Concerning the Religious Right, from Philip Yancey in The Jesus I Never Knew - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-29-2002, 03:28 AM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
theSoulfulMofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 4,490
Local Time: 07:11 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Achtung Bubba
[B]I think it's accurate to compare special rights for gays to affirmative action - that they are the same idea applied to two different groups.

They're both wrong.
Ok. Typical right-wing stance. I'm not gonna bother arguing about this.

Quote:
The government has based its prohibitions of murder and prostitution on - among other things - the Bible. I believe that the government is right to do so, and that the biblical prohibitions against such acts have not been corrupted.

Certainly, we can go too far, trying to make all immoral acts illegal - making murder AND hate illegal in this physical world because they are both wrong in the spiritual realm.

But that's only a case of going TOO FAR. Making murder AND hatred illegal is a bad idea. Legalizing both is equally imprudent.
Uh... mmm... it might just be me, but isn't killing kinda a universally know thing that it's usually dead-on WRONG!?!!


Quote:
I agree here that our actions matter for a great deal, but there are some theological truths (the Resurrection being a MAJOR truth) that cannot be expressed by merely acting charitably.

We must preach.
Did I see you holding a "Jesus is coming" at my liberal arts campus and talking fire and brimestone on everyone?

(Sorry, that was indeed a low blow.)

Quote:
Jesus ministered to others - healing the sick, feeding the hungry, and offering Himself to redeem all of us. But He also preached, and preached EXTENSIVELY. He taught through the Sermon on the Mount and some seventeen recorded parables.

Peter preached (Acts 2:14-36), and Paul preached (Acts 13:16-41).
Yes, Jesus did preach. Though at the time, most disciples and followers didn't fully understand what he was saying (all this I recently read in *coughYANCEYcough*).. and that it took more than half a century later or something til they could figure out how to write out the Gospels.

Quote:
Granted, there are effective ways and ineffective ways to preach, but we ARE to preach the Gospel; the suggestion that we shouldn't is not biblically based.
If we're gonna argue about whether it's Biblical to preach or not, we're gonna have to discuss (someothertimeplease) what it means to preach and how to do so.

Quote:
I believe that there have been Christians who wrongly believed slavery was endorsed by the Bible, and the Ku Klux Klan does claim to be Christian, but so what?
Wha? ... so you can get away with such comeback and I can't?

Quote:
I think the abolition of slavery is a VERY just cause, and obviously so. And I think Christian organizations were right to support the cause of abolition: they were at least doing their civic duty, and I believe they were probably doing the will of God.
Noooo.... really?

I wonder how long it actually took for them to come around with that idea in their head? Mmmm... the middle passage was around 1600s I'm guessing... and 200 years later.... hmmm... how bout those slaves? Maybe we should set 'em free literally


Quote:
Are you actually saying that slavery is, in certain conditions, morally acceptable? That it was the "oppression and abuse" that made slavery a sin in the 1800's, and not just the fact that one man OWNED another?
Too lazy to look in my Bible... but there is a place in Paul's Epistles I believe, where Paul tells everyone how to take their social role and treat others, including slaves.

Quote:
Certainly, those treating their slaves well were much better people than those who did not. But the institution itself was still wrong - and I believe many abolitionists were not just trying to allay their own consciences; they were also opposing a great injustice.
Hmmm... again, 200 years til Emancipation... another 100 years til civil rights.... man, humans are sloooow in the brain, huh?

Quote:
Even if slavery was murky enough to most citizens, there WERE those who willfully fought against it. Of those who did, many did so because their Christian faith led them to the conclusion that it was an immoral institution.
Like I said earlier, I was about incoherent at this time, because I was tired and hungry... I'll admit I was wrong, if you admit you're insensitive

Quote:
Whether today's political movements for secularism, relativism, and hedonism should be fought with a Christian political movement is one thing: what you seem to be suggesting is that there should be NO Christian political movements.

If that IS true, then Christian organizations were wrong to push for the abolition of slavery in the 1800's and civil rights in the 1960s.
I'll keep my stance short and simple: Issues concerning human rights in America should take the political route. Issues concerning morals and values should take the spiritual route. Otherwise, in my perspective, religious right is indeed wasting their time and energy.

Quote:
No, but it DOES seem to be the logical conclusion of what you're suggesting. If we are "to love and serve your neighbors, rather than putting up laws as electric fences," then there are no good Christian political movements.
Again, your "logical conclusion" doesn't taste very good when you stuff them in my mouth. And yes, there is no "good" Christian political movements, because (my only Bible quote in this thread) we "ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." [Romans 3:23] There can be nothing perfect in any institution created by man's hands.

Quote:
If there are no good Christian political movements, then the Christian political movement to abolish slavery was also not a bad idea.
You being facetious with me?
__________________

__________________
theSoulfulMofo is offline  
Old 07-29-2002, 04:46 AM   #17
Refugee
 
Achtung Bubba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: One Nation. Under God.
Posts: 1,513
Local Time: 09:11 PM
I am in no way trying to put words into your mouth.

You brought up the religious right (in the topic of this thread) and quoted Yancey: "Is our first aim to change the external political kingdom or to further God's transcendent kingdom? In a nation like the U.S., the two easily get confused."

I asked, "what is the specific complaint against the religious right?"

You replied, and I quote, "My main indifferent criticism on the religious right is their attempt to Christianize a nation of physical entity, which in this case is the U.S."

I then asked, "what actions are the religious specifically taking to Christianize the United States?"

Youre response: "Religious right in the U.S. pushing laws against homosexual rights and abortion... in the name of God, so to speak."

My replies have followed from these quotes; I'm not trying to put words in your mouth.


It's just that some of the things you've written are, well, a bit odd.

You called opposition to affirmative action a "typical right-wing stance" that you're "not gonna bother arguing about," when I demonstrated that MARTIN LUTHER KING preached a color-blind society.

Other things...

Quote:
Uh... mmm... it might just be me, but isn't killing kinda a universally know thing that it's usually dead-on WRONG!?!!
No, it isn't. You object to the "Religious right in the U.S. pushing laws against... abortion... in the name of God, so to speak."

If the foetus IS a human life, abortion IS murder.

Quote:
Yes, Jesus did preach. Though at the time, most disciples and followers didn't fully understand what he was saying (all this I recently read in *coughYANCEYcough*).. and that it took more than half a century later or something til they could figure out how to write out the Gospels.
So what? He still preached, something you don't think we should be do: "We shouldn't be preaching the Gospel. We should be LIVIN' IT!"

(One wonders how one can "live" the truth that Jesus was God Incarnate, fully human and fully divine, who lived a sinless life, was crucified, and rose from the dead.)

Quote:
If we're gonna argue about whether it's Biblical to preach or not, we're gonna have to discuss (someothertimeplease) what it means to preach and how to do so.
Like I said, "there are effective ways and ineffective ways to preach." How to preach is a worthwhile discussion.

However, what it means to preach is pretty simple: telling others that Jesus Christ is the resurrected Son of God who died for our sins, that belief in Him allows us to enjoy eternal life with the Father.

And I'm not arguing "whether it's biblical to preach or not." I'm asserting it as fact: PREACHING THE GOSPEL IS BIBLICAL. I see no room for an argument on this.

Quote:
Noooo.... really?

I wonder how long it actually took for them to come around with that idea in their head? Mmmm... the middle passage was around 1600s I'm guessing... and 200 years later.... hmmm... how bout those slaves? Maybe we should set 'em free literally

...

Hmmm... again, 200 years til Emancipation... another 100 years til civil rights.... man, humans are sloooow in the brain, huh?
An irrelevancy. It's terrible that it took so long for this nation to realize its immoral institution, act on the realization, and "finish the job." But Christian organizations were still right to push for the abolition of slavery and to support the civil rights movement.

Quote:
Like I said earlier, I was about incoherent at this time, because I was tired and hungry... I'll admit I was wrong, if you admit you're insensitive
I'm not sure where I was insensitive. Explain, and I might apologize.

Quote:
I'll keep my stance short and simple: Issues concerning human rights in America should take the political route. Issues concerning morals and values should take the spiritual route. Otherwise, in my perspective, religious right is indeed wasting their time and energy.
If THAT'S the case, your quotes from Yancey and Peck seem irrelevant. Those quotes - in the context they are in and with the emphasis you give them - give the impression that the church should never take "the political route."

More than that, it is very hard (I suspect impossible) to completely separate human rights and morality. Every human right has an equivalent moral mandate: for example, the right to free speech implies a moral mandate to allow others to speak.

Finally, if you DO think that religious groups have the right to take the political route in issues concerning human rights, why complain about their opposition to abortion?

Quote:
Again, your "logical conclusion" doesn't taste very good when you stuff them in my mouth. And yes, there is no "good" Christian political movements, because (my only Bible quote in this thread) we "ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." [Romans 3:23] There can be nothing perfect in any institution created by man's hands.
There can't be a perfect political movement, truly, but that doesn't mean that religious organizations should stay out of political movements. And the same argument (that nothing's perfect) could be used to say the we shouldn't try "livin' the Gospel."

Finally - I've been saving this quote - concerning the Bible and slavery:

Quote:
Too lazy to look in my Bible... but there is a place in Paul's Epistles I believe, where Paul tells everyone how to take their social role and treat others, including slaves.
There is. But what's your point? That the Bible condones slavery?

The passage, I believe is in Paul's letter to the church at Ephesus:

Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ. - Ephesians 6:5.

This doesn't condone slavery - any more than Christ's command to turn the other cheek condones the act of striking another person. It is, I believe, a command to do the right thing despite the injustices of the world. It is NOT a suggestion that slavery is actually just.

How can I say that? Let's continue the passage:

Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.

Essentially, Paul is asserting that all Christians are equal in the eyes of God. He asserts this time and again.

For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. - 1 Corinthians 12:13.

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. - Galatians 3:28.

Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all. - Colossians 3:9-11.

Certainly, there is no explicit attempt at abolishing slavery here, but planted are the seeds of ideas that would undermine it utterly - seeds that grew into the idea that slavery is utterly wrong and should be opposed politically.

OF COURSE, the change of hearts that the Gospel of Jesus Christ has brought about has been far more important than any political action, but that doesn't mean that political actions are always unnecessary or (worse) detrimental: they can often be the final culmination of a societal change of heart. Poltical movements can be the fruits by which a Christian nation can be known.
__________________

__________________
DISCLAIMER: The author of the preceding is known
for engaing in very long discussions.
Achtung Bubba is offline  
Old 07-29-2002, 05:37 AM   #18
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
theSoulfulMofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 4,490
Local Time: 07:11 PM
Normal It's late... I'm tired... I'm done... with this thread.

To straighten out the record, ... I really don't have any animosity toward the religious right ... It's just that they annoy me sometimes with what they say and do. When I talked about being "indifferent", it's just my feelings toward politics... I have no faith in politics, liberal or conservative.

And no, I'm not going to go into further detail or discussion.

And don't bother responding, because I'm not coming back to this thread again.... unless you among others are just gonna gripe about what a wack job I am...
__________________

__________________
theSoulfulMofo is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com