Open Blogging

You may also like...

51 Responses

  1. bob1 says:

    Well, this is an embarrrassment…

    OTOH, If you’ve ever wanted to shed the term ‘evangelical’ and what it stands for in the good ol’ USA, now is the time…

    “How American Evangelicals Lost Credibility with the Global Church”

    “Was the US never really a “Christian country,” or was US Christianity corrupted by politics?”

    That’s the question that Kylie Beach, a writer for the Australian-based Eternity News asked several days after the capitol insurrection and several days before last week’s presidential inauguration.

    https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2021/january-web-only/global-church-american-evangelicals-trump-trust-podcast.html

  2. Em says:

    Dunno Kirk or Lecrae? ? ? Should i?

  3. Jean says:

    I will just remind the house that the individual Raphael Warnock ran against was Kelly Loeffler. In my opinion the choice wasn’t even close. Good for Lecrae!

  4. Dan from Georgia says:

    Good for Lecrae. Methinks Kirk is another white guy telling a black person how to think and vote and feel. Oh, I see…Charlie Kirk and Pastor Jack Hibbs…sigh.

    Two Georgia Congresswomen are introducing a measure to censure Representative Majorie Taylor Greene and are also calling for her resignation. Not sure how she got voted in in the first place. She has no business being in a governing office.

    In other stupid news:

    https://www.christianpost.com/news/kirk-cameron-launches-his-own-100-day-plan-for-america.html?clickType=link-most-popular

    Apparently Kirk Cameron thinks America is the center of God’s will. The picture accompanying the article shows where Cameron’s heart is at….not a cross in sight.

  5. Michael says:

    Kirk Cameron is a has been/never was cashing in on nationalism and bad theology.

  6. Dan from Georgia says:

    I’m not even sure I can combine the words Christian and Nationalism…the mixture is borderline another gospel. Almost unrecognizable. Never been a fan of Cameron’s since the “Fireproof” debacle.

  7. Mike E. says:

    Many of these “personalities” who mix Christianity and politics are nothing but grifters using the name of Jesus to make money off poor people who actually love both Jesus and America. Infuriating. Must. Disengage.

  8. Duane Arnold says:

    Question for the house.

    I was recently informed that in my state, although the tier being given the vaccine are 70+ and frontline workers, some clergy are also obtaining the vaccine owing to pastoral care/in person church services. In my opinion, unless the clergy are involved directly and consistently in hospital chaplaincy, I think this is unethical. I’d be interested in other’s thoughts…

  9. Jean says:

    Definitely not unethical for a pastor in a sacramental church. The close physical contact (to parishioners and the holy elements) together with the importance of the sacrament in the soul care of the parishioners places the availability of a pastor as of upmost importance and an essential worker IMO.

  10. Duane Arnold says:

    Jean

    I thought about that, but I also wonder about the idea that a shepherd shares in the suffering of his/her flock, in imitation of Christ. I think both approaches have some merit…

  11. Jean says:

    Not to argue Duane, but in a small church, if the pastor goes down with Covid, there often isn’t anyone who can come in and substitute and the church will literally close for the period of his illness or in a worst case scenario may close permanently.

  12. Michael says:

    Duane,

    I tend to agree with you on this one…but perhaps we’re at a point spiritually where we need clergy to be able to freely administer the sacraments…although the vaccine doesn’t prevent a person from spreading the virus.
    We may end up doing harm trying to do good.

  13. Duane Arnold says:

    Jean/Michael

    I think it is an ethical dilemma. What means do we use to reach a “good” end?

  14. Duane Arnold says:

    Here’s Aquinas on the subject:
    “Nothing hinders an action that is good in one of the way mentioned above, from lacking goodness in another way. And thus it may happen that an action which is good in its species or in its circumstances is ordained to an evil end, or vice versa. However, an action is not good simply, unless it is good in all those ways: since “evil results from any single defect, but good from the complete cause,” as Dionysius says…”

  15. Michael says:

    It is an ethical dilemma.
    I’m growing increasingly worried about the mental and spiritual health of my community…between the fires and the lockdown, we’re not doing well…

  16. Em says:

    Mike E… “grifters”
    We need to internalize and recognize folk who fit that seedy mold….

  17. Linnea says:

    Warnock stands for abortion. Do you? Why do you think Lecrae endorsed him? What do Christians stand for?

  18. Michael says:

    I don’t know of any Christian who is “for” abortion…I know many who support the right to choose an abortion while working to prevent such.
    Neither party has a consistent, biblical “pro-life” stance…so other issues can and do come into play.

  19. Jenny says:

    Some are way behind on Lecrae he was publicly exposed by the black community a while back! This guy has been a creeper for years! Greg Laurie promoted Lecrae through Harvest Crusades, big mistake! By Phoenix Preacher’s own standards Lecrae has no right to be in ministry.

  20. Michael says:

    Jenny,

    I know little about him as I don’t listen to Christian pop or rap.
    I just know if we excommunicated people based on politics, we would have a bigger problem than we have already.

  21. pstrmike says:

    everyone has a theology, everyone has a philosophy. both are expressed in some way, whether overtly or discreetly, through a political medium. politics is a secular theology, and political philosophy is an attempt to recast opinion as truth.

    “everything is a political system” ~ Warren Gage

  22. Pineapple Head says:

    Jenny, what was Lectae exposed of by the black community? And what makes him a creeper?

  23. Jerod says:

    Linnea, everyone’s a hypocrite in some regard so why bother worrying about dismembered children? It’s definitely important but I wonder if, maybe like, everyone has their opinion and a right to decide how they’ll pave their own road to hell, y’know? Take these sacraments (including the vax) and stop with those abortion posts, K? Thanks. Maybe you should volunteer in the nursery! Just pray about it. I’ll tell Karen you’re thinking about it. Here’s some parting platitudes. We love you! You matter. Keep it up! Be happy. God is love! Jesus! 🌈. 🙏🏼😷

    🤮

    Tax shelters.

  24. Jerod says:

    Sorry, I meant to say tax shelter corporate execs.

    “Yeah, yeah, save the babies… meh.”

  25. Michael says:

    Jerod,

    Again, no one I know is “for” abortion.
    Unfortunately, abortions don’t disappear just because laws are passed.
    Pastorally, I’ve never had someone deciding about abortion simply for the sake of convenience…it has been a complex and difficult situation medically and emotionally.
    Culturally, it is very difficult to retract something which has already been given as a right…one has to exhibit a consistent moral and ethical platform from which to speak and then speak in such a way as to persuade, not condemn.
    It’s easy to make binary choices for oneself…

  26. Duane Arnold says:

    Michael

    “…it has been a complex and difficult situation medically and emotionally.”

    That has been my experience as well. I must say, I can only hope and pray that women who have experienced this are not exposed to some of the off-hand comments on this thread, as they would be a cause for real emotional pain and suffering…

  27. Michael says:

    Duane,

    Amen…and I’ll add some men who loved and cared for them.

  28. Jean says:

    “It’s easy to make binary choices for oneself…”

    It’s even easier to make binary choices for others.

  29. Mike E. says:

    Em..grifters are very easy to recognize. They are the folks who use religion/the “gospel” for financial gain. What has happened in our culture is many of these “religious grifters” have learned that the passions of both religion and politics together can generate huge amounts of revenue from well meaning Christian folks who actually really do care about the issues at hand i.e. abortion or whatever. So they then stoke these passions on purpose, throwing gasoline on an open flame and sit back and watch the money roll in. They become “celebrities” as it were and they just keep stoking the flames of anger and hate, all for financial gain.

  30. Mike E. says:

    Linnea..”Warnock stands for abortion. Do you? Why do you think Lecrae endorsed him? What do Christians stand for?”

    Christians, as I understand it, are called to “stand for” the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Politics and secular policy may sometimes come into conflict with the Gospel. What I struggle with is the American church grasping for political, worldly power using the Gospel to obtain it. That is not the proper stance or place for the church of Jesus Christ, in my view.

    “Christian Nationalism” has taken hold in the USA. It is antichrist, in my view. Many of these conservative political/religious leaders who advocate Christian Nationalism seek to apply the edicts of the Mosaic Law to the policies of the U.S. government. Some see the USA as Israel and our current political climate as Old Testament storylines. This leads to delusional thinking and all sorts of, for lack of a better word, weirdness.

    My question: Why do we as Christians seek to impose God’s Laws on a secular society? Did God command us to do so? If someone answers yes, could that person please show me in the New Testament where we are commanded to do this?

  31. Em says:

    Good observations and great questions, Mike E…. IMHO. 😇

  32. Jean says:

    Mike,

    “My question: Why do we as Christians seek to impose God’s Laws on a secular society? Did God command us to do so? If someone answers yes, could that person please show me in the New Testament where we are commanded to do this?”

    Christians are commanded to love their neighbor as themselves. In fulfilling that command, would not advocating for laws that benefit our neighbors be included?

  33. Mike E. says:

    Jean: Perhaps, but then the question arises, how best to love our neighbors? My point was that Christian Nationalists wish to impose biblical morality upon unbelievers. There is great disagreement among believers (obviously) as to how best to love our neighbor. When asked who is my neighbor, our Lord replied with the parable of the Good Samaritan. Binding up the injured person’s wounds and ensuring they will be sustained to health.

    He didn’t say, “Go and impose the law of Moses on the Roman world.” Did He?

    So I guess I would say, to truly act upon Messiah’s command, does it not entail nursing the sick and wounded to health and meeting their practical needs? But that’s not the aim of most Christian Nationalists, as I see it. Their aim is to impose their views of Biblical morality on an unbelieving world by passing laws aimed to control behavior. I just don’t see that in the New Testament. And I don’t see that as a particularly loving thing to do, either.

  34. Jean says:

    Mike, I hear you. Without arguing, is it possible to see biblical morality as God’s design for human flourishing?

  35. Mike E. says:

    Jean, that is a very deep question. Yes, I do believe biblical morality is God’s design for His creation. However, it pretty much ended in Genesis 3, didn’t it? When sin entered God’s creation, humans went off the deep end and never returned. What I’m saying is you have what would be best, vs. what actually is. What actually is, the reality of the human condition, is that the entire human family is in rebellion against God’s ways, and have been ever since Genesis 3, and will be until the Messianic Kingdom is established in creation.

    So then, we have human beings with Christ (a minority) and humans without Christ (the vast majority). Scripture is clear, all the nations of the earth are in rebellion against Messiah (Psalm 2). That is, against Messiah’s rule over them. This includes the United States.

    I guess my point is, while I agree the very best for humankind is to obey God, it’s never going to happen. As Christians, if we try to impose biblical morality on humankind, we absolutely will fail. Humankind is never going to submit to God’s rule until that final Day.

    So then the question becomes, what is the mission of the church? Is it to impose Biblical morality on unbelieving people? That can’t be the mission, because it cannot work. So, to me, the mission of the church is to promulgate the gospel of Jesus Christ to the world.

    The distinction must be made between the gospel (peace and relationship for individuals with God) and the imposition of biblical morality on an unbelieving society. I just see there’s a difference, but the American Christian Nationalists wish to use the machinations of human law to impose biblical morality. So, for me, the answer lies in defining the mission of the Church.

  36. Jean says:

    Mike,

    Good thoughts and a good heart.

    “So then the question becomes, what is the mission of the church? Is it to impose Biblical morality on unbelieving people?”

    When you put it that way, we agree that the answer is “no.” The mission of the church is to make disciples by baptizing and teaching.

    However, in the church’s proclamation of God’s Word, it most certainly preaches biblical morality to an unbelieving world, but only as a prelude to the preaching of Christ.

    In addition, Christians live in Christ’s kingdom by faith, but in the world through love. In the world, as citizens of a temporal kingdom, wouldn’t we want to promote laws or ethics that serve our neighbors, such as those found in the 10 Commandments.

  37. Mike E. says:

    I believe I may be being slightly misunderstood. I am not stating Christians i.e. the Church universal, has no temporal responsibility to society. I’m simply stating that that responsibility is not to be the main focus of the church.

    And that is where I believe the church in America has it flipped upside down. That is, the main focus, especially among Christian nationalists, is political power to achieve Godly goals. I simply disagree with that philosophy or model.

    I believe the church’s main mission is promulgating the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ to a dying world. The apostles gave us this legacy. Nowhere in the New Testament can it be shown that the historical faith given to us by the apostles involved the seeking political power.

  38. Jerod says:

    Michael
    “… it’s easy to make binary choices for oneself…”

    You don’t know enough about me to say that, and this site isn’t worth the salt it takes to write about why.

    Paving one’s way to hell is a continuous series of behaviors first mentally, then outwardly in the environment. That’s not binary. It’s not set in stone. God is merciful! Still, having an abortion is a pretty good marker someone’s not making the right decisions.

    When it comes to the procedure

    nothing is more clearly binary.

    But a$$3$ don’t sit in the pews for that.

  39. Jerod says:

    Duane
    Let’s be clear – I’m not lumping in the 2% of medically necessary abortions into this.

    You seem to be invalidating the strength of the woman’s decision, Duane. The only people who passively “experience” abortion, Duane, are the fathers – both good and bad.
    Abortion doesn’t come in the mail like a jury summons, Duane.

    If you are one of the good dads who likes the idea of being a father, It is an experience to realize someone has killed your unborn child, in case you were unaware. And some men even beg for their child before the woman decides unilaterally to kill it (it is, by definition, a unilateral decision) Forgive the men who can’t forgive the women. “My child, her choice”.

  40. Jerod says:

    Jean…

    Isn’t it? Thanks for backing me up.

  41. Duane Arnold says:

    Jerod

    My pastoral experience has been far different from what you describe…

  42. Jean says:

    Jerod,

    “Jean…
    Isn’t it? Thanks for backing me up.”

    What did I back you about?

  43. bob1 says:

    Saw something on one of the networks I didn’t expect — a discussion of the filoque and the split between the Eastern church and the Western church.

    Colbert was interviewing Fr. James Martin.

    Pretty cool! 🙂

  44. bob1 says:

    This photo brought tears to my eyes.

    Thank the Lord things are finally changing WRT immigration and reuniting families.

    https://religionnews.com/2021/02/02/faith-based-groups-cheer-share-hopes-for-bidens-family-reunification-task-force/

  45. Jean says:

    Ladies and Gentlemen,

    A similar type law or ordinance was introduced, but ultimately withdrawn a few years ago in Houston.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/31/c-of-e-anglican-bishop-issues-warning-proposed-denmark-sermons-law-robert-innes

    Under the principle of “I am not ashamed of the Gospel,” I could in principle support such laws. I think good preaching should be publicized, and on the other hand, I think subversive preaching should be exposed.

    What do you think?

  46. Jean says:

    bob1 at 12:19 pm,

    That link exemplifies faith working through love. Thank you for sharing that article.

  47. bob1 says:

    Jean,

    You’re welcome.

    Really looks like better days ahead. And you’re right — it is faith working through love!

  48. BrideofChrist says:

    Charlie Kirk and Calvary Chapel Jack Hibbs seem to be engaging in ‘Cancel Culture’ by telling churches to cancel any concerts by the Christian rapper Lecrae. I thought conservatives thought ‘Cancel Culture’ was bad. They’re always accusing others of it, but they don’t seem to recognize it when they do it themselves. So strange.

  49. Babylon's Dread says:

    Jean @3:43 In a culture with freedom of religion AND free speech ensconced in the founding documents such laws would be essentially anarchistic. I would reckon people who opposed such laws would be standing in the shoes of our founders. No doubt the British throne would have loved such laws in pre-revolutionary New England.

    Further, those laws would be tantamount to putting Luther on trial at Worms again and again. Government censorship of sermons? NEVER!!!

    Please tell me you would NEVER support such laws? Wokeness is a religious spirit more restrictive and harmful than any yet conceived …. no it is the same as communism.

    Why did I have to read this on Resurrection Sunday?

    Here I Stand Dread

  50. Deliver Us From Evil says:

    Oh GOOD GRIEF

    This horrible thread goes back to January and February…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.