Saving the Soul of the Religious Left
by Joseph C. PhillipsA reader recently sent me an email admonishing me for not being more supportive of President Obama. For reasons that were not immediately clear, he also raised the issue of my confessed Christianity. The “aha” moment came when he asked, “Do you pray for your leader like you’re instructed in the good book?” I responded that while I have prayed for the president, I do not do so regularly. That, in his mind, was evidence of my Christian hypocrisy.
This is an elementary school argument, but sadly one that is far too commonly made by the religious left and their secular allies. All Christian stumbling is demonstration of falsity; individual failure to practice principles is ipso facto proof of the bankruptcy of those principles. Sophistry of this sort allows the new left to dismiss ideas they disagree with and evidence they find inconvenient with a simple label: “religious right-wing extremist.” That sure beats actually having to make a substantive argument. What remains unclear is why the regular and unabashed support the religious left offers candidates whose policies are incompatible with or in direct contradiction to Christian principles is not more damning evidence of their Christian hypocrisy.
Aside from the fact that the left takes it as a given that they are both smarter and morally superior– one answer might be that the religious left now preaches moral relativism as opposed to the objective truth of God.
Not long ago I asked a black clergyman about his (and so many others) support for candidates that write and support policy inconsistent with the tenants of Christianity. He responded by asking me, “what are Christian beliefs?” His question was neither rhetorical nor was it an invitation for my definition. Sadly it was his serious contention that the “Bible is not a unitary document but a collection of books. Which one you choose to quote and live by is a result of interpretative choice.” Alas, his explanation seems inconsistent with a Christianity that worships a unified father, son and Holy Spirit; that accepts the bible as the inspired and living word of God; that views the individual books as part of a greater whole with a unity of theme and purpose and that believes the risen Christ is the fulfillment of ALL scripture. To hold that there are no true Christian beliefs just individual opinions–and all of those equally valid-leads me to guess he purchased his diploma cheaply and on-line.
Of course this pastor is only one of many claiming to be independent – choosing their candidates on “the basis of intellect, moral compass, life experiences, sensitivity to ethnic diversity and a commitment to expanding the blessings of liberty” and yet somehow always votes for a Democrat.
The excuse is that the hypocritical religious right – those that pray for his happy retirement and not his political success — are too busy talking about family values and not dealing with the broader moral issues of poverty, injustice and more recently healthcare. Significantly, this has led the religious left away from preaching virtue as the way in which God empowers individuals and towards locking arms with secular leftists that preach the administrative state as the anecdote to man’s falling. For the left, redemption is to be had not through personal sacrifice and struggle, but through the redistribution of resources; not through personal discipline but through mandates for equality. It is not enough to save our neighbor we must work to save the planet.
And yet both spiritual redemption and political liberty are secured through individual virtue. The most important thing Christians can do is influence behavior. To be baptized is to recognize both the truth of the example and the veracity of the instruction book. Whether of the right or left if you are not talking about moral behavior — that is to say behavior that is objectively right or wrong — then you are not going to impact social issues like poverty and injustice.
This is where the religious lefts relativism fails them and those they purport to champion. Issues of personal morality are important not because some of us want to limit others fun, but because some behavior – like some ideas – both undermine those institutions that shelter our liberty, and ultimately (and most importantly) move us further away from the Lord.
And here ultimately is the greatest question the religious left must be prepared to answer. Do we walk by faith in the administrative state? Or do we believe in mans capacity to change his life through the grace and mercy of God?
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
177 Comments
I wonder if your friend prayed regularly for George Bush.
I have this argument with liberals at least twice a month and it always starts out with either I'm being un-Christian or Jesus Christ was the original socialist. I explain to them that I'm not being un-Christian when I fail, I'm being un-Christ like. Christians are only humans who believe that Christ is their savior, but like all humans, prone to failure in their attempt to live up to God's word. Christianity isn't flawed, humanity is, thus the purpose of Christ in the first place. And Jesus was apolitical as politics can't accurately describe the son of God. However, he would be upset with secular people and the religious left who placed the state ahead of God.
When I give these clear and ridiculously obvious arguments, they fall back on even more desperate ad hominem attacks. That's when you know you're winning!
I think Obama needs to pray for me, instead.
I will never understand how a minister can side with a political party that has no use or real belief in christianity……….except when using a congregation for a captive vote hustle or photo op.
Interesting thought provoking article.
"And here ultimately is the greatest question the religious left must be prepared to answer. Do we walk by faith in the administrative state? Or do we believe in mans capacity to change his life through the grace and mercy of God?"
Somewhere I recall hearing the phrase "Faith without works is dead."
Somewhere therein might lie an answer. Or THE answer…….
I'm just not feeling that charitable these day, Joseph. I've been watching these crack-lickers for about 40 years and I'm tired of accomodating them in any way. I was one of them–then I grew up.
I love my enemy (Obama). I'll just love him more when he's not in office.
Although the Bible does tell us to pray for our leaders, there are also many clear examples of people going against oppressive and crooked leaders. To speak out against injustice, immorality in government and oppression, is in its very nature Christian.
In fact, the Apostle Paul frequently butted heads with the Jewish Sanhedrin, and even used his status as a Roman Citizen to appeal to the Roman government after a false arrest, ultimately appealing to Caesar.
John the Baptist lost his head because he preached against the wickedness and immorality of King Herod.
The Apostles Peter and John refused to stop preaching the name of Jesus when ordered by the Jewish authority, telling them, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard." (Acts 4:19-20)
Jesus himself overturned the tables of crooked money changers and drove them out of the temple.
It's also important to note that these examples are all from the New Testament, the same place where we find "Judge not and you will not be judged," and "Turn the other cheek."
The way I see it, there is a time and a season for everything. There is a time to back up the leaders and support them, and a time to vigorously defend our rights as citizens and children of God. In my opinion, now is that time, and there is nothing anti-Christian about calling out the evils of our government.
I also thinks is funny the way liberals are aloud to invoke Scripture and the name of Jesus without having to adhere to any standards of conduct or living, and without being called fanatics. They get a free pass, but if George Bush talks about his faith, he's a crazy right wing religious zealot.
Mr. Phillips, would you please run for some public office? Please? Any office will do. You bring more clarity to important issues than any Democrat and most Republicans!
Nothing to add. Great response Mr. Phillips.
Every day, I pray for individual friends and family members that I know are struggling in various ways, the earthly leadership of my church, the missionaries for said church, the people affected by recent natural disasters, people from countries who are otherwise struggling, such as the Iranian protestors, for those who are missing, as well as their families, for the families of murder victims, and if I'm praying and someone's face pops into my head, I'll pray for them too. Occasionally, when I remember, I'll pray for the President, Congress, and those who offend me or my family.____Even without praying for groups or nations, I'm praying for upwards of 40 or 50 individuals by name every single day. Sometimes, I just simply don't remember them all. I try my best, but the simple fact is, I can't pray for every single person who needs it every single day. My memory is not that amazing. I'm going to forget people, and usually, Obama is the last person on my mind. Falling short does not make me unChristian, it makes me human. We all fall short in some way every single day. That's why we need Christ in the first place.
Beautiful article.
Someone once said to me that socialism and communism are uniquely Christian heresies.
I had to think a lot about that statement, but I think your article helps to bring to light one aspect of truth in that claim: the proper response to Christ's love for us is to love our neighbor and God in imitation. We are called to lay down our lives for one another….but here's the rub, it has to be a free choice! Socialism and communism make sacrifice compulsory and mandated by human beings. God's love elicits a repsonse of self sacrifice, socialism and communism demand it, crushing freedom.
Mr. Phillips, as always you are articulate, succint, clear and knowledgeable. I am going to share this on my Facebook like I usually do. However (and I am NOT being the grammar police here, but if I post this as-is, there are liberals on my friends list who will focus on the two small grammatical issues and not the message itself and use it to say, "See, conservatives can't even write properly."), I wonder if you might be willing to make two small corrections before I do:
1. "Significantly, this has led the religious left away from preaching virtue as the way in which God empowers individuals and towards locking arms with secular leftists that preach the administrative state as the anecdote to man’s falling." I think perhaps you meant "antidote" (something that relieves, prevents, counteracts) instead of "anecdote" (short story or narrative).
2. Last sentence: should be "man's" as it is the possessive form (as in, man (as a species) owns the capacity).
With all respect, thanks.
The Religious Left has to look very deeply into their hearts and answer one question. Ultimately who do they love more Caesar or God. Choose carefully.
“what are Christian beliefs?”
Will someone please tell me why we must all suffer for some of us who refuse to go beyond Philosophy 101? Hey, pretend preacher, Dude, the chair really is a chair and your refusal to acknowledge it as such only makes you look like a kid. Moral relativism is for children unequipped to think beyond their level of maturity and it is for adults unwilling to practice self-restraint.
Marxist Rev Jim Jones is one example of the religious left.
The "religious" left has no soul. They are for the most part Laodiceans. They have no future.
This relativism is, unfortunately, nothing new among many mainstream Christian denominations, namely those with a history of supporting economic liberalism. I can give my own denomination–the Methodists–as an example. This is a branch that has for a long time been active in social causes: alleviating poverty, denouncing greed, combating alcoholism and other vices, etc. In and of itself, of course, this is a perfectly legitimate course of action; the Bible calls us to fight evil in the world, and surely deliberate oppression of the poor is an evil. The crisis came, however, when some in the church despaired of realizing their goals on their own and turned to the government as a new means. This led to the "Social Gospel" movement, in which Methodists were prominent, and which advocated a kind of utopian Christian socialism–a new phase which inevitably turned to plain socialism, under the label of Progressivism. This was still a very moralizing Christian Left, but one which battled economic inequalities in the name of "social justice." As a result, other aspects of morality fell by the wayside, making it easier for moral relativism to enter into the church.
The evidence of this development is obvious. My Sunday School teacher last Sunday condemned the narrow-mindedness of those who believe that Christ is the only way to heaven. I have frequently heard laymen in the church advocate interventionist measures such as a living wage, and our hymnals even include a so-called "Mother Earth prayer." And let's not forget, Hillary Clinton was a Sunday School teacher herself for years. The same story can be found to varying degrees among the Lutherans, the Anglicans, the Catholics, the Presbyterians, etc. The juxtaposition of Christianity with liberalism/socialism is, sad to say, a very common occurrence within modern-day churches.
I am, admittedly, an avout atheist, yet I find the faux-faith of Leftist America to be absurd and insulting – they are nothing more than "whatever and ever amen" Sunday believers, at best, and purely for political gain. Their hypocracy knows no bounds
Everyone has a God/god, some are their own god, some are searching for gods and some are waiting for God!! God/gods are symbols of validation, even evil searches for one to validate it, many are false, one is not!!!
"individual failure to practice principles is ipso facto proof of the bankruptcy of those principles."
individual failure to practice principles that aren't derived from Christianity are considered inferior by your ilk, my friend which sets you up for failing to be "holier than thou."
"are too busy talking about family values and not dealing with the broader moral issues of poverty, injustice and more recently healthcare."
This is the part of the article that resonated most with me, and where I think many people mess up. As I've said on many articles in the past, I'm a liberal but I come here because I think its important to find the reasonable people who will test your beliefs. The first step for people on the left or on the right should realize is that both sides are genuinely well intended (and i dont mean the few sound-bite artists from both sides who outright lie to their advantage), theres just a fundamental difference in how these moral issues should be dealt with.
"Leftist America." Well, that sounds like millions of people who are extremely liberal. "Purely for political gain." That sounds like a bunch of hypocritical politicians.
Well, "leftist America" doesn't have a lot of faux-faith or real faith. The faux/real faith lies in those who lean left of center. Not exactly leftist, but closer to the middle of the road Americans.
But, "purely for political gain"? Are we talking about every day folk. Or politicians. You're not clear.
Consider it done.
is it really a surprise? Wasn't the first form of "big government" large unruly churches?
be it for obama or bush the whole argument is false. I mean, wasn't the pharaoh also a leader? seems to me that the last thing the good book would encourage is blind allegiance.
So far as I can tell, Leftist Christianity has only one commandment: "Thou shalt not be judgemental," and only one sin: hypocrisy. So anyone who challenges the assumption that tolerance is not the supreme value of Christianity must therefore be a judgemental hypocite.
Yeah, it's a circular argument, and requires zero brain-power; but being Liberal means never having to do your homework.
My observation is that, for Progressives, nothing else is required BUT stated good intentions.
And I'm sure many of them would say the same thing about conservatives. My only point is that the second you start assuming people are right or wrong, moral or immoral, based on their ideology is the second you stop looking into ideas critically.
sorry about that, meant for it go one higher.
"not a unitary document but a collection of books. Which one you choose to quote and live by is a result of interpretative choice."
Oh.My.Word. Cafeteria Christianity at its most jawdropping.
I suppose this is how one can claim Christ without actually obeying him.
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's. The religious left likes to overlook the second part of that sentence.
although the belief may be more "real" on the right (I wish you could hear how condescending that sounds, but whatever), don't fool yourself that right doesn't use it for their political gain also.
Practicing principles derived from Christianity is reasonable if one has been raised a Christian. There are some belief systems which are infeior to Christianity. Two I can think of right away are inferior because they advocate human sacrifice and murder: Ancient Mayan religions and Islam.
[...] the original post: Saving the Soul of the Religious Left This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
I hate the "Christ was the first socialist" argument! Nothing could be further from the truth! Christ expects us to personally care for the poor and downtrodden, not rely on a government program to do it for us.
Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
Ephesians 2:8-9 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."
I also wanted to add that Christians are also instructed to not only pray for their leaders, but for their enemies as well.
I agree!
Thats painting with amazingly broad strokes. There are plenty of people on the left who are religious. They just don't usually get the press. To call even some of these people laodicean totally undercuts the possibility that they just have a misguided interpretation, or just an interpretation that doesn't agree with you.
I encourage you to look up a jewish concept, "Tikkun Olam." Many people I've known have taken this concept to mean that they act in accordance to a sense of morality and justice, they just don't feel it is right to force that on others. When you begin from the presumption that people don't feel strongly in the moral conviction, just because they don't share your principles, you in fact are in fact prejudging a large segment of people.
A fair point, i stand corrected.
Even if your premise that Christians consider non-Christian principles inferior were true, that still doesn't mean that Christian principles are bankrupt just because Christians at times fall short of perfect obedience to said principles.
in all honesty I doubt the socialists see it this way. They probably see their consent to a socialist system as the sacrifice they choose.
When quoting Mathew 7, people always stop at verse 1, when the point is made in verse 2.
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."
I don't think liberals get a free pass, because we ALL will ultimately have to answer for our deeds hear on earth. Some of us have already accepted the payment that was made on our behalf and will get our free pass then, while others…
Yes, very true. I'm reading Arthur C. Brooks' book "Who Really Cares", and his research into charitable giving shows that for Progressives, a belief that the government should take care of everyone replaces actual charitable giving and personal sacrifice (whether or not the goverment is actually taking care of social problems).
Very true.
It's like using corrupt Enron executives as proof that capitalism promotes deceit and greed.
well if theres one thing my time in peace corps taught me its that charitable groups usually don';t work either. Largely because the people who give the money have expectations that are different from the people who actually need help. Point in fact, the only form of organization that has an incentive to respond to those they provide value to is a business. Or put simpler, a charitable foundation can only stay in business so long as people are dependent on their help. So it is to their advantage to make people dependent.
All this being said, and I only say this from my own extremely limited scope of experience, the people who during my service, were also in the peace corps and other missions, were largely liberal. So i suspect that that one statistic is only a small piece of the puzzle.
I am never more stymied than when confronted with a person who professes to be a "Christian" in one breath, and then goes on to defend immoral behavior as a "right." Clearly, to me, it isn't a God-given right, so who is giving it? Society? The Government? The Devil? Aliens?
In a 2009 blog post, Pastor Eric Redmond perfectly summed up why Black Christians often support liberal candidates who loathe their faith and values:
"Syncretism" is a fancy word used to describe the blending of different, and often incompatible, systems of religious and philosophical belief. The syncretistic practice of Christianity within the traditional African American church is well known, and in some settings cherished. The line between Christianity and secular African American culture is not blurred; it does not exist.
On the positive side, some sociologists and historians have suggested that, historically, this is due to the inseparability of the slave church and slave culture. African American slaves were able to survive the brutality of antebellum slavery due to their Christian faith, and the slave church was the rallying and unifying point of the slave community.
(cont.)
Negatively, however, the gray matter of African American Christianity is most evident in the democratic process of presidential elections. Consequently, last November the thinking probably went something like this:
My Christian position on the life of the unborn and the biblical teaching on marriage have no place in my decision-making when it comes to the election of a President. He is African American, I am African American; nothing else matters.
http://www.urbanfaith.com/2009/10/this-aint-it.ht...
Im not sure I follow your argument, can you give me an example of such immoral behavior?
Here is a famous quote from "Letters from a Birmingham Jail" by Dr. King that further strengthens your argument:
There was a time when the church was very powerful–in the time when the early Christians rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Whenever the early Christians entered a town, the people in power became disturbed and immediately sought to convict the Christians for being "disturbers of the peace" and "outside agitators."' But the Christians pressed on, in the conviction that they were "a colony of heaven," called to obey God rather than man. Small in number, they were big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be "astronomically intimidated." By their effort and example they brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contests.
(cont.)
Things are different now. So often the contemporary church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. So often it is an archdefender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church's silent–and often even vocal–sanction of things as they are.
But the judgment of God is upon the church as never before. If today's church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century.
http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_B...
So now that we know that god is the solve providence of faithful republicans I would like to remind you that this is the same kind of thought that leads idiotic liberals to think that any conservative opinion is uneducated and inherently racist just because it is conservative. Both their, and your points are absurd.
Religious & left are a contradiction of terms.
Well, I sort of did. I couldn't think of the exact verse, but I said something to that effect, but then the teacher and everyone else got to talking about how that just turned everyone off and made us seem so self-righteous, as though that justified mangling Scripture.
Joseph I am an avowed agnostic. I was raised Catholic. I have found in my adult life that there are many Christians, such as yourself that describe religion and belief in such a beautiful way, it almost gets me into Church.
Seriously. Your piece is beautiful and exactly spot on.
The left is doing what Hitler did – using Christianity in order to destroy it. They are no more "Christian" than my heathen of a husband. In fact, he's more Christian than any of them and he's never been baptized.
Keep up the good work.
Practicing principles that are sound and moral, yet derived from outside of religion, aren't necessarily inferior, due to their not belonging to a commonly accepted religious-based (and cherry-picked) source.
Some argue that you can't have sound and moral principles that aren't derived from a centuries-revered source (i.e. The Bible), because those very secular principles are subject to the fluidity of changing times.
I argue that the selective nature of those who use the Bible as their source of their principles is subject to the fluidity of changing times. Hence, the term "cherry-picking." What was once considered unholy by many is now commonly accepted as normal and even sometimes good. (like divorce, for example; not that divorce represents anything remotely good, but in instances where the marriage is toxic, unhealthy and beyond repair, yes, divorce is better than marriage.)
I believe in the common sense my parents taught me and knowing the difference between right and wrong. Namely, killing is wrong unless it's self-defense or war-related (I guess as long it's our side that's doing it). Having sexual relations with someone outside of informed and mature consent is wrong. Killing animals out of the sheer pleasure of watching them die (READ: this does NOT include hunting for food) is wrong. Of course, this can all get subjective really fast. But, I'd rather have an intelligent conversation about what is wrong in society without anyone convoluting the subject matter with a religious (READ: any religion) agenda.
You can open the Bible (or the Koran or whatever) and find many things listed that are wrong. Some things are. Some things aren't. Some things were once used to be and now are not. That's what I'm trying to say.
I said that if one religious sect (of any belief) is judgmental of those who who derive their principles from non-religious means (common sense, knowing the basic difference between right and wrong), they are setting themselves up for criticism. An argument the judging religious sect may use after failing to adhere to their own standards is often, "At least I hold myself up to SOME standard." It's a judgmental response that accuses secular types of not having any standards because their don't subscribe to their specific, religious-based beliefs. This is a fallacy, because one does not need to belong to a religious group to hold themselves accountable to standards.
"To hold that there are no true Christian beliefs just individual opinions and all of those equally valid-leads me to guess he purchased his diploma cheaply and on-line."
Well, that's what they're teaching at Harvard and Berkeley and all those other "prestigious" universities around the country. He may have got it at any one of those.
Or what's worse–a "liberal" seminary. Oxymoron, contradiction in terms and all that.
TESTIFY BROTHER!!!!!!! (or is it sister?)
Another very good article.
As a believer in Christ as my Saviour, I often fail in praying not only for our leaders, but for my loved ones as well. I may fail, but God never fails! All I can do is keep trying to follow God's Word, all of it.
Psalm 109:8 "Let his days be few; and let another take his office."
Mr. Phillips, I find this post very encouraging. Thank you. I had a conversation recently with friends on the Christian Left, and I was so discouraged by their perspective. I felt alone in this feeling, but your post reminded me that I am not! I find the "social justice" movement to be so misleading. The things they advocate for (public option, for instance) don't even directly target the poor, but the middle class (tax payers) benefits the most. Since when was the middle class "the least of these?" Advocating wealth distribution by force and threat of imprisonment is inconsistent with Christian teaching. Christians are called to give as each has need, not secular federal gov'ts. We as citizens must argue for legislation based on a consensus document – the Constitution. It's also interesting to note how many of these leaders of the Christian Left denounce the "evil" free market and the decadence of capitalism, yet make a living selling their books on amazon.com. These are just neo-televangelists. The old ones wore three piece suits, these guys want your credit card numbers wearing birkenstocks and Che t-shirts.
Practicing self-restraint is the point. Looked at a certian way, the Bible is all about self restraint. Love your enemy, Instead of nailing him to somthing and draging his guts out with a red-hot iron hook. Treat others the way you would like to be treated, instead of being vile and hurtful for no reason. (no I am not trying to send you on a guilt trip)
Oh, and if you want to compare the contridictions between the old testament and the new, the smartest guy I ever personaly met, explained it like this- "When Jesus came, he changed the rules."
I am a child of the 80's. I have a great mistrust of religion to this day – But I have FAITH. It's a story I won't go into here but without it, I would have died of excess long ago. It may not be comfortable to you, and that's ok. It is MY truth and a truth shared by many, many people.
God's not a Republican, Aaron. But He sure as HEAVEN ain't a liberal.
Your moral relativism is showing. To assume that both sides are "well intended" is to equivocate. "Intention" is a relativist term. An individual's "action" or "behavior" measured against an absolute value or truth is how "truth" is measured. "Intentions" are just a subjective means of excusing immoral or evil behaviors.
Thats my point, he's neither. And the second everyone accepts that we can get on to actually addressing moral issues rather than owning them.
We're going to have to agree to disagree on that one. When I speak of intention I speak of it as a binary off or on state. This is simply in regards to what i believe to be a false statement when someone claims that when someone attempts to work on a moral issue they aren't addressing the issue but merely consolidating power.
Yet another great article Mr. Phillips. Actually sent this to my friends and posted on my facebook page. Thank you!!!!
…. and this article belongs on the 'hollywood' site…. why ??
Excellent article Mr. Phillips! Being a college student on a seminary campus it is so encouraging to see people other than pastors and seminary trained believers speak with such clarity and effectiveness as you have on this issue. God bless you, Joe.
I have no idea how anyone who takes their religion seriously can remain on the left. I used to be on the left. Trust me, the atheists run the show. They look down on you as borderline sub-human if you're a Christian. They literally want to destroy Christianity. And I'm not exaggerating in the slightest. Christianity in their view is the #1 obstacle to their idea of progress in the world. I should know. I used to be part of that ideological movement.
The left only tones down their anti-Christian bigotry when they want to win votes from people they privately deem to be retarded morons. And some pretend to be religious in order to gain poliical power and move up the social ladder. Obama being a good example. I'm not a "birther", but it's probably likely that Obama grew up as a Muslim or as an agnostic who didn't take religion very seriously. He then probably chose that radical black nationalist Marxist church lead by Mr. Wright, not because he's a devout Christian, but because he agreed with their activism and wanted to make inroads into the local area.
Good for you! You know, I used to be sort of like that. I'd water things down a little so as not to seem pushy or offensive, to the point where I was almost apologetic about believing the things I do. But then I realized that, in trying so hard to not offend everybody else, I was offending my Savior by not standing up for Him and His teachings. Christ was extremely concerned about the feelings of those around Him, but He spoke bluntly about the Gospel. He didn't water anything down, and just left it up to the people to decide for themselves what they wanted to believe. I think we all need to learn to be more like that.
Hence the saying, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." It's one thing to intend to do good, but it's something else entirely to actually do some good.
What exactly do you mean? Like, abortion? Or what?
I read an article full of quotes by some of the Acorn people who worked with Obama back in Illinois. It was actually meant to be a puff piece, but it was full of interesting information, such as the fact that he wasn't religious in the slightest when he came to them. The problem was, many of the people he was trying to ingratiate himself with were, and so the Acorn staff pushed him to find a church to attend so that he could relate to the people better. It also helped when he was running for office. Several of the anecdotes and direct quotes referenced this. According to them, at least, you're spot-on.
I have never understood the Christain Left. While their government programs on poverty have such a "Christain" ring to them, in the end, it ultimately benefits only those in power, robs Christains of their hard earned money that they could use for real Christain purposes, and ultimately leads to atheists governments that ban Bibles.
My Sunday School teacher last Sunday condemned the narrow-mindedness of those who believe that Christ is the only way to heaven.
I hope somebody raised their hand and suggested he read John 14:6 aloud to the class.
And what do socialists do to those citizenry that don't consent? Reeducation camps?
By praying for someone, be it a leader or otherwise, doesn't equate with blind allegiance! Just saying.
Great article. Well written. I have the same issues with my current church. I called several churches recently to ask if the minister had made any statement regarding taxpayer funding of abortion. One church secretary said to me "oh, we wouldn't do that. Our congregants don't like being told what to do." I am currently looking for a church–not one that teaches fire and brimstone–that does not teach the gospels of Namby and Pamby.
Interesting. But, if you have a capitalistic system that operates under in entirely different political world that doesn't have Enron-type executives to begin with, it makes one wonder.
(And why stop at Enron, when you can throw Anthem Blue Cross into the mix? Not the same level of corruption, definitely, but deceitful and greedy none-the-less.)
If you are on the left, it is more than abundantly clear you cannot be a Christian. The Word of God dictates morality and the norm of how societies SHOULD be….the left refuses this and prefers its own moral code. Therefore, based simply on the true Word of God, a leftist cannot be a Christian.
"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." (John 3:3)
Excellent Post Mr. Phillips!!!
We need to ask our lefty Christians if when Scripture speaks of helping the poor, is it the Church that God is adressing or the Government in which the "Lefty Christians" want to slough off thier "responsibilities to?
I agree…great article. One other correction…I think it should be "tenets" of Christianity, not "tenants". I see this one all the time (like antidote/anecdote).
Because Mr. Phillips is an actor and a conservative…a rare breed in Hollywood. This is a venue for him to encourage us that some folks in Southern California share our beliefs and views. If I'm not mistaken, that was one of the original purposes of Big Hollywood.
Let me help you clear that up so you do not have to think too much more about it. Communism , that includes socialism, is a nihilistic atheistic political economic philosophy which has as one of its tenets to destroy all religious belief and replace the focus of faith on the state. Hiltler and national socialism, in kind, sought to destroy Christianity along with the Jews and thier God within the first 100 years of the third reich. Yeah, you might say it is a heresy..ya think?
Let's cut the to the chase..here. The Left does not give a rats a$$ about your christian-judeo beliefs but see them as an impediment in bringing about thier socialisic statist society. People like the reverend are considered useful idiots to be expolited in the pursuit of the leftist agenda. As long as the rev lets himself be used he will be useful in rounding up all the other useful idiots for the purpose of ultimately destroying all religious belief and setting forth the worship of the state and the collective. Please educate yourself. Start by reading, Liberal Fascism, by Jonah Goldberg. Odd thing about these discussions..people act like this is an undefinable or ambiguos subject matter. It is not. Read the literature and history of the left and you will know what they are up to and what they believe… in thier own words.
God bless you, Sarah.
It's very easy to be generous with someone else's money.
there are many socialist governments that don't engage in such practices. I'm not at all saying socialism is better, I'm just saying let's at least be accurate.
actually, while similar, by a strict definition, socialism is a different economic system than communism. As far as your belief that socialism is inherently atheistic i would like to mention that sweden has a freedom of religion law and venezuela is 96% roman catholic. So that isn't necessarily true.
I do pray for the President. Specifically, that God will grant him repentance and that he will turn from his lust for power, chronic dishonesty, and his habit of stoking the fires of greed, envy, and racial discord. I pray that he will live with the recognition that he will be called to account for all that he does, whether good or bad.
Here is the cite [1 Timothy 2]
I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
And also at Romans 13 1-7.
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
For those of you who do not speak King James, the Apostle is telling us to obey authorities ("powers), pay our taxes ("tribute, custom"), and salute the flag ("honour").
St. Paul has a similar passage where he tells women to be subject to their husbands, even if the husband is pagan, that is, so that the Christian cannot be accused of being a revolutionary, or disobedient to civil authority (except in cases where the civil authority commands disobedience to God, whereupon disobedience to civil authority is mandatory).
This is one principle that distinguishes the Christian rather sharply from the Mohammedan, which is just as much a political party as a religious movement, and preaches both Jihad and Sharia.
"May the Lord bless and keep President Obama… Keep him far away from us!"
~ Paraphrased frome the Rabbi's blessing for the Czar in "Fiddler on the Roof"
Very insightful. Love your work (have the article describing what heaven is like on my refrigerator).
Jesus Christ was the original socialist
There's that liberation theology again. As I understand the
opinionargument is that the totality of Jesus' teachings against injustice far out weigh his teachings against violence.You must be logged in to post a comment.