From someone above in the comments, whose name I have no desire to learn: There are atheists who carry more love in their hearts for their fellow human beings than the followers of the Judeo-Christian faith. Are you nuts? Three years ago, with a combined income of less than $50,000 I gave five times as much to charity than did BHusseinO. Is that the kind of HOPE and CHANGE you are looking for?

not for me, but whatever

windansea on May 3, 2008 at 10:04 PM

Hit the nail on the head

This Manifesto should be correctly labeled a Confessional.

Confess to anything you want but do not imply you are speaking for any Evangelicals other than yourselves.

All too often we have attacked the evils and injustices of others,” they wrote, “while we have condoned our own sins.” They argue, “we must reform our own behavior

That of course is the foundation of Christianity, evangelical or not. It is a good thing they just noticed. Even the big dogs need to fight sin and temptation

That way faith loses its independence, Christians become `useful idiots’ for one political party or another, and the Christian faith becomes an ideology,” according to the draft

Sounds like Rev. Wright to me. Is that who they were talking about?

Limerick on May 3, 2008 at 10:29 PM

Sorry to read that…that is the problem with those darn dogs, you get to attached to them.
Let me suggest a great replacement, a mini-aussie. I’ve had standard aussie, corgies, shelties, and borders (I love those herding dogs). About 35 lbs of activity (not as much a your border collie), I know your loss, but do it quick. Nothing like a little puppy to realize that the cycle is a natural one. A puppy needs a great home.

as long as we can get a Republican Congress;…

emailnuevo on May 4, 2008 at 1:33 PM

Good luck with that…plus a more liberal Senate…

Entelechy on May 4, 2008 at 1:06 PM

Rush did disappoint me on that. No one thought McCain would take it, so why not play it safe?

But Rush is a little different. He has always maintained that he is, first and foremost, an entertainer. Choosing a candidate in the primary might alienate his audience, like you said. He does not have the moral haughtiness of a James Dobson, who is considered and calls himself a culture-warrior and major Christian figure and, most importantly, not only an entertainer, but instead, a spiritual leader. Rush also didn’t he endorse someone who ran completely contrary to his own beliefs once it became politically viable (Huckabee on Lawrence v. Texas, Huckabee on evolution-in-schools,etc.).

I’d much rather have Hillary than Obama, as long as we can get a Republican Congress; I’ve sworn hostility to McCain, because I don’t trust him. That leaves me stuck with Hillary as my favorite (I love her faux-”Watch out Iran!”), but man, we really messed ourselves up this time.

Indeed. From different perspectives, Rush was no better. For the sake of maintaining listenership (for which I don’t blame him from a Capitalist’s standpoint), he maintained neutrality, until it was too late. Now he’s trying to be ‘relevant’ again, with Operation Chaos, which might bring us Hillary and backfire on Rush, and us, royally.

Watch what you wish for, you might get it. Or as some would say, god will grant your wishes.

I lost the best pup I ever had just a couple of months ago, so it’s fresh in my mind that it’s a tough loss to overcome.

petefrt on May 4, 2008 at 10:51 AM

It doesn’t go away completely, ever. Lim’s India, your pup, and so many others, are with my beloved departed dog. They are the best given to humans. If only all humans w/b good to them. Yes, getting another, or having others, is the best to move on.

jgapinoy on May 4, 2008 at 12:17 AM

No. Dobson sat on the sidelines and refused to endorse a political candidate, saying that there was nobody, I mean nobody, who satisfied his Christian character; he threw a temper tantrum and hinted he might not vote. After Huckabee gained some traction, guess who Dobson endorsed?

Dobson claimed to be fighting evolution, fighting against same-sex marriage, and fighting for a Christian morality – three issues on which Huckabee is and was disastrous. So he’s an opportunist.

I am not an opportunist because I did not say “There’s NOBODY in the WORLD who can satisfy my Christian character…” and then wait for a few polls to come in and say, “Wait a minute, yes there is!”

P.S.

ScottMcC on May 3, 2008 at 11:46 PM

Amen.

For me, honesty and telling the truth are natural-born virtues, they go together, they can’t be separated.

I hope I made myself clear.

Indy Conservative on May 4, 2008 at 6:46 AM

You did, and we are in complete agreement.

You can withold the truth without necessarily lying which is dishonest. It’s better to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

aengus on May 4, 2008 at 9:03 AM

Indeed. Look how many politicians get in trouble for the cover-up, and not for their follies, necessarily.

Limerick, may India’s celestial dog-sled to heaven be harnessed with a splendid array of angelic canines of all breeds. Godspeed India.

As for you AllahPundit, who do you think you are? Indiana Jones? Dredging up ancient artifacts like the political corruption of Christianity. Why post stories on HotAir that are nearly 17 centuries old? Politics overwhelmed the original Christian church when Constantine declared in the official religion of the Roman Empire. It was the worst event in all of human history. From that day forward, the organized religion of humans commonly referred to as Christianity became ALL about the temporal, political, carnal things of man, and almost nothing about the spiritual, eternal things of God.

Fortunately, there IS hope. The church that Jesus spoke of is a spiritual entity, and it is not diminished or corrupted in any way by the political activities of foolish human zealots. His Word stands, He continues to reign His Kingdom, and the gates of hell will not prevail against the True Church.

“That way faith loses its independence, Christians become ‘useful idiots’ for one political party or another, and the Christian faith becomes an ideology.”

You mean… like Jeremiah Wright’s liberation theology reduces Christianity into a subservience of Marxism?

Limerick on May 3, 2008 at 10:29 PM

My heart goes out to you, Limerick. I lost the best pup I ever had just a couple of months ago, so it’s fresh in my mind that it’s a tough loss to overcome.

The first three words are completely misleading as to who these people actually are. They aren’t conservative at all, they’re just Christian liberals trying to excuse their political ideology. This way they can be guilt free when voting for people who support abortion and gay marriage yet share their pacifist and socialist views.
The bonus? They can paint true evangelical Christians as intolerant at the same time.

lowandslow on May 3, 2008 at 10:23 PM

Bingo.

Contending that Christians shouldn’t take sides in the culture war is like saying they shouldn’t be judgmental about values and morality. Pure PC poppycock.

They aren’t conservative at all, they’re just Christian liberals trying to excuse their political ideology.

Os Guiness is hardly a liberal. That aside, this “manifesto” does sound about as political as the politicking it condemns. They should know that such a letter would be used as a weapon.

Dogs go to heaven. Would that we could join their company when our time comes. Condolences.

Draw the line as to what one is and is not and do not let the opponent define one to the world.

Evangelicals are conducting serious self awareness of what all that they have accomplished and all that they have become, in their own minds and in the minds of others. Christianity has a history of 2000 years during which empires have come and gone and transitioned. Hope to God they neither succumb to self depricating annihilation nor overlord self-righteousness.

Isaiah Berlin wrote much on positive vs. negative liberty, and the effects of the Counter-Enlightenment vs. the Enlightenment that deals with this current evangelical dilemma.

Entelechy on May 3, 2008 at 11:22 PM

You can withold the truth without necessarily lying which is dishonest. Its better to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

I was reading this morning turn of the 20th Century politics, and forgotten Republican Presidents preaching pluralism.

Pluralism is connected with the hope that this process of conflict and dialogue will lead to a definition and subsequent realization of the common good that is best for all members of society. This implies that in a pluralistic framework, the common good is not given a priori. Instead, the scope and content of the common good can only be found out in and after the process of negotiation (a posteriori).–Wikipedia

Republicans are the party of pluralism, the “Big Tent” of the Grand Old Party. Pluralism has been the tenet of the party since it began given the specific exclusion of slavery and polygamy. However, now Conservatives no longer hold strength of sway over the GOP gone RINOP just as the Classical Liberals lost sway within the DNC to the hard-ultra-left progressives. BOTH parties have been overrun well by the persistent progressive agenda over a century now, that with lip service toward pluralism seduces the citizenship into the suffocating totalitarian fascist embrace.

Time for all Conservatives to draw a line and take stock.

Limerick on May 3, 2008 at 10:29 PM

My condolences. I’ll make sure I throw the Frisbee for my BC more than usual today. Next time I see a rainbow I’ll think of you.

emailnuevo on May 3, 2008 at 10:13 PM

That’s exactly their point, emailnuevo. The word “evangelical” is now taken to describe the politically active group of culture warriors you dislike, when in truth it means those who follow the Great Commission and spead the word of Jesus.
Not having seen the actual text of the document, I can’t endorse it, but as it was reported in the article I think I agree.

So what exactly is an Evangelical? I’m a Christian but I don’t recognize myself in the preachers I see on TV. I”m a Lutheran who doesn’t buy the “rapture” and believes that we are saved by what Christ did on the cross, not by what we do ourselves. I love the work of Chuck Swindol, Dobson and others to help people but am frustrated with the Republican Party which I believe to be very liberal right now. So, who speaks for me? Nobody, that’s who! Sigh…

Indy, I’ve commented before that if god is benevolent he says “I think my experiment went sour”, and if he’s malevolent he watches in awe and amusement how we behave.

p.s. I don’t know if god is a “he” or a “she”.
p.p.s. I don’t know way more than that.

Entelechy on May 3, 2008 at 11:41 PM

God created Human Beings and gave them freedom to do whatever they want. And that’s why God doesn’t intervene when Humans kill each other. It’s their choice.

The thing is, God answers those who sincerely and honestly pray to Him.

Jesus promised to return to see what His Creation did.

Did they obey or disobey His commandments?

I don’t think His commandments are such a burden for Humans to reject them.

Love, Faith and Hope. Is that too much to ask?

You can tell the truth without being honest about it.

Because you can tell the truth to get something for yourself, because there is something in it for you.

Got it?

Indy Conservative on May 3, 2008 at 11:32 PM

Not sure that I “got it”, but I’ll think about it more. I don’t think that I could tell the truth, without being honest. Here’s what others say about me “Your candor is your splendor”. Of course, some don’t like that. They probably fall into the category you describe.

Entelechy on May 4, 2008 at 12:03 AM

Let me expand a little bit.

For example, in court, when you swear to tell the truth -while in the real world you’re a liar and a dishonest person- you’re just doing it to get something for yourself which is not getting in trouble for lying under oath.

See, honest and telling the truth might look the same, but in reality, honesty is a natural-born virtue. Telling the truth can also be a natural-born virtue or it can be faked momentarily.

You can be honest and tell the truth all the time.

You can be honest all the time but you can tell the truth in some circumstances and situations where you have to, specially to avoid trouble, or if it benefits you.

For me, honesty and telling the truth are natural-born virtues, they go together, they can’t be separated.

I hope I made myself clear.

Limerick on May 3, 2008 at 10:29 PM

I’m sorry, Limerick. India was a member of your family–and, if you’re like the rest of us, sometimes the easiest family member to get along with. Entelechy is right, there is nothing like a good dog. God bless you both.