Gays showering with straights? Absolutely.
If President Obama, congressional Democrats, and homosexual activists get their wish, your son or daughter may be forced to share military showers and barracks with active and open homosexuals who may very well view them with sexual interest.
Talk about creating a hostile work environment for people who practice normative sexuality!
As former General Colin Powell observed in 1993 (before bowing to pressures of political correctness), "...it would be prejudicial to good order and discipline to try to integrate gays and lesbians in the current military structure."
He compellingly argued against the completely bogus comparison between race and sexual preference: "Skin color is a benign, nonbehavioral characteristic. Sexual orientation is perhaps the most profound of human behavioral characteristics. Comparison of the two is a convenient but invalid argument."
Not being the biggest fan of Colin Powell, I can't help but agree with him on this. Gays openly practicing their 'sexuality' in the disciplined ranks of our military? It's a recipe for disaster. There is nothing normal about homosexuality. It is a practice physically evident to be against nature; against design and purpose.
I'm not going to argue the point either. Everyone who reads this blog knows my thoughts on homosexuality, so what's the point? What I will say-- or rather, lament --is that this is just another ideological waste of time coming from the Obama administration. I'd say he should concentrate on fixing the economy, but who is he kidding? He's never managed ANY business or payroll prior to screwing up the American economy.
Why is it every sliver of 'Hope' and 'Change' he's offered thus far appeal only to the far left, the unions, moral reprobates and sexual deviants?
38 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Since we were never a "Christian nation" (except, maybe, psychologically), I don't think Christians should be very surprised by any changes of a moral nature that come about at this stage in our history (especially considering many of the trends and changes of the last several decades).
...
Also, if your mention of Laodicea was a reference to the letter in Revelation, aren't you in danger of equating America with the body of Christ? (I can't imagine you are, but it comes across that way.
As for Obama,...He is exactly what many level-headed people knew he was: a very Liberal politician who has likely sold way too much of his soul to ever be able to move to the political center.
Sometimes nations get the leaders they deserve.
It's the popular thing for Liberals (Progressives) to do; rewrite history to give support to their preferred brand of societal mores.
America WAS founded upon Biblical principles, and it's founders were overwhelmingly Christian. Our founding documents appeal to God and the principles of Christianity for its moral underpinning. We WERE a Christian nation. People wonder and ask why God doesn't stop all the violence in Schools? Don't they know? God was expelled from public schools back in 61-63.
As to my referencing of Laodicea, it's intentional. Reagan spoke of that shining city on a hill, but we who inhabit the city, we are becoming more and more the denizens of Laodicea as described by Christ in Revelation 3.
Obama is unfocused... trying to do too much too quickly-- trying to change too much. Rules for Radicals may have been a groundbreaking book for the 60's protest movement, but it smacks of tyranny when applied to legislation against the will of the people. The first year of Obama's reign has been shown to be the worst of any modern president including Carter. And that's saying a lot.
I don't believe in Christian nations any more than I believe in Christian houses - no matter how many Christians were involved in the building thereof. If a house is designed and built by pious Christians who pray before each nail is driven in, it is no more a Christian house than if atheists had built it who cussed and spat before driving in each nail. What makes the difference is the kind of people that inhabit the nation or house.
The vast majority of past (and present) Americans would have classified themselves as Christians, but there is plenty in our nation's history to make one wonder just how deep that went. I think many people were socially or psychologically Christian, but they were as theologically and biblically ignorant as any unbeliever. The constant use of Old Testament verses to trump the New Testament was rampant, and shows a complete lack of understanding of the NT doctrine of Grace. The treatment of minorities of various kinds (even fellow Christians) was appalling. The equating of American patriotism with Christian faith should be disturbing to any follower of Christ. But all people seem to care about is how many people claim to be Christians, not how many actually are.
Christianity has indeed had a marked and profoundly positive effect on much of our country's history. But it's still a country founded (via violent revolution) and run by people -- and anything founded and run by people eventually corrupts and fails. Power corrodes the soul, which is why Jesus said that real power lay in the hands of those who humbled themselves and served others sacrificially.
As for your school violence referrence, I'm surprised at you. God wasn't expelled from schools, Jesus walks through the front doors every day in the Christian students and teachers that still attend public schools. Putting prayer back in school won't change anything, because most students don't pray outside of school either. There is violence in schools because there is violence everywhere else. And where is the witness of Chritians living the Gospel everyday as beacons of hope in an increasingly hopeless world? They're far too often hiding in gated communities, and sending their kids to ridiculously expensive "Christian schools". And why? Because they don't really trust God to be on the ball.
Being a Christian is easy in a nation that's dominated by Christians. But isn't it interesting how unhinged (and unChristian) people become as soon as they encounter a little resistance? Jesus said following him would put us at odds with the world, but look at how hysterical people get when they don't get to control their little corner of it.
The constant mantra about America ever being a Christian nation is what stokes the angry passions of those who think that they're justified in whatever rhetoric or tactics they use to "take back our country!" Unfortunately, there is nothing Christlike in the behaviour of most people on either side of the issues. God help us.
We are a Christian nation for the reasons I've already mentioned. What is a nation but the people within it? Yes, to build a house in the manner you've described doesn't make it Christian, but a house is a thing. A nation is its people. Without the people there is no nation, only uninhabited land. The Apache Nation, for example, didn't comprise the land on which they lived, but were the Apache people themselves. So since the majority of the people of the USA declare themselves Christian, we are still indeed a Christian nation.
As for prayer in schools, it doesn't much matter how many kids pray outside of school. What prayer in schools does is to reinforce the teachings of parents in the public sector. For those kids who "get no religion" at home, they learn of, at the best, something bigger than themselves to which they ought to be beholden, or at worst, that there is a standard of which society approves and encourages. A good influence, as it were.
Removing religion from the public square and the public debate marginalizes religion, the teaches that form it, and the God at the center of it. It puts mankind into an equal, if not superior position in relation to God and gives the illusion that there is an equal choice in accepting or rejecting God. Not a good idea, nor has it played out well since its implementation. For what has replaced God in the minds of those who removed Him from the public arena?
about how America is failing because she isn't upholding some requirements to stave off his
displeasure (implying legalism) is just the kind of wide-spread double-mindedness that is so
disturbing to me. (And, no, I'm not denying the corrosive and deadly effects of sin.)
I never said or implied that any Christian would or could "be Christ", in the sense of being
sinlessly perfect. But the NT seems to make it clear that there should be something
different about Christians. Obviously, every Christian still has sinful habits they struggle with. But I wasn't referring to the residual effects of the old nature. I was referring to the kind of thinking and behavior that is the result of a wide-spread and deep-seated set of beliefs that are at odds with being a follower of Christ.
Unfortunately, most Americans think God's pretty much okay with whatever they do — as long as they
don't kill anybody (who doesn't deserve it), or hurt babies or puppies. And as long as they're
trying to be a good person (by their definition of "good", of course), then getting into Heaven is a cinch.
If salvation simply means one can live like hell, without worrying about having to go there, then Jesus and the NT writers have a lot of 'splaining to do. What struck people about the early church was how different Christians seemed to be from the rest of society. The breaking down of the divisions between men and women, rich and poor, slave and free, Jew and Gentile, was a stark
contrast to the prevailing mores of the time. They weren't perfect, but they were different.
A nation is more than just it's people. What binds a people into a tribe or nation is a shared
allegiance to a certain codified set of beliefs (e.g., our constitution is the house Americans
share). If an Apache stepped too far outside of their set of accepted beliefs, then he (and
probably his family) would have been banished from the tribe. An American (thanks to our
constitution) can believe whatever he or she wants, and still be considered an American. A
Christian is more like the Apache, in that regard, because a Christian can't believe anything they want, and still be a Christian (Bishop Spong, your handbasket is waiting).
The fact that most Americans claim to be Christians doesn't necessarily mean that most are. Nearly everyone I know claims to be a Christian, but the majority of them couldn't tell you why. Just saying, "I believe in Jesus", doesn't really mean much if you think Jesus is a really cool dude
that likes you just the way you are and wouldn't want to change a thing about you (paging Mr. Osteen). Too many people claim to be Christians because that is the safe and culturally acceptable
thing to be. But Jesus said following him would not be safe or culturally acceptable.
[To be continued...]
And, why is it that most Christians bristle at the idea of schools teaching their kids things they don't approve of — but they don't even blink at the suggestion that schools should do that to other people's kids?
As for "removing God from the public square and the public debate" — I think that's both true AND over-blown. Of course the powers-that-be want religion marginalized — they see it as a threat to their power (especially where Jesus is concerned). But when one looks at how many Christians have been corrupted by power, once they achieve it, then maybe being marginalized is not such a bad thing; maybe it's God's way of forcing Christians to make up their minds about where their faith really resides.
For far too many American Christians: being an American trumps being a Christian, every time. I think that's called idolatry. We're to live as citizens of another Kingdom. We're to live out that Kingdom's principles as a witness to whatever kind of nation we find ourselves in. Unfortunately, too many seem to equate America with the New Jerusalem, and are loathe to level (or tolerate) any criticisms of her. People are less concerned with theological heresies than they are with political vagaries. That's why the church in America no longer has the influence it once did — because it's members are no longer interested in being the Church.
Christians can send their kids to Christian schools (or home-school them). Christians can bring up
religion in a debate as much as they want. They can watch Christian TV programs and movies, read Christian books and blogs, listen to Christian music. But they can't force others to do the same, no matter how good for the country they believe it to be. And, by trying to do so, they will become increasingly irrelevant to a dying nation, just when that nation needs them the most.
I can't think of anywhere in the NT that it even implies that Christians will ever be the majority population anywhere on Earth prior to Christ's return. If anything, Jesus seems to promise just the opposite. But Conservative and Liberal Christians in America have hitched their wagons to an elephant and a donkey, respectively, instead of following the Lamb that is also a Lion.
I really appreciate your clarity, Ricky... AND chastisement. I wish I had time to respond beyond this quick question (I'll be able to do more come Monday).
By the quote above am I to assume that you too view this nation as dying? And would you mind digging into into the 'whys' and 'wherefors'? I am interested in knowing your mind and heart in this.
As for the schools, I don't know if we could ever go back to the way it was before they outlawed religion in the public schools. At the time they did it, if they hadn't, I suspect our moral slide might not have descended with such speed. There's no way to tell at this point, so it's rather moot.
But that whole period affected more than just the schools and we're suffering from the effects today. That's my point. What was done has hurt us without question. Yet, we're still a Christian nation. Thanks to the internet, blogs such as this one and so many others seek to restore some of what was lost in our own humble manner.
I do in fact think our nation is dying -- and I see the blame being shared by all of us. But the seeds of the bitter crop currently being harvested were planted decades (even centuries) ago.
People warned FDR that his social welfare policies (e.g., Social Security) would have dire consequences 50 or 60 years down the road. But few cared about the burdens placed on future generations, they wanted something done immediately - consequences be damned.
Also, people today (especially Conservatives) are forever pointing to the 1960s as the time when our nation really started going off the rails. But no one seems to care that the upheavals of the sixties were carried out by the children of the "greatest generation", after rejecting the shallow materialism and spiritual vacuity of their parents' largely Christian and conservative worldview. (The "because that's how we've always done it" answer to your kids questions is no answer at all, and is all but guaranteed to send them looking elsewhere.)
More specifically, I think the blame lies in the failure of too many American Christians to be more Christian than American. The ability of professed Christians to justify (in their own minds) even the most reprehensible behaviors, is a trait that one can tace like an ugly scar across our nation's history. And rather than call sin sin, excuses are made as to why, under certain circumstances, such horribly unChristian behavior is acceptable (if not desirable).
Jesus said render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. But the American colonists decided to take up arms against "Caesar". One of the popular slogans of the time was (and still is) "Give Me Liberty, or Give Me Death!" But has anyone ever stopped to think how messed up it is for a follower of Christ to espouse such nonsense? Can you imagine Paul telling Onesimus that it would be better to die than go back to Philemon -- especially considering that Paul had lost his own freedom at the time, and wasn't blathering such useless platitudes himself? Not to mention the fact that Jesus and the early church lived under some pretty oppressive conditions, but nowhere do you see them advocating violent revolution as an option for Christians.
Jesus said love your enemies, yet many of our nation's Christian forefathers killed the Indians as if they were nothing more than insects. And the enslavement of Africans (and abuses of other minorities of every ethnicity) has rarely ever been dealt with in a timely and Christian manner (heck, we're the only country I can think of that had to use a Civil War, and the deaths of nearly half a million of its citizens, to finally end slavery).
Jesus never said kill heathens, or burn witches, or stone heretics. He said to love everyone, period. The unsaved are no less loved by God, and no more in need of salvation, than any of us were before our conversions. And why do so many professed Christians get so bent out of shape over the inability of non-believers to see the truth of God's word, when so few believers seem to see the truth themselves? Jesus said to follow Him. He didn't say to do anything to unbelievers except love them and be a witness to them of the trasforming truth of the Gospel.
[To be continued...]
Too many Christian's are more concerned with getting the Ten Commandments back in public schools and courtrooms than they are with the hurting and lost people that pass through the doors of those schools and courtrooms every day. Putting up the Ten Commandments is the socio-political equivalent to anonymously tossing Chick Tracts at people, and it's even less effective. (And does it not bother anyone that Christians are wasting so much time, effort, and money to reestablish something that Jesus suffered and died to free us from?)
For the most part, Christians in America have rejected Christ's call for us to be lights in a dark world -- opting, instead, for political solutions, and a near complete separation from the world we desperately need to be impacting in a powerful way. Jesus rejected political solutions, but, apparently, his followers know more than He did about how it should be done.
I don't disagree that the bible was a major (if not the major) influence on the moral and ethical fiber of America -- but that doesn't mean that those who used the bible as a kind of moral compass were necessarily Christians. Then, as now, many people called themselves Christians simply because they went to church, thought Jesus was an okay guy, and weren't Jews, atheists, or Hindus. The writer Walker Percy once commented that the Stoicism that often passed for being a Christian in the southern U.S. was more influenced by novels like Ivanhoe than the bible. For too many Americans, identifying one's self as a Christian was simply the most convenient and pragmatic thing to do. But that's changing, as is obvious from the sudden (but not surprising) increase in the percentage of Americans who now claim no religious affiliation (we're living in the age of "I'm not religious, but I'm very spiritual" nonsense).
As for schools, I think people are longing for a time that didn't really exist. Before they "outlawed religion in public schools", you could only go to a decent school if you were white (even if you were a better Christian than any of the white students).
--While I was in the 4th and 5th grades, my family lived in a city that had NO black citizens. Zero. Yet those churches were full of Klansmen on Sundays, who were out burning crosses the night before to keep folks on the pale & narrow path. The unofficial city slogan was "The sun don't go down on a nigger in Southport." They even burned a cross at the little league field the night before a team with some black players came to play the local team. That's anti-Christian, no matter how you parse it.
--I went to a Christian school in 6th grade (circa 1973) and remember the teacher having a discussion with the class about why an attempt to force the school to accept black students (whose parents could afford the tuition) was wrong and should be resisted. Somehow, I can't imagine Jesus going along with such stupidity.
Banning prayer in school didn't contribute to bad behaviour -- a flaccid and impotent theology in our homes and churches did! Christians want the state to do the work of the church and family. As I asked in a previous comment: "...why is it that most Christians bristle at the idea of schools teaching their kids things they don’t approve of — but they don’t even blink at the suggestion that schools should do that to other people’s kids?"
And having students fake a prayer to a generic god that they may not even believe in won't accomplish anything. Plus, it only blurs the distinction between the God of the bible, who we meet in the person of Jesus Christ, and the God of popular culture who tends to be made in our ownimage. Now THAT'S a recipe for a nation's decline and collapse.
Far too many people's faith ends where the really hard stuff kicks in. Everybody loves Jesus -- until he gets too personal, and insists that they love and reach out to the bitch or ass-hole that lives next door, or works in the next cubicle. Jesus is Lord, until he starts challenging our priorities and cherished prejudices.
Jesus is cool, until he insists we love Obama or G.W. Bush as much as we love the people we find agreeable. Then the excuses and back-pedalling begins, and the real object of peoples' devotion is exposed.
Did America just grow up? Grow beyond a belief in Santa Claus and Jesus? So much so that reading the Bible in school is akin to teaching from flat-earth era texts?
This nation's first institutions of higher learning were ALL dedicated to training up ministers in the word of God. Yale, Harvard, Princeton... all of them.
This nation sent out missionaries across the globe to bring the light of the Gospel to untold millions who needed (and still need) the Gospel message.
For this America has been blessed.
But we've turned our back on our first love, so to speak. Christianity is not something one becomes at christening, or because one identifies himself with a selection of Christian tenets, or has friends who also CALL themselves "Christian." Christians are redeemed by God through the blood of His son Jesus. And whether or not every person who ever claimed to be Christian was in fact Christian is, to my mind, irrelevant in terms of America's state of being a "Christian" nation.
No, we were not founded as a theocracy, but this nation was founded on Christian principles, in spite of Slavery. And, if you search deep enough, you'll discover that more than a few founders found the practice of slavery abhorrent and antithetical to the tenets of Liberty, but allowed it in the then 'now' to establish the nation, with the hope of doing away with slavery altogether later. And yes, it's a shame half a million "Americans" had to kill each other to settle the argument.
Continued...
Spiritual Laodicea is where todays church is hurtling toward. Cultural Laodicea? We've been there quite a while now... beginning with the case that kicked God out of public school. The case that even today educators ignorantly employ in their little persecutions of children who pray over their lunch or bring bibles to school. Even educators aren't immune from this American pogrom against Christianity; it was reported in the news recently of a man fired from his teaching position because he had a bible laying on his desk. What would Liberals think if the roles were reversed and educators were being fired for having Noam Chomsky on their desks, or for daring to teach Darwinism? And yet neither Chomsky OR Darwin were infallible God.
The darkness hates the light because it exposes their evil deeds. There is nothing to fear in the light, but there is caution to be employed in judging the motives and doctrine of those purporting to support the light. Man is fallible and capable of all manner of evil. Being Christian does not exempt one from being human. And ignorance of the Bible and its teachings has allowed the majority of Americans (including many Christians, sad to say) to believe Christians are supposed to be perfect... that they HAVE be perfect to BE Christian.
By removing even the pretense of God in the classroom we have raised generations that neither know or desire to know God. They choose instead the gods of their own hands, in the worship of which they don't have to give anything up. In whom there is no need to repent because THESE gods validate their sin. They can continue to do whatever is right in their own hearts and minds without the slightest consequence to their immortal souls.
I agree with you 100%. But finally finding time to respond, I needed to clarify myself... to say, "This is what I mean."
If we are to love our enemies, we can't be pickers or choosers. Men like Obama must also be loved. But as an American, and given a right to vote in elections, Christians must render to Caesar the things which are Caesar's and give him their vote. And don't think God will not hold us accountable for our votes.
It's one thing to say 'I don't believe gambling should be made legal in my state' but given the opportunity to vote, should I vote in favor of gambling (because I know my ballot is "secret"), God will know how I voted. And I'll answer for it in some form or fashion.
But there's nothing wrong with the theology itself. Christianity is just fine. The problem is people and how they relate to it, and how they choose to interpret.
So, Ricky, that your fellow townsmen were racially ignorant is unfortunate. But if you were to eliminate that fault, set it aside, what then can be said for the overall tone of those people? Certainly some were drunks, some adulterers, some this, some that. Imperfect human beings. But what was there notion of wrong vs right? I would wager that despite their personal faults as well as their general racial ignorance, they likely still maintained a sense of right/wrong that was tied to Christian teaching. Under that, even with the shortcomings of adults, kids were raised with these notions and it affected them and the way they lived. Without it, there's even less to guide them.
There was a time when Christian sensibilities pervaded the social mentality even with all the faults of mankind. This is evident in the area of sexuality. How can anyone rightly say that the ratio of virgins to loose women is the same now as it was even fifty years ago, certainly sixty to seventy years ago? We can see it in the numbers of young girls with babies, venerial diseases, & abortions.
And now we see it in the debate over homosexuality. Without the influence in the public sphere of ANY religion, this behavioral anomoly has been reframed as being akin to racism or gender inequality. Anyone with a shred of sense can see that's BS even without religion, but without religion, there's one less argument for truth and decency. With religion pushed to the side, this perversion threatens to infect our legal system to the detriment of those who are more honest about the condition, be they religious or just honest atheists.
As regards non-Christians in schools, keep in mind that they also existed in the past and I don't believe they were forced to do anything. For as long as the Pledge of Allegiance included the words "under God", and likely since the Pledge existed, no one was legally forced to recite it. And while those teachers of yours and neighbors were misinterpreting the Bible, using it to promote their warped worldview, there have always been others who disputed them with the truth.
We, as Christians, make our choices and if we do so with the best of intentions I believe our faith covers our errors if we face up to them. We, as Christians, are raised in such a manner.
I stated in an earlier comment that, "I don't disagree that the bible was a major (if not the major) influence on the moral and ethical fiber of America..."
I also understand the centrality of the bible in teaching children to read -- as well as it being most people's introduction to reading great literature (and, no, I'm not suggesting it's only literature). So some of your (and Marshall's) comments are against things I haven't said.
I do have a problem with the idea that "Whether the prayers were heartfelt or not, they were at least a pretense, and an example to younger children in school, of a proper reverence for and asking supplication to God." I fear that such behaviour only taught people to fake it for God (and smacks of having a form of Godliness, but denying the power thereof). And I think it was a big factor in our nation's growing hostility to anything labeled Christian. It was phony, so people began to dismiss Chistianity as phony.
I think there are plenty of scriptures one could cite to show that God's not too crazy about pretense. The phrase, "they honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me", comes immediately to mind -- but there are plenty of others.
Also, having people enact some kind of quasi-devotion to God blurs the line between Christians and non-Christians, and leads a lot of people to mistakenly think they're "goin' to Heaven" because they went to church enough, always prayed before meals, and never killed anybody.
The reason the bible isn't taught in public schools anymore is because America is far more religiously diverse than it was then. And, as I asked earlier, why is it that most Christians bristle at the idea of schools teaching their kids things they don't approve of — but they don't even blink at the suggestion that schools should do that to other people's kids?
Also, I know that our first universities were for religious instruction, just as I'm aware that our government used to pay for priests to minister to some Indian tribes. But that involved a very small percentage of our nation's population, so I don't know that that was THE reason America was blessed.
As for turning our backs on our "first love" -- He wasn't necessarily anyone's first love if their faith was the pretense you mentioned earlier. And I completely disagree that "whether or not every person who ever claimed to be Christian was in fact Christian is...irrelevant in terms of America's state of being a 'Christian' nation." I think it's very relevant, unless the term Christian is nothing more than a way to label people. John Shelby Spong still calls himself a Christian, but he's not (no matter how many times he says it, or how strongly he asserts it).
I don't think God would decide to judge a nation just because they quit faking devotion to Him. I think many of our nation's ills are self inflicted: the inevitable consequence of people behaving in a way that is contrary to the standards God has graciously put in most people's consciences. We're doing what most (if not every) great civilization has done -- i.e, we reached a level of great affluence and power, because we adhered to certain moral and ethical standards (in our case, biblically informed), only to fall for the delusion that we have grown too sophisticated for such outdated ideals. Such hubris is deadly, as we are witnessing.
[To be continued...]
And, why does no one consider that maybe what American Christians are going through is God's way of chastising His people by lettng them go through what they've too often put other's through -- and often in His name. (There is biblical precedence for such.) Harassed for praying in school? There was a time where one was harassed for NOT praying in school; or not saying the Pledge of Allegiance; or for reading the wrong books; or for having the wrong haircut, skin color, accent, or daddy. Heck, I knew a good Christian lady who used to refer to the divorced woman down the street as "that whore" -- even though she didn't know anything about the mother of two, except that she was divorced (such behaviour only fueled my anti-Christian sentiments at the time).
Why would we expect non-Christians to behave like Christians, when the Christians too often don't behave that way themselves? We've too often confused Chistendom with Christianity, and we're now paying for it. Christians in America are a lot like the Jews in the OT (i.e., not all who clamed to be children of Abraham were children of Abraham), but we've so compromised the gospel, and the call to truly be disciples of Christ, that we often don't even realize we've strayed (much less have any idea how to get back on the right path).
Again, I'm not talking about the imperfections, weaknesses, and residual sins that we all struggle with. I'm talking about deep-seated bigotries and prejudices that most will not even admit are sins -- and which have gone unchallenged for too long in the lives of too many professing Christians. We've refused to hold each other accountable -- so, perhaps God is doing it for us.
As for our history: One shouldn't have to "search deep enough" to find out that some founding fathers disapproved of slavery. They should have been boldly outspoken about the fact that slavery (especially as then practiced) was an unacceptable business for Christians to engage in -- not to mention incompatable with the claim that "all men are created equal."
I don't think Spiritual slides proceed Cultural slides. I believe it is the other way around.
And I've never suggested that one must have all their theological or doctrinal ducks in a row to be a Christian. Nor would I ever presume to judge who is or isn't saved. But the NT seems to make it pretty clear that some things are unacceptable for those claiming to follow Christ (e.g., treating poor and ragged differently than the rich and famous; or allowing divisions over such stupid things as what kind of meat you can eat, etc).
I don't think the kind of widespread bigotry I'm talking about can just be chalked up to ignorance. And I certainly don't believe those people's lives can be fairly assessed if that behaviour is simply set aside. And I don't know how one can think their moals and ethics were biblically grounded, when they not only ignored the explicit teachings of scripture, but very often twisted scriptures to try to justify behaviour they knew was unbiblical.
Also, the fact that they may have been using the bible to teach their children such hypocrisy is beyond reprehensible. Such bullshit is the very reason so many people, raised in "good Christian homes" grow up to hate the Christian faith. Such...behaviour...is...evil. It is manipulation to gain power over others. It is abuse, in the name of God.
Seeing their parents' blatant disrespect for the book they claim is God's Holy Word, would have little or no positive effect in the life of any child who was even half-way paying attention. It teaches them that it's a weapon to bludgeon others with, rather than manna to refresh and transform one's soul and spirit.
Far too often, professing Christians (en masse) will sell their souls for another gospel, if it will allow them to keep the cultural bigotries and superstitions that they refuse surrender. It's the old "Tell us pleasant things, prophesy illusions." Or, "For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths."
As for the sexual sins you mentioned : Why only mention women? Men were allowed (even expected) to be sexually active long before women were allowed to. The sad thing about the sexual liberation of women is that, for the most part, it mostly seems to have freed them up to do the same kinds of things that made so many men assholes. Some freedom.
It's true that promiscuity, out of wedlock births, STDs, etc, have skyrocketed in the last 50 years -- not because the bible was taken out of schools, but, rather, because Jesus was kicked out of our churches. Too many professed Christians sold their souls for the excesses of the American Dream (which is not synonymous with the Kingdom of God).
Also, as I've repeatedly said, you can't expect nominal or cultural Christians to continue to take the teachings of the bible seriously, when so many seemingly stronger Christians don't. Why is that not obvious?
The bible isn't a user's manual for How to Have a Moral Nation. If anything, it is an airtight case for the impossibilty of having a moral nation -- and the only solution offered is Jesus. And, unfortunately (for some), there is no indication that (prior to Christ's return) Christians will be the majority population of any nation -- much less a Christian nation.
[To be contiued...]
The Christian faith is not an "argument for truth and decency." It is the offer of salvation to the untruthful and indecent. It's the Good News that the impossible has been done for us, and is graciously offered to those who are sick enough to know they need the miracle cure. There is no promise to make you better. There is the promise to make us a new creation -- even if at a slow and sometimes painful pace.
Your refusal to believe that non-Christians were ever abused or harassed is too mind-boggling to even know where to begin.
And if you think my examples were isolated extremes, then you haven't been around long enough, or you haven't been paying attention. And I've never implied that there aren't Christians tirelessly contending for the faith.
As for the Pledge of Allegiance: it was written in 1892, by a Christian Socialist who wanted America to become a socialist utopia. He was forced out of his church because of his socialist sermons. His grand-daughter claimed he would not have been happy when the words "under God" were inserted in 1954.
http://www.oldtimeislands.org/pledge/pledge.htm
I've neverclaimed that Christians can't be involved in various social causes and political campaigns. Stop trying to read things into my words.
What I've said is that far to many American Christians are more American than Christian.
The burdens the colonists were saddled with were nothing compared to what early Christians faced -- and yet, there was nary a word to the early church about using violence to resist the persecutions (in fact, there were words stating just the opposite). Christ will not allow his Church to cease to exist. Such fear shows a lack of faith that God is truly in control.
Our intentions don't mean squat (no matter how sincere), if we are doing things that the bible clearly states are wrong. Political pragmatism is not a Christian virtue -- it is a secular vice.
One doesn't have to accept homosexual behaviour as anything less than sinful to love one's gay neighbor, or help them when they're in need. You don't even have to like people of another race or religion, but you have to love them -- Jesus doesn't leave us any choice, if we're claiming Him as Lord. If we don't realize that something deeply profound has taken root in us, and don't understand that it intends to radically transform us, then we haven't even begun to learn the kind of faith that creates disciples. And that is where far too many American churches and Christians have failed this country. Too much time, effort, and money has been spent trying to create nice little Christan Citizen Clones™, that will parrot the right words and slogans, and be good little consumers, and not question the government (unless the Democrats are in power).
I don't know quite where to begin except to say that your recent comments clarified your position a little better for me, so thanks for that.
I might be shotgunning a little, so bear with me. I'll start by restating one of my comments as it was originally presented:
"Without the influence in the public sphere of ANY religion, this behavioral anomoly has been reframed as being akin to racism or gender inequality. Anyone with a shred of sense can see that's BS even without religion, but without religion, there's one less argument for truth and decency."
By this I didn't mean that there are no people of faith arguing against homosex from a religious perspective. What I meant is that such perspectives are dismissed as backward, based on superstition, rank bigotry, and other less than legitimate arguments. This allows for the equating of "their struggle" with that of blacks and women. They dismiss the talk of behavior, on which the Christian focusses, and puts forth the lie that it is as unchangable as race or gender. Without the influence of religion, this lie is easier to proclaim and also easier for others to swallow as truth.
"The Christian faith is not an "argument for truth and decency." It is the offer of salvation to the untruthful and indecent."
This is true, but it defines truth and decency so that we can know the difference, does it not? I would add that it would be unChristian to simply allow that others redefine those as they see fit without rebuttal. This is typically where charges of hypocrisy are made. But, to fall short is not hypocrisy, but human imperfection. Worse would be to join those sorry supporters of redefinition and pretend Christian definitions no longer apply.
Frankly, for those who point to Christians as having no room to speak, I consider them the bigger hypocrites as I don't see that they go to any lengths to be better, but simply give no effort at all to higher standards. A typical example is the one who doesn't go to church because they "can't stand all those hypocrites". Who's demanding perfection here, and who's understanding their own imperfection? Sure. Some church goers ARE assholes. But to simply point and cast aspersions is cheap and not usually backed by superior character.
Put another way, do you justify every mistep in your life, or do you recognize your sins, confess to your God and seek forgiveness? This is a major sign of one who is truthful in his understanding of the faith. Do your misteps mean you're a hypocrite and that your faith is weak and your religion worthless, or would you explain that Christ covers your imperfections when you are unable to be perfect?
As to the pledge, it's source is irrelevant. My point was that it was never something that anyone should legally forced to recite. I also don't claim that Christians never messed with non-Christians in an unChristian manner. So what? The claim isn't that we're a perferct Christian nation, but simply a Christian one. Even with a greater percentage of non-Christians, the claim is still true. Had we never changed things from the old days, my point is that it is likely the morals of today would not have slid so far even if they still slid at all. The descent would have been slower or not dropped to the current depth.
-------------------------
I never intended that men should be omitted from guilt in our moral decline. I simply used women for the sake of example.
"It's true that promiscuity, out of wedlock births, STDs, etc, have skyrocketed in the last 50 years -- not because the bible was taken out of schools, but, rather, because Jesus was kicked out of our churches."
Same difference. We are the church. We are His church. Whether we govern ourselves as a theocracy or not is irrelevant to that fact. Religion was pushed out of the public square and it isn't really surprising that it would be hushed up in the church services as well. It was only a matter of time. It's so watered down in some as to be indistinguishable from any nonChristian self-help group. Why not? The same people that make up the public square are in the churches, too. They let Johnson change the tax code to penalize churches that got too political and churches have since questioned just how religious they can get from the pulpit without tax penalties. It's all part of the same issue.
"I've neverclaimed that Christians can't be involved in various social causes and political campaigns. Stop trying to read things into my words."
Sorry. Didn't mean to.
"What I've said is that far to many American Christians are more American than Christian."
I don't necessarily disagree with this statement. But for me, to be a good American means being a good Christian. If I'm the latter, then I can't help but be the former. I don't think bad Americans can be good Christians or that bad Christians can be good Americans. But being a good Christian is the prime directive, as it were. Take care of that and the good American aspect is automatic.
"Christ will not allow his Church to cease to exist."
I don't think this is correct. If I'm not mistaken, we are taught that as long as the Church stands, Jesus will not come. There'd be no need as we are still living (for the most part) as He taught us to. He'll come to judge us when the Church falls. Don't quote me. I'll have to look that part up. But I think mine is more accurate. It goes back to what I said earlier about allowing evil without speaking out against it.
To wind it up, I'm not concerned that our history is stained in one way or another. None of that matters as regards our Christian heritage and current make-up. What's really important is that the deeper our understanding of Scripture, the better a nation we can be if we always work toward emulating the truths found therein. And certainly that we may have allowed some nonChristian behaviors to run rampant means that we must then continue to do so. Hearts and minds are tough to change but the effort is worth it. To allow a further decline, such as by doing away with miltary codes of conduct regarding sexual behavior is to further abdicate our responsibility to raise ourselves and our character as a nation.
"And certainly that we may have allowed some nonChristian behaviors to run rampant does not mean that we must then continue to do so."
Quoting you quoting Ricky and then responding...
[Ricky:]"Christ will not allow his Church to cease to exist."
[Marshall:]I don't think this is correct. If I'm not mistaken, we are taught that as long as the Church stands, Jesus will not come. There'd be no need as we are still living (for the most part) as He taught us to. He'll come to judge us when the Church falls.
Allow me to correct you on this. What is the Church if not the "Bride of Christ." Remember the parable of the Bridegroom? of the wise and foolish virgins? The Bridegroom comes to take his bride to the house he has prepared for her. It was Jewish custom at the time that the Bride was to be perpetually ready for her groom, because while she waited, he was to be busy building a house for her and could come for her at any moment.
What is the rapture if not the Bridegroom coming for His bride, the Church? Christianity is not a religion but rather the whole cloth of ALL believers following Christ and awaiting His coming, as a bride awaits (is daily prepared) for her husband. Christianity cannot therefore die out. Our Lord IS coming for us. If we die before that day, we will still hear that trumpet first and be raised. Why will we hear it first? We will be in heaven with our Lord when he gives the order for the trumpet to be blown. We will be there awaiting our resurrection bodies. Those who are alive when that trumpet sounds will be changed in an instant-- their flesh will put on immortality.
When we are judged, we will not be judged as the unbelievers are judged. We are covered by God own blood (Acts 20:28 KJV), and so our sins are already taken care of. We will be judged based on what we did with the talents He gave us. Did we bury them? Or did we invest them and bring a return for our Master? We will be judged for the purpose of rewards.
Furthermore, Jesus said He would save us from THAT day... the tribulation. The rapture is a picture of Noah's ark; only a remnant will be saved. Millions will be taken out of the earth on that day, enough so that the world WILL notice, and tremble with fear (initially).
So you see, the Church will never cease to exist on earth or in heaven. Also, it must also be pointed out that the Church will increase in number, on earth, AFTER the rapture. The Gospel of the Kingdom of God will be preached to the whole world* and many millions will be saved amid great persecution.
----
* an interesting note as an aside...
Many Christian teachers claim the Gospel must be preached to the whole world before Christ can come, but this is not so. Jesus taught that it is during the tribulation that the Gospel will be preached to the whole world before His coming. The rapture is NOT the second coming of Christ. The second coming is at the end of the tribulation when He returns in Glory and power and puts an end to all rebellion on earth (for a time), ruling with a rod of iron.
The rapture can occur at any time. Nothing stands in the way of that event. And we, the Church, are to make ourselves (and remain) ready-- our wicks trimmed, our lamps filled with oil.
The Mother of all write offs. God must have puked when you wrote that, EL.
Not to get in a pissing match with you, but if God were prone to puking what would be the state of his delicate stomach knowing all the heresy preached over at ER's place? The same shite you yourself engage in? Because you've read a few books that makes you smarter? Well, I've read some books too, but at least I'm humble enough to realize that reading Gray's Anatomy doesn't make me a surgeon, any more than any studies going on in ER's seminary make him a preacher capable of rightly dividing the word. Or you for that matter.
But this is typical of you. You wander in, look into the pot on the stove, then promptly spit.
I'm sure you chaps are a right fun bunch when you strip off the righteous macs you guys wear to shield you from a good honest rain, it's not you personally (or ER) that I object to but, rather, the smarmy self-righteousness that literally drips from your lips as you rattle off terse drive-by loogies in our direction.
Mock all you want. But Cat Stevens, for all he's a Muslim and on his way to hell, said it right in his song In The End...
"You can't bargain with the truth
'Cause whether you're right or you're wrong
We're gonna know what you've done
We're going to see where you belong - in the end"
We've had some reasonable conversations in the past. Why can't we now? You don't have to like my politics any more than I have to like yours. I don't have to accept your liberalism any more than you have to accept my conservatism. We can be civil to one another if we choose, but it would make it so much easier if you didn't spit in my soup each time you showed up.