Nasty Christians who care less about Poverty than they do gay marraige...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
it would be a better country, and world, if he were to become the face of American Christianity rather than Fallwell, Robertson, Dobson and, yes, W.

sounds like a very admirable person. you're lucky to have him so close.
 
Yup, I have a lot of time for Rick and have found "The Purpose Driven Life" an excellent book that has helped to sort out some priorities in my life more thoughtfully. Didn't know that about what he did with his money but am not surprised. "40 Days of purpose" has had quite an impact here locally and around Australia as far as I can gather.
 
Irvine511 said:
it would be a better country, and world, if he were to become the face of American Christianity rather than Fallwell, Robertson, Dobson and, yes, W.

I couldn't agree more. He's a great guy.
 
That was seriously impressive to hear. I've read some of PDL and wasn't really too crazy about it. Nice to hear this great stuff about him though. :)
 
As far as I'm concerned, the jury is still out on Rick Warren. For one thing, Saddleback is (or was) a member church of the Southern Bapist Convention. It's a typical, conservative evangelical church right in the middle of a major stronghold for conservative Christians. As for Warren, if it looks like a duck.....
 
Those terms (conservative evangelical) seem to be pretty negatively loaded terms these days in USA. My guess is the kind of christians you would think of when you say conservative evangelical would consider Rick Warren to be a raving liberal lunitic. If they met Jesus in his day they may well have thought the same.
 
pub crawler said:
As far as I'm concerned, the jury is still out on Rick Warren. For one thing, Saddleback is (or was) a member church of the Southern Bapist Convention. It's a typical, conservative evangelical church right in the middle of a major stronghold for conservative Christians. As for Warren, if it looks like a duck.....

As someone who's a member, you couldn't be more wrong.

The main priorities in our church are helping the poor, helping in rehans of about 30 varieties, and routinely sending help to AIDS clinics in Africa.

You're welcome to come see for yourself, or you can continue to display your ignorance.
 
It's some conservative evangelicals I don't like, not all of them. I don't like the types who dwell on negativity, and complain about all the stuff they are against, and never talk about the stuff they like. For example, this political nut in my state who wants to ban the gay books. Or the fundamentalists who claim that Catholicism is a Satanic cult. Plenty of decent evangelicals believe that certain things are a sin but they're not on hate trips. There's a difference. The ones who are mainly positive people are cool. The ones who are always complaining are something else.
 
NotAnEasyThing said:
Those terms (conservative evangelical) seem to be pretty negatively loaded terms these days in USA. My guess is the kind of christians you would think of when you say conservative evangelical would consider Rick Warren to be a raving liberal lunitic. If they met Jesus in his day they may well have thought the same.

The one quote that always sticks with me about Rick, is when during a sermon one week he said something along the lines of "People ask me what I think Jesus would be doing if he came back today, I'm convinced he'd be working in an AIDS clinic.."

Typical evangelical this Church is not.

We recently set out to feed all of the homeless in OC for 6 weeks, and pretty much achieved that through food drives, donations, food deliveries, standing outside grocery stores asking people to buy food, etc.

Rick is the real deal, he cares more about helping the homeless and the poor than anyone I've ever met.
 
cardosino said:
Typical evangelical this Church is not.

Actually, it is. It just doesn't fit the stereotype purpetuated in the press.

Rick is an excellent speaker and teacher. He is always careful to tie his statements to many Scripture references.
 
nbcrusader said:


Actually, it is. It just doesn't fit the stereotype purpetuated in the press.

Hence it is not "typical" in the context in which it is being discussed in this forum.
 
I'm never comfortable with evangelical people. That doesn't mean that none of them do good things, many do, but their evangelical bent always makes me wary.

This guy seems to be putting his money where his mouth is, but I can't gush too much as, rightly or wrongly, I'm always waiting for the scandel (which I do realize may never come).
 
Fallwell, Robertson, and Dobson are an embarassment to Christians everywhere. Their bombastic rhetoric is disgusting and I wish the media wouldnt seek out their idiotic opinons when major distaters/significant events occur.

Alister Begg, John Piper, or Warren would represent the christian viewpoint far more effectively and graciously.

Man...I wish C.S. Lewis was still alive. Could you imagine him on Larrry King or Meet the Press.
 
Christian tv last weekend

On News Year Eve the Catholic station had a rosary service for the victims and on New Years Day there was a memorial service. I thought that it was nice and it was the first time I've seen a rosary service in 20 years.
The other christian stations had shows on Armagedon and how rock and roll is satantic. I found the rock and roll one funny because they were saying things like how the Beatles are devil worshippers. Nothing on the Asian tradegy instead it was how everyone is going to hell.
I had the flu last weekend and there wasn't much on t.v. I'm not into organized religon since my dad was protesant and my mom was a Catholic.
 
Irvine511 said:
how about W? is he an embarassment to Christians?

(that's not meant to antagonize, i'm really curious.)

He's an embarassment to people from many walks of life I'd think.
 
cardosino said:


As someone who's a member, you couldn't be more wrong.

The main priorities in our church are helping the poor, helping in rehans of about 30 varieties, and routinely sending help to AIDS clinics in Africa.

You're welcome to come see for yourself, or you can continue to display your ignorance.

And I'm betting I'm not as ignorant as you think me to be, cardosino.

I know a bit out Saddleback's history -- hell, I even attended a Sunday morning service there several years ago -- and Saddleback was (and is still?) in fact a member congregation of the very conservative Southern Baptist Convention, though Saddleback certainly has never made much effort to put that fact in their publicity material.

Nevertheless, I just googled Saddleback and read an article from summer of 2004 stating that Saddleback would probably break ties with the SBC because Saddleback was intending to align itself with the Baptist World Alliance, which is apparently a bit too liberal for the tastes of the folks in SBC leadership. I wonder if your church ever did split from the SBC. http://www.biblicalrecorder.org/content/news/2004/6_1_2004/ne010604southern.shtml

Look, I give Warren credit for even talking about the AIDS epidemic, let alone the fact that his church is putting resources toward the problem. I can guarantee you that this is rare among conservative evangelical churches. By the way, you'll note that in the article I've referenced above, Warren himself describes Saddleback as "conservative theologically." Though he adds that his church is "radical when it comes to methodology." To Warren's claim that his church does "radical methodology," I say great. I hope that actually means something. I really do. But one can never be too skeptical of such claims coming from conservative evangelicals -- especially when it has to do with an issue like AIDS.
 
pub crawler said:


And I'm betting I'm not as ignorant as you think me to be, cardosino.


Maybe, but comments like "It's a typical, conservative evangelical church right in the middle of a major stronghold for conservative Christians. As for Warren, if it looks like a duck....." certainly don't dispay an intimate knowledge of the facts, for argument's sake, I'll apologize and say you're not.


pub crawler said:

I know a bit out Saddleback's history -- hell, I even attended a Sunday morning service there several years ago -- and Saddleback was (and is still?) in fact a member congregation of the very conservative Southern Baptist Convention, though Saddleback certainly has never made much effort to put that fact in their publicity material.


Is the label more important to you than what's inside ?



pub crawler said:


Look, I give Warren credit for even talking about the AIDS epidemic, let alone the fact that his church is putting resources toward the problem. I can guarantee you that this is rare among conservative evangelical churches. By the way, you'll note that in the article I've referenced above, Warren himself describes Saddleback as "conservative theologically." Though he adds that his church is "radical when it comes to methodology." To Warren's claim that his church does "radical methodology," I say great. I hope that actually means something. I really do. But one can never be too skeptical of such claims coming from conservative evangelicals -- especially when it has to do with an issue like AIDS.

I understand where you're coming from, but it seems like nothing short of financial audits and notarized logs of all church-sponsored activities would convince you otherwise.

Come along some day, see for yourself, speak to some people, see what you think.

Did you know Rick's wife was visiting AIDS clinics and meeting with the President of the Philippines and other 3rd world countries in between fighting breast cancer ? Rick's not a saint, neither is his wife and God knows I sure am not, and Saddleback isn't perfect, but it's the closest I've personally found to a church that actually addresses these types of issues (poverty, AIDS, etc) head on in a practical way in a manner I can actually trust.

Yes, Rick is anti-stem-cell research, pro-life, etc. But those issues are very much in the background at Saddleback, the focus is on helping the poor, homeless, etc.

I voted for Kerry, but did not agree 100% with him on everything, I chose the most improtant issues to me personally, and made my decison base don that. So it goes with Saddleback, yes it's a Baptist church, ut if their focus was on gay marriage, abortion, and stem-cell research, I wouldn't be a member.
 
I don't consider W an embarrassment when it comes to his faith. He goes to church and prays for wisdom and guidance. I don't think there is anything too offensive about that. Millions and millions of americans, as well as people of all religions do the same thing every week.
 
cardosino said:


I understand where you're coming from, but it seems like nothing short of financial audits and notarized logs of all church-sponsored activities would convince you otherwise.
Those things would help. :)

Come along some day, see for yourself, speak to some people, see what you think.
Hmmm, well I might make a phone call to Saddleback and ask the staff there a few questions.

...yes it's a Baptist church, but if their focus was on gay marriage, abortion, and stem-cell research, I wouldn't be a member.
Fair enough. Please understand that I'm going to challenge the claims of any conservative American movement -- church or not -- because I am not in line with the right wing extremism currently pervading the American ethos. My view of fairness, justice and equality is very much at odds with the agenda of the right wing nutcases running this country. The conservative evangelical community has largely consumed the koolaid and as a result is aligned with and supports these nutcases.

I will say that -- in light of what you've written in this thread -- you personally don't seem to fit the mold of the typical conservative evangelical.
 
pub crawler said:

My view of fairness, justice and equality is very much at odds with the agenda of the right wing nutcases running this country. The conservative evangelical community has largely consumed the koolaid and as a result is aligned with and supports these nutcases.


I posted this article a few weeks ago, this is more in line with how I think, and many others too.

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20041220/religion_two.art.htm


I'm sorry to see how you stereotype, but it's always the case that the media loves to report on the controversial comments of the Buchanan/Falwell (or maybe Sharpton/Jackson on the other side) rather than what might be the more mundane and positive, but less controversial actions of others.
 
Back
Top Bottom