering garbage by the media you pander to. It also doesn’t help Christians, that people like you David, perpetuate the bad image of Christians as political power-hungry tyrants, while hailing people like Andrew Sullivan and Ann Rice as super heroes. Kids are dying from Goth and Gay culture David. The Democrats, that claim Christian labels, are ten-times the hypocrites of anything “the Right” puts forth, and you and the rest of the media darlings . . ., say nothing about them. You seem oddly detached from what is happening to Christians nationwide. While you want us to keep silent, our enemies “on the Left” are hard at work every single day to further debauch our youth and relagate us to ghetto existence. Where is the love abd compassion BETWEEN Christians david? The kind of love that shows us as believers? It certainly is non existent in encouraging people to continue in sin and to take it up at first opportunity. Click over to MTV and see if I’m lying?



report abuse
 

canucklehead

posted January 1, 2008 at 11:09 pm


It’s a new year but there’s nothing new with Donny.
The reason so many youth have a bad impression of Christians, Donny, is because they’ve watched their parents vote for and live just like dorks like George W. Bush who mouths allegiance to Christianity come elction time but is wholeheartedly committed to the gospel of peraonal revenge, family prestige, godless materialism and promoting the old boys club.
Our youth simply aren’t that stupid, Donny – they see right through the crap that is represented by what’s left of the religious right and the Big Oil toady they put in the White House.



report abuse
 

Jim

posted January 2, 2008 at 4:20 am


As a Christian and a Democrat I have no love for the narrow minded “we’ve got the Infinite Almighty all figured out” religious right. But I am equally uncomfortable with the idea that a preacher is automatically unqualified to be president. Huckabee doesn’t strike me as a puppet of the religious right as Bush is. Huckabee comes across to me as someone with strong religious convictions, but enough wisdom to know he doesn’t have all the answers to everyone’s spiritual or material needs. I’m not convinced he has what it takes to be president (I don’t see anyone on the Republican side who is), but I think he is a decent, fair minded Christian man.



report abuse
 

Donny

posted January 2, 2008 at 8:03 am


Canucklehead, our youth are already victims by the time they see what IS Democrat politics. I cannot change in presenting the facts. Our youth, whom I have worked with for two-decades (more than half of my working life), are not stupid at all. They are just worn down by the targeting and destruction of their young minds and bodies that has become our educational system and social paradigm. It is the Left that is a greater danger to our children than anything the Republicans actually do. I’ll bet you will not watch MTV and see what is the Democrat life being plied into the future of our country. Oil will run out one day, but the morally corrupt will go on being the teachers of our children until we do something about it. Numbers printed on a calendar do not change right and wrong, good and evil. Notice what non-threatening and non-cursing posts get expunged and why. This is not a game being played by the Left. Those that still have a conscience not seered closed with dark ulterior motive, need to speak out. That is what love is.



report abuse
 

jules

posted January 2, 2008 at 9:53 am


As an evangelical Christian (please note the small “e”), I believe that our greatest task is bringing the word of God to those who are unbelievers, so that they can come to know Jesus Christ as the way to salvation. I do not support Evangelical Christians who are ramming a wordly conservative political agenda down our throats.



report abuse
 

recovering ex-Pentecostal

posted January 2, 2008 at 11:29 am


“The reason so many youth have such a bad impression of Christians is because Christians are ONLY portrayed to them by Hollywood and MTV, HBO, ABC, CBS, NBC, Vanity Fair, Cosmo, etc., etc., etc.”
Blather, blather, blather.
The reason for the bad impressions are because of the way evangelicals like Falsewell, Robertson, Hagee, Hinn, Swaggart, Haggard, Dobson, et al ACT. What they do and what they say is what makes them so follish.
The media report what they say and do. If they’d stop putting their feet in their mouths, the media wouldn’t have so much fodder.
Don’t ever forget, there is not supposed to BE a religious test to hold public office. Or it used to be that way. Now it seems required, but only for SOME religions. “Do you believe every word in the Bible?” What kind of POLITICAL or POLICY question is THAT? And how would it be relevant in an America that (used to) hold freedom of religion in such highregard? It sort of precludes Buddhists or Hinuds, or Muslims or Jews from even running for public office.
What a shame.



report abuse
 

recovering ex-Pentecostal

posted January 2, 2008 at 3:53 pm


Swift,
“Is it not possible for Christians to allow their Christianity to be Christianity and to keep it from being polluted by politics, and to let their politics be politics and keep it from being influenced by their Christianity? Doubtful.”
You are correct. It IS “doubtful” that Christians can “allow their Christianity to be Christianity and to keep it from being polluted by politics, and to let their politics be politics and keep it from being influenced by their Christianity”. They seem to like their politics and religion mixed, despite what the Constitution “promises” (that there shall be NO religious tests to hold office). And it is truly sad.
It used to be called “a personal relationship”. Now they insist it be public instead of private. Now it is the fulcrum on which an election for (what used to be known as) the “leader of the free world” (TM) hinges. That is indeed scary.
Many posts above, Doug said, “I do think Huckabee, a good and godly man so far as I can tell, has gone way too far mixing religion and politics.” That sentence could be repeated with almost ANY candidate’s name replacing Huck’s, starting with George W(armonger) Bush in 2000, but most specifically and emphatically with Romney’s, heck, even Hillary’s and Barack’s names would fit in qutie well.



report abuse
 

recovering ex-Pentecostal

posted January 2, 2008 at 4:02 pm


Jim,
“I am equally uncomfortable with the idea that a preacher is automatically unqualified to be president.”
Being a preacher is not the reason people believe Huck is “automatically unqualified to be president”. (There are multitudes of other reasons.) But being a precher is NOT a qualification FOR president in the first place, last time I checked.
“Huckabee doesn’t strike me as a puppet of the religious right as Bush is.”
Nah, he just wants to quarantine people with AIDS. Nothing from the religious right agenda in that, is there? ;{O)
“Huckabee comes across to me as someone with strong religious convictions”
But as I (and others) continually ask: SO FRIKKIN’ WHAT?
“I think he is a decent, fair minded Christian man.”
How come no one ever sees the danger in the total lack of the opportunity to make a statement like, “I think X is a decent, fair minded Hindu man.”? Or Sikh man? Or Jewish man? Or Jain man? Or Wiccan man? Or Muslim man? Or agnostic man? Or atheist man?
Remember, there is not supposed to BE ANY religious test to hold public office in America. So WHAT if he is (in your opinion) both “decent’ and “fair minded”. His “Christianity” is not supposed to be a factor. It certainly isn’t a “qualification” to be president.



report abuse
 

c kitty

posted January 2, 2008 at 4:21 pm


Donny
The real reason people have bad impresions of Christians is the actual behaviour of actual Christians. It has nothing to do with portrayals “by Hollywood”. Where is the love? Certainly not in your hate-filled rhetoric.



report abuse
 

Donny

posted January 2, 2008 at 5:03 pm


Ex-P, this question: (Now it seems required, but only for SOME religions.) “Do you believe every word in the Bible?” WAS ONLY ASKED of Republican candidates . . . even though the Dems stump in every Church they can. Not one anti-Christian word from the media to them. C Kitty, you cannot prove one example of hate-filled rhetoric in my responses. Your typical leftie ad hom is all you got. This is not a game being played against Christians. I have a duty and responsibility to love my fellow Christian, and that includes warning them about evil. Oh, Ex-P, prove where Falwell and Dobson have done anything wrong as Christians?



report abuse
 

Bryan

posted January 2, 2008 at 8:26 pm


It is interesting to note that C.S. Lewis-respected writer and Christian thinker-makes brief comment in his book, “Mere Christianity” about mixing Christianity with politics, implying it to be wrong to expect success in force feeding a Christian agenda and values through the government and political arena. However, I believe in a personal conscious approach that, as a Christian, attracts me to the candidate that is most likely to adhere to the moral code that generally speaking all men and women recognize as believers or non-believers, also spoken of by Lewis in the early chapters of his book. I don’t think it unreasonable to believe Christians should follow that recognized moral code that God has supplied all men in casting their vote whether it be for a pastor or non-pastor. Biblically speaking, believers held a wide variety of positions that God used them according to His will, positions ranging from politicians to slaves and wealthy to poor. In that, I believe the individual’s personal motivation is the key. Is Mike Huckabee motivated to be President because he truly believes that to be God’s will in his life, to use that position if attained to bring glory to God in a way that can extend the reach of the gospel, or does he merely have a human agenda? Personally, I believe him to be genuine in his bid for office as someone not trying to force feed his faith but instead following what he believes God has given him in direction. Finally, I support him as a Christian and as someone who is trying to follow the moral code that is universal. I believe his stances are reflective of what moral people, Christian and non-Christians, are looking for and won’t discredit him for simply being forthright in making it known that his foundation is in Christ.



report abuse
 

canucklehead

posted January 2, 2008 at 9:28 pm


“Oh, Ex-P, prove where Falwell and Dobson have done anything wrong as Christians?” Donny
For starters, David had a fairly enlightening vignette in his book on Falwell’s behavior at the post 9-11 memorial service in the National Cathedral. But other than that, you’re probably right, Donny, they’re flawless, and will be admitted to heaven accordingly.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

More blogs to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting J Walking . This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here is another blog you may also enjoy: Inspiration Report Happy Reading!!!

posted 9:36:25am Jul. 06, 2012 | read full post »

Dancing... or drinking through life
I am not even sure that I know how to do a link anymore. I'm giving it a shot though so, three readers, please forgive me if I mess this up. So Rod Dreher's sister is battling cancer. It is nasty. Their faith is extraordinary. Here's his latest post (I think) There are 8 comments on it. As I scrolle

posted 3:05:22pm Mar. 02, 2010 | read full post »

Back...
I'm back here at JWalking after a bit of time because I just want someplace to record thoughts from time to time. I doubt that many of the thoughts will be political - there are plenty upon plenty of people offering their opinions on everything political and I doubt that I have much to add that will

posted 10:44:56pm Mar. 01, 2010 | read full post »

Learning to tell a story
For the last ten months or so I've been engaged in a completely different world - the world of screenwriting. It began as a writing project - probably the 21st Century version of a yen to write the great American novel - a shot at a screenplay. I knew that I knew nothing about the art but was inspir

posted 8:01:41pm Feb. 28, 2010 | read full post »

And just one more
I have, I think, just one more round of chemo left. When I go through my pill popping regimen tomorrow morning it will be the last time for this particular round of drugs. Twenty-three rounds, it seems, is enough. What comes next? We'll go back to what we did after the surgery. We'll watch and measu

posted 11:38:45pm Nov. 18, 2008 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.