For the first time in more than a decade, a majority of Americans believe churches and houses of worship should keep out of political matters.
The change in heart is the result of a shift in view of some social conservatives who are said to be disillusioned with the major political parties, according to a survey released Thursday by Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.
Currently, half of conservatives believe churches and other houses of worship should keep out of politics, up from just 30 percent four years ago.
In particular, the survey found the shift is strongest among Americans who are less educated, who consider gay “marriage” a very important issue, and who think the two major parties are unfriendly towards religion.
"To my mind, that spells frustration," said Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center, according to The Associated Press. "But by the same token, we know these very same people are not interested in less religiosity in the political discourse. They almost universally want a religious person as president.
"It's not that they want to take religion out of politics, it's that their frustrations with the way things seem to be going are leading them to say, 'Well, maybe churches should back off on this.'"
With this new shift, conservatives now hold similar views with moderates and liberals on the issue of church and politics.
Overall, a slight majority (52 percent) of the public now says churches should “keep out” of politics and not express their views on social and political matters, compared to 44 percent who held this view in 2004.
Also, the sharp divide between Republicans and Democrats on the issue has disappeared.
Now, 51 percent of Republicans say churches should keep out of politics, and 52 percent of Democrats hold this same view. Back in 2004, there was a big gap in view between the two parties on the issue, with only 37 percent of Republicans wanting churches to not participate in politics, compared to 51 percent of Democrats.
Meanwhile, the American public’s opinion has remained relatively unchanged on the belief that churches and other houses of worship should not endorse candidates and that it is important for presidents to have strong religious beliefs.
The survey was conducted through phone interviews on July 31-August 10 from a national sample of 2,905 adults. This is the first time a majority of Americans want churches to stay away from politics since the Pew Forum started asking the question 12 years ago.
RSS
Proverbs 29, says, " When the Righteous are in Authority, The people rejoice, But when the wicked bear rule, the people mourn."
Someone said, " It is an unfailing law, Much Bible, Much Freedom, Little Bible, Little Freedom, No Bible, No Freedom."
America will only be free and Americans rejoice, If the Bible, Gods Word is allowed to spread to this Nation, and the Nation's of the World.
The Church certainly should have a voice concerning the Political relm, Then and only then will we see America stand tall.
letsgetreal - VERY WELL SAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In the Bible the prophets were always involved with the kings, to guide them according to the word of the Lord. That's how they fought battles. John the Baptist was beheaded for criticizing Herod. Jesus was killed for pointing out the hypocracy of the political Pharisees. In 1967, 41 years ago, Christians kept their mouths shut when 11 Governors decriminalized the killing of preborn babies and since then all America's biblical foundations have eroded. Now churches are finally finding their voice, and forced out of their comfort zones. We already see the problems our kids face, with God thrown out of schools and communities. If the church doesn't take a stand, then the Lord's enemies will and have. Let's not back down now. It's not about electing a Party, but how close are those we are electing holding to Biblical truths and righteousness. Jesus said we cannot serve two masters. And how can we fulfill a simple command like Jesus telling his disciples to let the little children come to him, if we decide to kill them first?
The last 8 years have proven that when you mix politics and religion, all you end up with is politics. As an evangelical christian I will no longer allow the republican party to USE me or my vote. Until government is controlled by the people and not corprations or greedy, lying politicians, it will never change.
I have just read a book that has opened my eyes and shaken me up. It's Greg Boyd's "The Myth Of A Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power Is Destroying the Church." This book should be required reading for everyone in America who calls themselves a christian.
http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Christian-Nation-Political-Destroying/dp/0310267315/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220999193&sr=1-1
scitsonga,
I understand kill to be stopping the life of someone or something, while murder is to kill someone with malice forethought. The dictionary add the term 'unlawfully' before 'kill'.
wb "The truth is, murder is always wrong "
is there a difference between killing and murder in your view?
I see the term 'relative truth' meaning something that is fluid - like some people would like ethics to be. Like "you might think murder is bad, but its not true for me." The truth is, murder is always wrong - some might not accept it, but it is truth none the less.
I think the problem comes in with so many 'Christians' having multiple personality disorder of the faith. They have who they are at church, who they are at work, who they are at home, ... you get the idea. Christianity is about the renewing of your mind. You become a new person and that person is what all the areas of your life are based on.
When I was a student at the Bible college my dad worked at I was asked what he was like at home. I had no idea at first what the question was about. The person went on to explain there were people who were more 'holy' at the college than the were at home. I explained to him that when it comes to my dad it's "what you see is what you get."
The world isn't being turned off by Christianity in the political arena. It simply doesn't like the gospel.
I think that we are driving people away from the church by politicizing our message. I used to love Dobson et al, but he has gone from being a biblical pro-family voice to being a pro-republican voice. There is a big difference, especially when he is about to endorse a repeated adulterer as our country's example for everyone. Ugh
ok who's the wise guy and flagged my post
wb, I guess I see subjective and relative as synonomous terms, but I think we're in total agreement with what we're saying about truth. I think the real problem comes in when we try to make subjective truth an absolute truth and when we try to make an absolute truth a subjective truth. And I see the first happen many times in the Christian community and the latter happening quite often in the secular community.
Finally some good news in this world. This news is almost 2 years old but I just heard about it today.
"Religious Decline in U.S. Follows Europe"
"Is the U.S. following Europe in becoming less religious and more humanist? This is the tantalizing prospect held out by some recent surveys."
"A new survey in the U.S. shows that the number of 18-25 year olds who are atheist, agnostic or nonreligious has increased from 11 percent in 1986 to 20 percent today. Meanwhile a survey of the United States and the five largest countries in Western Europe reveals that religious belief continues to plummet in Europe, with Italy being the only country with a majority believing in any form of God or supreme being. And even in these overwhelmingly godless countries, the young are still significantly less religious than their elders."
http://humaniststudies.org/enews/?id=281&article=0
Yes DP, poor old Donna.
believer,
I think I understand what you mean. Basically it is something that is not always true in all situations. Like the statement, "I can swim 1 mile" is true for some people, and not true for everyone.
But this does not mean truth is relative, but I think the term used by Daniel Paul is more accurate - it is subjective truth. It applies to certain people but not all people. But this is simply because the facts are not totally known or not taken into account to make an accurate statement of the facts. For instance, the fact is that people who do not have addictive personalities, are not addicted to nicotine, do not like the taste of smoke, and do not have a psychological addiction to the movements involved in smoking have little difficulty in stopping smoking. This is truth.
We still have insufficient understanding on the issues involved in being delivered from sins to come up with an accurate statement that would always be true (although from experience, I believe it includes some equation containing faith, conviction, personal surrender to God, and the power of God). The best we can do is state things in a more general way as opposed to a more specific statement. Such as the difference between stating, "some people are delivered from sin upon salvation" and stating "all people are delivered from sin upon salvation". The first is always true, the second is always false.
It seems to me that these examples have absolute truth inherent in them. Its just that without sufficient knowledge of the factors involved, it is inaccurate to describe them by stating "all". That is to say, it is absolute truth that '"some people are delivered from sinful habits at salvation," or "some people have no difficulty stopping habits." If we had more information on the issues involved in every situation, there would be no difficulty in making more detailed statements of absolute truth.
But I agree, without specificity, there are statements made that are true in some instances and not true in all instances.
But as has been stated before, just because someone does not understand the facts, does not mean a statement of truth is not always true. And as you say, this does not mean moral truth does not exist as an absolute, nor does it mean physical truth does not exist as an absolute.
wb, here's another one that may help show what I mean. I hear many Christians say that when they got saved God immediately released them from certain sinful habits. Then I hear other Christians say that they still struggle with various sinful habits. The problem comes in when those who were immediately released begin to challenge those who were not to the point of even questioning their salvation or their walk with the Lord. To me this is what happens if we try to make a relative truth an absolute truth.
wb, I see relative truth as being a truth that may be valid for some people, but not for all people. For example some people can just quit a habit where as some have a very difficult time such as smoking or drinking. Whereas an absolute truth is true for all people, such as Jesus Christ alone can save us from our sins.
believer,
What do you mean by a relative truth?
Steve...an example of subjective truth would be that the seasons end of Doctor Who was SO COOL! Not everyone would agree (in the words of Mr. T ... "I pity the fool!"
:D
Truth (www.dictionary.com)
1. the true or actual state of a matter: He tried to find out the truth.
2. conformity with fact or reality; verity: the truth of a statement.
3. a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like: mathematical truths.
4. the state or character of being true.
5. actuality or actual existence.
6. an obvious or accepted fact; truism; platitude.
7. honesty; integrity; truthfulness.
8. (often initial capital letter) ideal or fundamental reality apart from and transcending perceived experience: the basic truths of life.
9. agreement with a standard or original.
10. accuracy, as of position or adjustment.
11. Archaic. fidelity or constancy.
An example of truth would be “I think. Therefore, I am.†You would have to think and exist to dispute it. I believe there is truth and anti-truth. Truth comes from God and anti-truth which comes from Satan. They are polar opposites. Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.†Many other beliefs are a direct contradiction to His statement.
In short, Jesus said He is the truth. You either accept that or your don’t. It’s the same with all other areas of life. You either accept what the Bible says about it or you don’t. I think sometimes we make Christianity too complicated. Jesus really had a way of cutting through the ‘stuff’ and getting to the simple truth of things. How could He do that so well? Simple. He is the truth.
Or take adultery, yes its wrong because one partner is not being honest with the other one, the other thing though is that the partner who is commiting the act is also doing themslves harm(though illicit sex and great conversation can be a heady thing so they most likely don't realise it, at least at the start).
Depends what it is, take divorce for example, it can mess up peoples lives in the short term but in the long term it can actually be a good thing (obviously not in all cases)for people, allowing them to get on with their lives.
Steve
Steve,
so that does that mean something that messes up lives is not wrong in your worldview?
Thanks wb your last paragraph is what I wanted...
Steve
P.s By the way your "apparently" about adultery in my world is incorrect, happy to put that right.
I think we need to be careful to realize that there is both absolute truth as well as relative truth. The problem with secular humanism and postmodern thinking is that they say there are no absolute truths and it appears they use relative truth to support that point of view. Absolute truth in the area of morals and values allows us to either accept it or reject it, but it does not negate it if we choose to reject it. For instance Romans 3:23 says, "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.", we can either choose to accept the fact that we are a sinner or reject it, but the fact is in the eyes of God we are all still sinners. Too many people think if they say that they don't believe in God or they don't believe the Bible is God's Word or they are not a Christian and so on, that they are not a sinner. What they fail to realize is that our opinion doesn't matter, God says it and that settles it. But they also need to see that God through Christ has provided a remedy to their sin problem, which is an absolute truth as well and once again a matter of choice that they can either accept or reject with consequences for both, positive if they accept and negative if they reject.
Is anyone else seeing the web pages on christian post refreshing themselves automatically? My Pc and my mac are both seeing this problem, and it can make it hard to write a post, when it refreshes in the middle of my typing.
I was speaking to the issue of whether truth is relative.
You asked for simple examples of "what the evidence is for truth in absolutes." I gave a physical example. Then you asked how you can check that adultery is wrong. I said you can either trust someone who said it, or you can test it. You then told me all that tells you is adultery messes up lives and in the same breathe asked me where is the absolute. So apparently something that messes up lives is not wrong in your worldview.
You asked what is the absolute by which we measure adultery to be bad. To which I said all truth comes from God, and that physical and moral laws can be tested. I said truth is in accordance with the facts. You asked what facts. I gave more examples of facts - both physical and moral.
I'm answering your questions. I'm not worked up in the least. If your questions are not garnering the answers you are looking for, then perhaps you can form questions that will get you the information you are seeking?
Truth exists. Truth is absolute. Something is either true or not true, regardless of whether someone knows the truth, or likes the truth, or accepts the truth. Truth can be discovered. Truth can be tested, although how we test those truths differs based upon the truth being tested. If someone discovers a truth, they discover evidence for God, even though they may not interpret it as such. The truth we discover in our environment about how things exist and work together are like footprints of our creator.
As for why something is true, there is one reason: because it is. As for why truth exists, because God exists. I have two points of reference: experience/discovery (mine or others'), and God's word. God is truth, therefore, truth exists because God exists. God created the universe and instituted various laws. God created mankind. We discover these laws. We can live by them or not. There are consequences to both choices. As believer put it, we are not immune to those consequences, though we may not recognize the effects of the consequences for years or even until we die and face judgement.
I never said anything about morals being relative I just asked for examples of morals as facts as you stated. You where kind enough to write that murder is wrong but not kind enough to state why that is a fact whether somebody disagrees with it or not, what is your referance point to murder being wrong as a fact? If its the bible etc..just say so,thats okay, don't tie yourself up in knots so much, chill....
Thanks
Steve
These are facts that people have discovered, just as we have discovered physical laws - more facts, more truth. Truth is absolute, not relative.
You asked what facts. I reiterated them. Just like you live best by not eating cyanide, so too does society run best by not committing moral suicide. These are facts, truth. Its not relative, but absolute.
Which is ironic beacuse a little while ago on this site that continent was put forward as a Christian continent following the Anglican conferance.
Or societies run best and humans have the most productive lives etc..when these rules are adopted which is why they are upheld in civil law and punished by the state if broken? Also socities that tend to uphold the rule of law tend to be the most economicaly successful which is another incentive, look at Africa as an example of this not occuring.
Facts like murder and stealing are bad. As I've said, societies across the world and time have often come to the same rules: "do not murder", "do not steal", etc. These moral rules exist because of the moral laws created by God.
Read the posts, still don't see any "moral facts" put forward though....puzzled?
Truth always comes from Magic. The physical laws were created by Magic. The moral laws were created by Magic.
Steve,
read my posts on Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:59 pm and Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:48 pm. They apply.
It depends which facts you are considering. If we speak of the physical laws, then the facts concerning them. If we speak of moral laws, then the facts concerning them. The definition of truth is "in accordances with the facts." If something is a fact, it is truth.
I'm sorry SteveH, but Truth is not relative. There is an absolute Truth.
Only today's soceity is shaping the culture to say that Truth is Relative. The Church will stand against relativism, since it always leads to extreme forms of liberalism or facism.
McCain 2008.
And those facts are?
truth always comes from God. The physical laws were created by God. The moral laws were created by God. We can test the physical laws. We can test the moral laws. But when we try to go against the physical laws, dangerous physical consequences can occur. In the same way, when we try to go against the moral laws, dangerous consequences occur.
As I've posted before, Regardless of where or when, society often come to the same rules: "do not murder", "do not steal", etc. How these rules are interpreted or applied might differ, but the rules, the moral rules, still exist. Why? Because of the moral laws created by God.
As for whether it is the same as 2 + 2 = 4, it actually is. The facts are different, but the truth is still in accordance with the facts.
Yes' but where is the absolute, all that tells me is that adultary mucks up lives that in itself does not make it "wrong" where is the absolute you talk about? What is the absolute we measure adultary to be wrong by? you have not answered that.
Regards
Steve
You have a choice: you can trust the truth that adultery is bad, or you can test it out. What effects does adultery have upon the person committing it? What effects does adultery have upon the innocent party? What effects does adultery have upon trust? What effects does adultery have upon a marriage?
Okay wb I can go out and check that, how can I check that adultary is wrong, what is my refernace point? One may feel that is true, one may feel that is not, how do I choose? Its not the same as 2+2= 4, where does the truth come from on that issue?
Thanks
Steve
"what the evidence is for truth in absolutes"
My favorite response on this is the teacher who said there are no absolutes to which the student asked "absolutely?"
"If there is a God, and you do get to that Beulah Land you people talk about all the time, I think you'll find a God much more open to different ideas than you were here on earth."
Do I think God won't be as uptight as people act like he is? Yep.
Do I think God will be more open to ideas? Yes and no. See, in our case, we can't seem to follow a few simple instructions. Once we get the few simple instructions down like love your neighbor as yourself and marriage is between one man and one women then maybe He might be inclined to share with us more of who He is. Until then exactly why should He bother?
Suppose it is dark outside where you are right now. It either is, or is not, dark outside where you are right now. How you describe it does not change the truth. How you feel about it does not change the truth. What you think about it does not change the truth. Whether you agree with it does not change the truth. It simply is true.
Could you just remind me please wbmoore what the evidence is for truth in absolutes, don't worry about going into postmodern clap trap or Plato etc..just keep it simple.
Thanks
Steve
wb, I agree wholeheartedly with your last post and I to adhere to that logic, but I would also add that even though each person has the right to believe it or not believe it, that even if one chooses not to believe it, it does not make them immune to the consequences of their non-belief.
hlerwin
There is plenty of information to make a decision on truth and God. It is just that you are unwilling to make a decision. By not making a decision, you make a decision.
There is a lot of support for the existence of truth in absolutes, but you have to submit to logic and rational thinking. If you come at it from the postmodern relativistic perspective, you can claim anything is true or not true. You can claim there IS no truth. But that in and of itself is a statement of absolute, a statement of truth. This is a contradiction. Post modernism relies upon redefinition of language and one's willingness to hold contradictory information as true (A is A and not A simultaneously). Plato, Aristotle, Socrates would all be rolling in their graves if they knew what has become of their work. They were all about teaching logic and rational thinking, yet this has no place in the post modern worldview.
I live my life based upon what God wants. He provided the Bible as a written record of who God is, what God has done, what God wants for us, and what God wants from us, and what God will do. God gets to set the rules, and determines right and wrong and truth. You are free to believe or not. This has consequences, in this life and afterwards.
wb, from the information we humans have, there is no proof 1) that truth cannot change or 2) that there is a God. Masturbatory was perhaps the wrong word for me to use, but to live your whole life (and to judge everyone else's life) based on a collection of old writings is certainly a head game. If there is a God, and you do get to that Beulah Land you people talk about all the time, I think you'll find a God much more open to different ideas than you were here on earth.
In the 80's Steve Taylor had a song called "Whatever Happened to Sin?". One of the lines was about politics. "Just remember when you step into your voting booth, he'll never lie, he'll just embelish the truth...."
steiner
you have said....
If Christians are tired of politics, it is because they have the free will to reflect on their actions in how it is done, and they are aware that power does corrupt Christian principles for short term gains.
I do not believe that Christians are tired of politics.
I do believe that Christians are tired of the embarrassment and division that surfaces as a result of improper political influences.
May I also suggest that power does not corrupt. It is God who sets up and removes those who are in positions of power and authority.
And yet again, hlerwin, you show your ignorance. What you call self-indulgent or self-absorbed is actually nothing of the sort. What you call being in my head was actually part of a discussion with someone dealing with whether truth is relative. I felt it is applicable here.
People want to pretend that truth changes. They want to redefine language in an attempt to justify their behavior and desires and gain acceptance for them. This redefinition does not change the truth.
Some people value their feelings so much they would go to any length to justify them. Others have no idea what they believe - they prefer to use the thoughts of others rather their own. Others have such deeply held convictions that they would die for the object of those convictions.
The first group of people want what they want and reach for straws in an attempt of self-justification, in an attempt to justify sinful behavior. The second group have no firm set of beliefs; they are blown here and there with the winds of the latest philosophy. They pander to the people in the room who have apparent authority or who have the latest idea that seems "nice". The last group of people recognize something they consider to be truth.
But even with this last group, there are those who are right and those who are wrong, and some who fall somewhere in the middle. We each must make a decision for God, one way or the other. We have the responsibility of determining the facts and making a decision. If we choose wrong, we will pay the consequences. If we choose right, we will be blessed. If we fall on the fence somewhere in the middle, we will still pay the consequences.
God has no desire for lukewarm people. He wants people to choose Him. He will judge all, and those who do not have firmly held convictions of their own that Christ died for their sins will suffer the second death. Those who choose Him have the responsibility to help others make the same choice - to help them open their eyes to the truth of God.
So, you can claim it is self-indulgent or self-absorbed (masturbatory was the word you used), but in fact, attempts to reach people with the truth are anything but that. In fact, it is other-focused. It is an expression of love for God and love for others.
msnchris70,
I love what you wrote! You and I agree wholeheartedly on this issue.
This article is upside down. It is not that Churches are getting political, its just that the politicians are butting their noses in the Churches business.
The hiearchy of the Church only promotes moral values that you may not vote for and they do not tell you what party or who they support or do not support.
By sticking with moral value education, this is EXACTLY what churches should be doing after all your salvation depends on it. I know this is prudential judgment, but just because you believe Jesus is your savior and yet you continue to support the murder of innocent children then Heaven may not be where you are going.
Faithful Churchgoing Bible reading Catholics and Protestants will not support intrinsic evils such as; abortion, gay marriage, cloning, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research. McCain is only barely for embryonic stem cell research, but OBAMA IS FOR ALL OF THESE!
Lame Catholics and Protestants who are moral and theological relativists have no sense of hiearchy of moral values. They can't equate that murder of innocent human life is more important than fair housing.
When we as a nation stop defending the babies who can't defend themselves, then we go down.
LIFE LIBERTY and the pursuit of Happiness. You notice what the first is???? LIFE! Without Life all other goals and all other points are illusory. Protection of human life and traditional marriage are the capstone and cornerstone to a civilized soceity. Without these our soceity distorts itself and becomes something malignant to itself.
McCAIN 2008! May God bless America, and may we always seek HIS WILL and BE IN HIS WILL.
This is what Cromwell said upon dismissing of parliament on 20 April 1653.
"It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.
Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?
Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices?
Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. In the name of God, go!"
It will be interesting to read the details regarding Cromwell. That is, the circumstances that ruled before Cromwell came and ousted those whom he called political prostitutes...
but it seems that indeed that in England, if not much of western Europe, this is certainly true. What of it in the U.S. ? I fear that it will soon also be true.
When governments and their prostituted politicians will not honor Truth, and when truth is abhorred...we come to a crossroad as a nation.
And what a masterbatory little mind game. You need to get out of your head every once and a while.
wb, that's an argument worthy of the Lord Protector Cromwell himself.
The new "presbyters" in Commonwealth England produced fruits of the spirit that made the common people hate them, just as the evangelicals have done to the majority of modern Americans. The English were glad to put Charles II (a perfunctory Christian, at best) back on the throne. God is active in repeating history: Out with the religious Bush; in with the religiously luke-warm Obama or McCain. Not a minute too soon!
Actually, the truth does not change just because someone does not believe it. For instance, It is dark outside right now where I am. I could tell someone it is dark, and they can believe me or not - this does not change the truth of the matter.
Someone might say, "But you could bring him to your house, take a picture, prove to him it is dark. Darkness is the absence of light. " But if the person with whom you are speaking is totally blind, you would not be able to prove whether it is dark or light. For him, its all the same. He could not tell if it was daylight or dark, but this would not change the truth of the matter. Something is either true or not, regardless if you can see it, or if you believe it.
Truth is very definitely absolute. By definition, truth is not relative. Something is either true or not. For instance, 2 + 2 = 4. You might want to pretend 2 + 3 = 4, but you would be wrong. You might even change the language to say that "rain" is now "two" and "dog" is now "four". While the language might change, "rain" plus "rain" equals "dog", the truth remains the same. Language is fluid, but truth is not.
If the facts are absolute, then so is the truth. You might use different language to describe a truth (a fact), but it remains true, regardless of how you feel about it or what you think about it or what language you choose to describe it.
You might accept the facts or not, but this does not change either the facts or the truth about the facts. Hence the phrase "in truth" meaning "in fact".
My ten year old son knows that truth is absolute - that it does not change. You might use different words to describe it, but it means the same thing - it is still truth.
The same is true for moral truth. Something is either right or wrong. Someone might be hardened to the truth, but this does not make it less true. An extreme example would be whether burning someone alive is right or wrong. Some might say the circumstances determine whether this is right or wrong, but the truth of the matter is that it is always wrong. People might try to justify this behavior, but that does not change the fact that it is always wrong.
After living for a few years in Oliver Cromwell's England, John Milton declared, "I fear that new "presbyter" is but old "priest" writ large."
That always happens when the overly religious assume power. It's bad news for anyone who is not in the "club."
It is interesting that societies across the world and time have often come to the same rules: "do not murder", "do not steal", etc. How these rules are interpreted or applied might differ, but the rules, the moral rules, still exist. Why? Because of the moral laws created by God. Some might try to say that such and such does not apply to me, but we must sear our souls and minds and hearts to do so.
wrhalver,
America has been a country where the great majority is and has been Christian.
Now compare this to countries where the great majorities are not Christian. How they have run and continue to run their countries.
If Christians are tired of politics, it is because they have the free will to reflect on their actions in how it is done, and they are aware that power does corrupt Christian principles for short term gains.
They are being told to leave the helm by those that are far less more scrupulous in implementing their ideologies.
In countries where the majorities are non -Christian, the governments are on the most part, doing everything to actively and physically force their morality on the minorities.
When you hear of the new atheists...remember that these same ideals were foisted by the new atheists of an age past, but that is still with us...the stalins and Maos and Pol Pots were atheists who aggressively pushed their programs...dont be fooled by the ...NEW...
philo, secular humanists have done a tremendous job of eradicating morals and values by saying there is no absolute truth and everything is relative. As a result man is free to live his life in any way he chooses because what might be right for you is not right for me and vice versa. This also allows for dishonesty and lack of integrity on the part of our leaders since after all the ends justifies the means. That is what a society void of God and godly character becomes when God, God's Word, and all His godly attributes are thrown out. And the result, well just ask the former Soviet Union.
"It's not that they want to take religion out of politics, it's that their frustrations with the way things seem to be going are leading them to say, 'Well, maybe churches should back off on this.'"
This makes no sense. How is that Christians can separate themselves from politics while pushing for the candidate who best represents Christian values?
Frustration? I see a greater divide between Conservative and Liberal Christian leaders as a result of the actions of leaders like Pastor Wright.
Only embarrassment for the church as a whole. But this is no reason to back off. The secular world would love nothing more.
Christ is our example and He did not back off.
"the bible will support almost anything,"
Actually...no. It is man who justifies anything and blames it on the Bible. The father of communism said he based it on the US Constitution! The part that's scary is he could show you where he got his ideas from in our Consitution. Simply put, he had his own ideas and justified it with our Constituion which says NOTHING like what he was saying.
The same has been true of the Bible for quite some time. Jesus pointed it out on many occasions when he was 'correcting' the pharasees.
The Bible doesn't justify murder, stealing, slavery, racism or the practice of homosexuality. It says to be conformed to the image of Jesus. It's that plain.
Now, living in the south (near Bob Jones U), I can tell you about some WARPED application of scripture on racism. Having been in construction before I can tell you the very best of products doesn't make up for poor application. Poor application does not mean it is a bad product. Too often man looks at man to thumb his nose at God. How foolish.
"God's standards of right and wrong were in mankind's DNA since creation,..."
Well, not quite, Believer, but nice try. Altruism, and a rudimentary "civil contract" evolved during the two million years or so of humanoid evolution. Simply, if you shared with the group, didn't murder within the tribe and generally "got along," you got to stay with the group, share in the hunt and, most importantly, reproduce. If not, you were simply left to starve or killed.
As I said in my last post, these "standards," as you call them are not standards at all, but merely some humans interpretation of muddled, conflicting and competing translations.
I'll even give you an example, from Rick Warren, of all people. When I read "Purpose Driven Life," one of the things that really struck me was the fact that Rick used many (more than ten) different translations and versions of the bible, while writing PDL, in order to find support for a particular points he wanted to make. Why did he do that if the bible wasn't obscure? And you want to legislate this stuff?
I'm no expert, but I think this article is about more and more of us realizing that the bible will support almost anything, from slavery to genocide, depending upon who reads it and what their preconceived notions are.
---if you christians want to withdraw, then as cromwell said "you have sat here far to long for any good that you have done...go in the name of god and let us have done with you." want to be americans and engage and discuss and plan fine. want to rule only according to your rules then go --- by nogdrag
Which part of Christs message are you fed up with? Let us be Americans, as you say, and let us discuss those issues.
And in your quote you imply that Christians have run America, dont you? so which is it? according to you? have they been running America?
philo, as far as written standards you may have some creedence, but God's standards of right and wrong were in mankind's DNA since creation, unfortunately because of the sin of Adam and Eve mankind inherited a sinful nature and thus the need for laws as well as consequences for breaking those laws. And even if a government choose to eradicate God form the equation His attributes such as integrity must remain or that government is doomed to both failure and chaos.
"Regarding 'their standards' - these are not the standards of any individual, but of God - yes the one and only God. If you throw him aside, you have no basis for any sort of standard. Tell God to 'go' and societal decline becomes inevitable."
I'm sorry, Free, but there are a couple of glaring problems with this statement.
I submit that the "standards" you are talking about ARE those of an individual, your particular sect and denomination of Christianity. Most of the "standards" you talk about are so muddled, obscure and conflicting to be almost arbitrary. You can find something in "God's word" to support almost any position you might want to take.
If this was not the case, there would not be nearly 34,000 different, distinct sects and denominations of Christianity, would there?
As far as "all standards coming from God" is concerned, sorry but altruism preceded Christianity by tens of thousands of years, and is present today in more then just our species.
Do you think that murder was OK before Moses? Sorry, but there are several written codes that precede the bible, and some of them are even comprehensible.
The first religions latched onto mores that already existed, and acted as though they invented them, and the myth continues even today. repeat something often enough and it becomes "common knowledge," something you don't even have to think about.
However, if fear of eternal torment is all that's keeping you from murdering my grandchildren, then by all means keep believing it! I don't think you really do, though, not if you think about it.
Have a great weekend!
The story of Oliver Cromwell, general of the New Model Army, and the English civil war is very interesting. The puritans governed England for a while but as soon as the people got the chance following Cromwells death, they got the monarchy back with Charles 2nd.
steveh20, I'm assuming he meant Oliver Cromwell, but I can't say with all certainty.
"a huge number of americans are throughly tired of sanctimonious bigots who insist that every american live according to their standards,"
Yes we are! We are QUITE tired of the pro-gay bigots and their sanctimonious judges forcing their beliefs on us. We have the right to believe what is in the Bible. Yet, sanctimonious pro-gay judges in CA told a doctor he didn't have the right to bring his personal beliefs into his private practice.
You are SO right about sanctimonious bigots!
Dongard,
Regarding hypocrisy, you are absolutely right, people are tired of it, both within and outside of the Christian communinity. It should be noted however, that such people are certainly not following the teachings of Christ.
Regarding 'their standards' - these are not the standards of any individual, but of God - yes the one and only God. If you throw him aside, you have no basis for any sort of standard. Tell God to 'go' and societal decline becomes inevitable.
Do you mean Cromwell who was one of the signaturies to the execution warrant of king Charles 1st?
dongard, don't you find it interesting that Cromwell was a Christian himself, but I must say some of your points are well made. People to include many in the Christian community are fed up with the "do as I say, but not as I do" mentality, but this is not only true of those candidates who are promoting themselves as Christians. Moral and honest people, which by the way is not exclusive to the Christian community, want people of integrity to lead us as a country, people who keep their word both in public and in private. For me personally I prefer not only people of their word, but people of the Word as well, but if push comes to shove I will always vote for people of integrity every time. But the shame is, it appears we have very few of those types of people running for office it seems.
"The change in heart is the result of a shift in view of some social conservatives who are said to be disillusioned with the major political parties"
i beg to disagree. a huge number of americans are throughly tired of sanctimonious bigots who insist that every american live according to their standards, whose leaders fail to live up to the holier than thou standards that they preach, who condemn anyone who dares to question their self rightousness. and predict endless doom if their rules are not followed.
well we're still here and there has been no second coming after a thousand years and more of predictions that it was right around the corner.
a very telling poll was conducted. most americans would prefer to live next to an abortionist than a christian.
if you christians want to withdraw, then as cromwell said "you have sat here far to long for any good that you have done...go in the name of god and let us have done with you." want to be americans and engage and discuss and plan fine. want to rule only according to your rules then go
So...let me see if I understand this....
People don't like the immoral behavior, the 'good 'ol boys' system, the self serving government mentality in politics but they don't want 'houses of morals' getting involved.
AIN'T THAT SWIFT!