Two of Time Magazine's 25 most influential Evangelicals: Richard Land from the Southern Baptist Convention and Brian McLaren, from Progressive Revival debate the issues facing Chrstians today on Bloggingheads TV.
See the whole debate here:
Political Parties trolling in an election cycle:
Religion's real role in public policy
Media's role in religion and politics
The complexities of "conservative," "liberal," "progressive" in a discussion of how to be followers of Jesus
Bridging the Ignorance gap
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Subscribe
It was very good to listen to level headed Christians conversing with each other and pointedly stressing that being an Evangelical doesn't mean you have to be a bigot or a cone-head. You can be Conservative, liberal or progressive and still be Evangelical.
What we need is for the talking heads to stop polarizing Christians and work toward the reconciliation of all Christians to a common idea that to live in Christ means to work for the common good in Christ's name.
Richard Land can be called a lot of things, but "level headed" doesn't immediately come to mind. This was posted on the Dallas Morning News Religion blog the other day, and I don't doubt its authenticity:
"I'll take a third-class fireman over a first-class arsonist."
-- Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, on why conservative Christians will vote for John McCain over Barack Obama, despite reservations about McCain
I have to admit that I was also impressed that it was as cordial and respectful, etc. However, to me there were several items that were... Well, how do I put it...
Intellectually Dishonest.
To then not really be respectfully challenged on them doesn't advance the dialog.
One example: For Richard Land to purport that they don't "recommend candidates" is really insulting. Now, do they systematically, from the pulpit, recommend Republican candidate X? No, but that is a mere technicality.
Let's not kid each other here.
The Christian Evangelical community has had sophisticated voter drives that have had various levels of Republican operative involvement for well over two decades now.
The whole elevation of what is commonly referred to as the "social wedge issues of abortion and gay marriage" are really sophisticated 'get out the vote' voter block manipulations to elevate those raw emotions.
The relationship and brutal truth of those two issues to the entirety of the New Testament is my 'advocate' shall we say..
Evangelical leadership has had weekly conference calls with the Bush White House. Why? Because the Administration sees it as a core "constituency" in political parlance. Give me a break.
Just a few examples off the top of my head, and of course, it goes so much deeper than that. On one hand, they portray the voter influence as being straight up "independent and pure" so to speak as Richard Land attempted to frame it. On the other, folks like James Dobson make threats to whom? Yep, the Republican leadership (exclusively I may add) to withold or have them 'stay home' at election time.
Is it a voting block or group of mostly like minded religious people? Sure is hard to tell sometimes.
Despite some of the "moderating and respectful tones" and attempts to spin it otherwise, its a simple formula:
Republican = Far right Christians/Evangelicals = Wide spread support for the Republican plank or platform.
And what a tragedy.
Why?
Because that alignment has meant what? Support for the bulk of the Republican positions? Yes, but also, then by extension, they DIDNT REALLY then support legitimate social issues, associated with the Dems, that are so thoroughly consistent with the New Testament.
Why? Because it would have put them in conflict with that same Republican leadership being courted. Yes, you heard it right, being courted. So, when confronted with that conflict and access to power, what did they do? They chose power over being truly independent.
Therein lies part of the tragedy:
The historical Christian position of alignment with NEITHER PARTY, to then have the absolute moral high ground and consistency to condemn BOTH PARTIES has been removed and the resulting credibility to Christianity itself is the consequence.
Tragic indeed.
Folks, its not called the "culture wars" for nothing. Now, they purport to want the sides to lay down their arms and make nice. Interesting that this is coming now only when the cyclical political cycle has run its course and its crystal clear of the Dem's ascendancy across the country. Interesting indeed, imagine that.
None of this was talked about though. Perhaps in another debate.
I'm not sure people heard the same conversation I did, but knowing of both gentlemen, I thought it was an incredibly good conversation which isn't what typically happens. We are so eager for a fight...for blood...that when we don't get it, we aren't happy. That is ashame. Thanks to Brian and Richard form making this happen.
I would like to hear them talk in this manner on some of the finer nuances of doctrine.
Dear Gentleman :Brian McLaren and Richard Land,
Your debate was the greatest I have heard for a long time or if ever on a tv set courage to do GOD'S work A priviledge to be assigned to Educate People on the trued of GOD AND OUR EXISTENCE ,
I want to leave here one of my favours of many wisdom words of Martin
Luther King :Love is the way ,force capable of transforming an enemy into A Friend.
GOD BLESS YOU BOTH Gentleman and Your Families...
Also everyone in this Buble that I call EARTH OR WORLD...LIGTH AND PEACE And All departed Be With GOD WITH ETERNAL PEACE AND HIS GRACE...
Maria Helena
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.