Only in the sense that freedom to practice one’s religion is allowed. The Great Commission does not require legislative support.

No, but it might be helpful in countries such as North Korea and China

Thanks. I don’t think we disagree as much as I initially thought.

Dang it.

Now we’ll have to go cause trouble in another thread.

Jesus also said treat your neighbor as yourself and what you do unto the least of these you have done unto me (I’m not putting it in quotes since I’m not sure I’ve got it exact, but I figure you understand where I’m going).

I know what you mean. I think even those actions, and speaking out against injustice are a form of evangelism since our purpose in doing them is to point others to the One who leads us to do them.

But I see your point, and it’s a good one.

Only in the sense that it took (and still takes) a political process to assure religious freedom. The Great Commission does not require legislative support.

Slublog on March 30, 2007 at 1:57 PM

To be fair though, we’re sent here for more than just the Great Commission. Jesus also said treat your neighbor as yourself and what you do unto the least of these you have done unto me (I’m not putting it in quotes since I’m not sure I’ve got it exact, but I figure you understand where I’m going).

There are things beyond freedom of religion. When something unjust is being done within our government, I believe as Christians we are called to do something about it, no matter what it is.

Paul himself was a citizen of Rome and worked within the political process as a Christian.

Only in the sense that freedom to practice one’s religion is allowed. The Great Commission does not require legislative support.

Bah…bunged that comment up but good.

Let me try again.

Only in the sense that it took (and still takes) a political process to assure religious freedom. The Great Commission does not require legislative support.

I can agree with that, as I’m sure every Christian would, but sometimes, I believe that politics are necessary for accomplishing what we’re here to do.

Only in the sense that freedom to practice one’s religion is allowed. The Great Commission does not require legislative support.

Agreed. As a Christian, I have no interest in seeing us turn the other cheek – we should be involved and speak out. However, we should never let politics get in the way of what we were really sent here to do.

That’s all I’m trying to say.

Slublog on March 30, 2007 at 1:12 PM

I can agree with that, as I’m sure every Christian would, but sometimes, I believe that politics are necessary for accomplishing what we’re here to do.

When was the last time James Dobson interviewed a Democrat?

Slublog on March 30, 2007 at 12:46 PM

He isn’t the only Christian minster out there. Jackson and Sharpton certainly interview their fair share of Democrats.

Not trying to add to “the argument”. Just stating an opinion based on the 1st Amendment.

Well, that’s certainly an opinion.

Bad Candy on March 30, 2007 at 12:26 AM

bamapachyderm on March 30, 2007 at 1:12 AM

I don’t disagree with either of you. Not knowing Dobson really, it did seem like a pretty mild goof. If you compare it to Robertson’s comment after 911, and even worse when the former Chief Sephardic Rabbi of Israel, following a bombing on a Friday night of a teen night-club in which around ten Russian immigrant teens were killed, said, “They died because they were clubbing on the Sabbath.” Talk about speaking/thinking theologically about something that has nothing to do with theology!!! But, if you’re saying that Dobson has done or is capable of similar, and this instance is the tip of an iceberg, then be my guest and savage him.

Agreed. As a Christian, I have no interest in seeing us turn the other cheek – we should be involved and speak out. However, we should never let politics get in the way of what we were really sent here to do.

That’s all I’m trying to say.

Seriously, my major concern is that the Christian church is allowing itself to become too closely tied to one political party, and I don’t believe that’s good for the church or its intended mission.

Slublog on March 30, 2007 at 12:31 PM

I agree with you to the extent that political pragmatism obstructs doctrinal and practical integrity.

The problem I have with the gist of your comments is that it seems you’re asking Christians to “turn the other cheek” politically, indefinitely. There comes a point when turning the other cheek becomes self-immolation.

Most everything that’s considered a socio-political milestone in the Western world was accomplished by very religious people with a political itch to scratch. Evangelicals like Dobson are no different. Perhaps you don’t like the itch he’s trying to scratch, but you have no right, either historically or rationally, to invalidate him based upon his nominal religious affiliation.

Great things have been done throughout the Western world, and in our country especially, by religious people for religious reasons. Sure, bad things as well, but it is historical fact that the good has far outweighed the bad. Religion is a valid motive power, both politically and practically. To say otherwise is to reject history and reason. The only caveat is that religion should never be seen as a means to a political or practical end; it is the motive power, not the mechanism.

Puerile. Doesn’t add to the argument at all.

Not trying to add to “the argument”. Just stating an opinion based on the 1st Amendment.

Is this just because you say so? Oh tay then.

What’s the purpose of a church? Of Sunday worship?

(You’re full of it.)

Puerile. Doesn’t add to the argument at all.

But church “voter guides,” “Justice Sundays” – all that stuff?

No.

Slublog on March 30, 2007 at 12:28 PM

Is this just because you say so? Oh tay then.

(You’re full of it.)

Christians vote 60-40. That’s hardly being tied to one party.

When was the last time James Dobson interviewed a Democrat?

Look, unless a church specifically tells is congregation to pick a specific candidate, there’s nothing wrong with explaining to Christians that part of being a good citizens is to go out and vote. Schools do it all the time.

I have no problem with pastors telling their congregations to vote and get involved, but voter guides implicitly endorse particular candidates, which I do not think is appropriate given that the gospel is intended for both Republican and Democrat.

Seriously, my major concern is that the Christian church is allowing itself to become too closely tied to one political party, and I don’t believe that’s good for the church or its intended mission.

Slublog on March 30, 2007 at 12:31 PM

Christians vote 60-40. That’s hardly being tied to one party.

Blacks are 80% Democrat. Jews are over 70%.

It’s disingenuous to worry about Christians with numbers like these.