Christian Progressive

Why I'm a Democrat

2006-07-05T23:03:00.000-07:00

A friend of mine has inspired me to write more, so I thought I'd start with an innocent, non-controversial topic such as politics.

Since I've become a born-again, evangelical Christian, there have been many people at my church who have asked me why I am -- and remain -- a loyal Democrat. What follows is the number one reason. There are several others, and I may explore them in later blogs, but for now, this is what is on my heart.

I care deeply about the poor.

In my profile, there is a Biblical passage, Matthew 25:44-46. I believe in those verses with all of my heart. How we, as Christians, treat the poor is a direct reflection of Christ's love and compassion. It is a sign of fruitfulness, and provides some evidence as to whether or not we are actually Christians, as opposed to mere claimants. As Christians, we have an absolute duty and obligation to help the least among us. There are no restrictions on, or qualifications to, that duty.
Some of my fellow brothers and sisters have claimed that the obligation to help the poor rises only to the level of personal conviction, and is not a government issue. I find such claims objectionable only to the extent that these same brothers and sisters might also claim that opposition to abortion and gay marriage somehow becomes a government issue, as opposed to a mere personal conviction.

There are many, many self-professing Christians in the Republican leadership. I find it hypocritical -- Pharisaical, really -- when these self-professing Christian Republicans rail against abortion and gay marriage with conveniently-timed (e.g. shortly before an election, or when the President's poll numbers are down) rants, legislation and referenda, even while they block or defeat minimum-wage legislation at a time when the inflation-adjusted minimum wage is at a fifty-year low.

If a politician professes to be a Christian, his or her PERSONAL duty to help the poor is not magically transformed into a "government issue" simply by virtue of his or her election to high office. Indeed, I would argue that the duty actually becomes even greater, simply because the politician has a much greater power and ability to affect the world. Indeed, the concept of having greater accountability to God based on one's own level of giftedness and/or resources should not be foreign to the vast majority of my Christian friends.

Yet under the Republican party -- which controls both branches of Congress, the Presidency/executive branch, and I would also argue the courts -- we see a lot of lip service (when it suits their political calculations, anyway) to so-called "moral" issues such as abortion and gay marriage, even though the reality of those issues is much more complicated, with opinions being shaped by much more than government, and with the potential for harming our witness to non-Christians being much, much, much greater than when we try to help the poor.

Meanwhile, however, we see a lot of very concrete actions by the Republican leadership, MUCH more than mere lip service, that result in tax cuts for the rich, benefit cuts for the poor, and the stonewalling of basic minimum wage increases. This is, to be blunt, completely unacceptable and completely un-Christian.

Another line of argument I have seen is founded upon 2 Thessalonians 3:10(b), which states: "if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either." The first problem with this line of argument is that the context of the passage makes it very, very clear that the exhortation is specifically directed toward Christians. The verse does nothing to restrict or qualify our Matthew 25:44-46 duty to help the poor, many of whom will be non-Christians. As an aside, this verse also has no application to an increase in the minimum wage, which by definition only applies to those people who are actually working.

The second problem with this line of argument is that despite rhetoric often propagated by the Republican leadership that paints recipients of public assistance as shiftless, lazy, and good-for-nothing, the simple facts are completely to the contrary. Here is a website -- a Republican-controlled government website, and not a "liberal organization" or advocacy group website -- that explodes this primarily Republican myth.

http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/facts/welfare.html

Here is a key paragraph.

"In the 1992 National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS), the average annual household income for the total population was $30,824, compared to $10,138 for Aid to Families with Dependent Children or public assistance recipients, and $9,732 for food stamp recipients."
No one is on welfare to get rich, and very few are on welfare because they prefer living a dramatically poor lifestyle to working. The largest welfare programs in the United States are the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (formerly Aid to Families with Dependent Children) and food stamps programs! These are not boondoggles, they are critical safety net systems that help keep people alive.

Here is an excerpt from another Republican-controlled government report:

"The study results show that more than 80 percent of the respondents who were still off of food stamps were either working or living with an employed adult. Employment rates were much higher for Blacks than for Whites. More than 80 percent of the respondents who were working and still off of food stamps were working at least 30 hours per week. Among the unemployed who were still off food stamps, the most common reason for not working was the health condition of the respondent."

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/efan03003/

The above study continues to confirm that recipients of government assistance are generally extremely poor, and most often single mothers, elderly, sick or disabled. Many of these people have few or no options. Compare these folks with our duty described in James 1:27: "Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world." We must not let the worldly desire to, for example, pay fewer taxes (see Mark 12:17 and Matthew 22:21 on Christians' duty to pay taxes), influence our duty to help orphans, widows and other vulnerable members of society. And this brings me to Matthew 25:44-46.

"Then they themselves also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?' Then He will answer them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

Our duty is clear and unconditional. And those politicians who claim to be Christian are not displaying any fruit at all when they help rich individuals and even worse, soulless corporations, at the expense of the poor. Quite the contrary, in fact.

I believe these politicians will have much to answer for in the day of judgment.

Using White Phosphorous Munitions

2005-11-10T06:51:00.000-08:00

Warning: the link above contains graphic scenes and profanity.

It is also a masterful burst of, in my opinion, righteous outrage at the use of white phosphorous munitions in an urban setting. This is why war should be a last resort: because innocent people die. The Iraq invasion was an elective, unnecessary war. Using white phosphorous weapons in Fallujah, resulting in innocents dying in a horrifying manner, is unacceptable.

DTH

(Republican-Controlled) House Panel Votes $844 Million Cut in Food Stamps

2005-10-28T14:22:00.000-07:00

On a party-line vote, a Republican-run U.S. House of Representatives committee voted to cut food stamps by $844 million on Friday, just hours after a new U.S. Agriculture Department report showed more Americans are struggling to put food on the table.

About 300,000 Americans would lose benefits due to tighter eligibility rules for food stamps, the major U.S. antihunger program, under the House plan. The cuts would be part of $3.7 billion pared from Agriculture Department programs over five years as part of government-wide spending reductions.

...

North Dakota Democrat Earl Pomeroy complained that 40,000 children would lose free meals at school because of that provision.

"You have not even come clean that kids are going to lose school breakfast and school lunch under this," he said.

...

A new USDA report concluded that some 38.2 million Americans "were food insecure" in 2004, an increase of nearly 2 million from the previous year.

"These households, at some time during the year, had difficulty providing food for all their members due to a lack of resources," the USDA said.

...

I cannot tell you how angry I become when I read stories like these. I like to believe it is a righteous anger, but perhaps that is merely a prideful conceit. Regardless, at a time when the oil company cronies of the Republican party are making record, windfall profits, the Republican party is cutting food stamp assistance to the most needy segment of our society.

I'd like to know how many of the panel members who voted to cut food stamp assistance consider themselves to be Christians. According to Matthew 25:41-46:

"Then He will also say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink; I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.'

"Then they themselves also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?'

"Then He will answer them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.'

"These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

D

Chronicles of the Lost, Volume I

2005-10-13T17:33:00.000-07:00

I'd previously lost touch with my friend and former co-worker, we'll call him Rick. We'd always gotten along well, both personally and professionally, and so it was with a decent amount of pleasure that I received his call a few months ago, out of the blue. He'd apparently met up with a mutual friend of ours, who had given Rick my contact info.

We resolved to grab dinner together on the Westside, and after a couple of reschedulings (commonplace in the entertainment biz), we met up at a popular bar and grill with surprisingly good Mexican food. I'd arrived before he did, and so I went up to the bar to grab a drink.

There sat one of my exes (that's actually a slightly strong word, considering how we only went on a couple of dates and hooked up a few times), we'll call her Cathy. Cathy was already well on her way to a wicked hangover, and she embraced me heartily. After some small talk, my friend Rick walked in. We all got acquainted, and either Rick or myself (I honestly cannot remember) invited Cathy to join us for dinner. She happily accepted.

At that point, we had the challenge of finding a table, which is no easy thing in a crowded, popular Westside spot. Cathy said, "Watch this." She walked over to a table that had had a "Reserved" sign on it, which had just been removed by a party of five who was sitting down at that very moment. She appeared to engage them in conversation before returning.

"That guy is a major douchebag," she said.

"What happened?" I asked.

"Well I told them that they were sitting at our table, and they asked me to prove it, and I told them I was going to get the manager, who's my friend," she replied.

"We had a table?" I asked, confused.

"No, but they didn't know that. There's my friend, hold on." As I stood there in surprise, off she went to speak to her friend, who apparently had some bad news for her, because she came back unhappy. "He's not giving us the table!"

"Well, there are five of them, and they're already there," I reminded her gently.

"Yeah, but that wasn't their reservation either! I'm going to get that guy, nobody screws with me and gets away with it, I always hit back harder," she declared.

"Just let it go, Cathy," I said.

"No way, be right back." So off she went again, this time to engage in another discussion with the leader of the party of five, a thin, short guy with a smirk on his face. It got to be heated, so I went over to bring her back. As I approached, I heard her say, "You must have SUCH a small penis," which elicited disgusted looks from the women in the party of five and derisive laughter and a murderous look from the leader.

I brought her back with me, embarrassed for both her and myself, even as the party of five called out various unkind things toward Cathy. I wondered how in the world I had ever gone out with her in the first place, with the uninspiring answer coming back right away: because Cathy is hot.

Ultimately, I decided we should leave the place and head to a nearby sushi bar instead. I was grateful that Rick appeared to have been mostly oblivious to the scene that had just transpired. When we sat down to dinner, things seemed to have calmed down. I tried steering the conversation to a more Godly level by saying how I'd been attending church a lot and describing my testimony about how I converted to Christianity, but every time, either Cathy or Rick would say something else and we'd get sidetracked.

Eventually, Rick was telling us about his wife (who I'd met a few times before) and his new child, and how strange it was to be a father. I was a little surprised that he wasn't more excited, although perhaps I was projecting my own desire to have children onto Rick. Regardless, I was surprised again when I discovered where the conversation was going to head next.

"So you guys don't have sex any more, huh?" asked Cathy.

Rick just laughed, "Where did you find this girl?" he asked me.

Embarrassed again, I didn't have time to respond when Cathy asked again, "No really, you guys don't have sex any more, right? Seriously, just tell me."

Apparently thinking this was all enormously funny, Rick grinned and said, "Yeah, OK, I give, you're right."

"So then you have a mistress now," she declared confidently.

"Oh come on," I said, "this is ridiculous."

"Where did you find this girl?" Rick repeated, laughing and grinning.

"You know you have a mistress, I can tell, don't lie," Cathy persisted.

"Cathy!" I exclaimed.

Rick laughed even harder and said, "OK, OK, I have a mistress."

I looked at Rick, sure that he was joking. "Yeah right! Come on, Rick."

He became a little more serious, but still had a big grin on his face. "I'm not kidding."

Again, I sat there stunned. "Ha! I knew it!" crowed Cathy.

"You've got a newborn child and a wife, and you have a mistress?" I asked wonderingly.

Rick sounded a little more defensive, but he still had a smile on his face. "Well it's like she said, we never have sex any more."

"Yeah, what else could he do?" agreed Cathy.

It's hard not to judge people when they say things like that. Looking back, I know that I should have preached the Gospel to them right then and there, but I'm ashamed to say that it either didn't occur to me, or I lacked the courage (again, I honestly can't remember which). So I gestured for the check instead.

After we paid, Rick remembered, "Oh, that one sushi dish was terrible," gesturing to the one we'd left uneaten, "I'm going to get it taken off of the bill." While I thought it was a little late to raise the issue, I couldn't argue that the sushi was terrible, so I made no objections. So Rick spoke to the waitress, who flushed and seemed embarrassed.

"I'm going to have to get my manager," she said, apparently dreading the prospect, but off she went and we waited for the revised bill.

To our surprise, the manager came out personally, his face red from alcohol. "What's wrong with the sushi?" he demanded.

"It's terrible, way too fishy," Rick explained, surprised as I was about the manager's vehemence.

So the manager proceeded to pick up the uneaten sushi from our table and eat it. "This is delicious, you've never eaten this type of sushi before, have you?"

Rick was incensed. "I'm co-owner of a sushi restaurant in the Valley, and I've had it a lot. It's terrible."

"You're a Korean guy, aren't you, what do you know about sushi?" the owner asked.

"Yeah, so? And you're white! What do YOU know about sushi?" Rick demanded.

Meanwhile, the waitress looked as if she was going to die.

I was equally unhappy with the owner's racial prejudice, so I said calmly, "Take it off the bill or I'm going to protest the charge and hit you with a chargeback."

The owner grumbled but complied. To my surprise Cathy had been silent all this time. As we left, she went to the bathroom. When we all got outside, we exchanged a few more pleasantries before I prepared to leave. "No, please stay for a moment," she pleaded.

"What's going on?" I asked.

"Just hang on for a few minutes, I need to make sure I can get my car," she replied.

"Wait, you're not driving, are you?" I asked. "You're way over the limit, Cathy."

"Then hang on, wait here for a bit." She disappeared into the bar and grill as I waited, less than patiently, I'm sad to say.

Meanwhile, Rick got his car from the valet and we said goodbye to each other. I suspected I would not see him again, which bothered me since my evangelism efforts with him had been weak. Nevertheless, the moment passed (to my chagrin) and off he went.

I waited for Cathy for a while, before losing patience and going into the bar and grill to search for her. I looked around for a few minutes but didn't find her, so I asked one of the bartenders who knew Cathy well if he'd seen her. "Yeah, I think she's outside," he said. Somehow I had missed her. So I went back outside.

To my surprise, I saw Cathy talking to two police officers. One of them went into the nearby sushi bar as I approached. "What's going on?" I asked warily.

"Oh good, you can tell him too, about how the owner of the sushi bar harassed us!" she exclaimed.

On a night full of shocks and surprises, this one was the largest. "Cathy...what are you doing?" I asked her.

At that point, the police officer interrupted, and proceeded to ask me a bunch of questions about the sushi bar owner. I told him yes, he was a jerk, but no, he wasn't threatening us or assaulting us, and yes, he was probably drunk, but no, I don't think he did anything illegal and if it had been up to me I never would have called the police (!) about it.

The other officer came back and said the owner had apologized. Then he squinted at Cathy and me and asked, "You two aren't driving, are you?"

Although I'd had only two glasses of wine over the course of over two hours, I wasn't about to argue with the officer. And there was no way I was going to let Cathy drive! "No, my house is a few blocks away, we're not driving at all," I replied. Satisfied, the officers left.

At that point, I was emotionally and physically exhausted. "You must think I'm a total freak, huh?" Cathy asked.

"So let's get going, come on, I'll crash on the couch, you can sleep it off upstairs," I replied brightly, not answering her question. So we walked back to my place. By then, the true extent of her drunkenness became clear, because she was practically stumbling back to my house. As I poured her inside, I wasn't even able to get her up the stairs, so I set her up on my couch with some blankets.

"Thanks for everything," she said, even as she reached over toward me, and we kissed.

To my shame, I let this proceed for a minute or two (and perhaps oddly, I wasn't experiencing lust at that time, it was more a sin of pride relating to my ego, I believe) before I broke it off and said that I needed to get some sleep, and that she should too. So I went upstairs and the evening ended.

In the morning, I dropped her off at her car, and since then, I've never spoken to or seen her again. Yet even now, I marvel at the entire experience. I view it as a cautionary tale, not only with respect to my own sin, but also with respect to the dangers of lacking boldness in evangelism. My testimony was weak that night, and even though I was young in the faith, I cannot excuse myself because I still knew better. I also view it as a cautionary tale with respect to the dangers of alcohol, rage and revenge, and un-Godly marriages.

I still pray for Rick and Cathy sometimes. In fact, I think I'll go do that right now.

D

Chronicles of the Lost, Introduction

2005-10-10T21:24:00.000-07:00

(Author's Note: I do not use the term "The Lost" lightly, for in my opinion it connotes the sense of being judgmental, whereas we Christians should do our best to avoid being judgmental, instead leaving judgment to God. Yet as a sheerly factual matter, I believe that people who are not Christians are indeed "lost" in the sense that they have not yet found Christ. I believe they become "lost" forever if they do not accept Christ before their physical deaths. All of the people who I describe in these stories are avowedly and vocally non-Christians, and I pray for their salvation.)

Sometimes, it's a little strange to consider how my own beliefs and opinions have changed since I became a Christian. Conversations and viewpoints which I once would have viewed as commonplace are now astonishing. Astonishing, and disconcerting. Sometimes, I don't know what's more shocking, the actual viewpoint under discussion, or the realization that my own worldview has shifted so dramatically.

A fundamental case in point is the notion of pre-marital sex. In the world, pre-marital sex is absolutely a given. You need only watch just about any television program or movie to see that perspective time and time again. For example, I recently watched the movie, "Fever Pitch," a romantic comedy about an avid Boston Red Sox fan and his relationship with a woman who did not share his passion for baseball.

It was a cute enough movie as such things go, but something struck me about it. It wasn't the fact that the two lead characters were having pre-marital sex. Indeed, as I indicated earlier, pre-marital sex is the default presumption these days, and so there's nothing particularly surprising or striking about it, as sad and sinful as that statement might be. No, the thing that struck me was how at the end of the movie, the narrator described the birth of the lead characters' child, but never once mentioned that the two of them had gotten married.

So now we have a situation where popular culture has established pre-marital sex as the cool norm, while abstinence is relegated to the quaint -- or more accurately, the archaic -- status of an uncool artifact. Moreover, we appear to be moving toward a worldly reality where supposedly stable, loving couples don't even need to get married before they have children! It is almost as if the inexorable march of "progress" somehow requires a dilution of every moral value into a slushy mélange of subjective relativity, a "least common denominator" approach where everyone can be "right" and happiness -- or more accurately, hedonism -- is elevated to be the ultimate good.

Extending this concept to my own life, I will say that before I came to Christ, I never once viewed pre-marital sex as any kind of sin. Quite the contrary, I viewed it as a positive, and at times as a pre-eminent, goal. Virginity was a badge of shame, and I wanted to be rid of it as soon as possible. And suffice it to say that I eventually accomplished my goal, although my preference would be to leave it at that, my past "accomplishment" now truly being a badge of shame.

I was a base sinner. I still am, even though I now strive to do better in accordance with my new nature. And even though I might never have done some of the things that I am about to relate, I was undoubtedly worse in many other ways. The stories I am about to relate are not conveyed in an effort to glorify or elevate myself, quite the contrary, in fact. They are not told to imply that I am in any way better than the people I am describing. I am telling these stories so that they might hopefully serve as cautionary tales to fellow believers, and to emphasize that the brothers and sisters who have been fortunate enough to grow up in the church and away from the world have missed out on absolutely nothing.

The grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence. All too often, the grass next door is dead and brown for lack of watering. And even if the unwatered lawn somehow appears to be lush and vibrant, perhaps it is actually the false life of astroturf.

D

Bush: Pro-Torture, Anti-Hurricane Relief

2005-10-07T12:07:00.000-07:00

From the link in the headline of this entry:

The Bush administration pledged yesterday to veto legislation banning the torture of prisoners by US troops after an overwhelming and almost unprecedented revolt by loyalist congressmen.

And then we also have this:

http://tinyurl.com/d5qmc

Leaders of a Senate committee including its Republican head bluntly accused the Bush administration on Thursday of sabotaging a bill to provide Medicaid health assistance for victims of Hurricane Katrina.

Outrages like these make me question whether or not George W. Bush is truly a Christian. Where is the fruit in his life? What Christian could support torture, to the extent of using his FIRST VETO EVER on a bill opposing torture? What Christian would try to sabotage a bill that sends relief to the poor unfortunates hit by the hurricanes?

Anyone can say they're a Christian. Anyone can go to church. Anyone can pay lip service to Christianity. I've seen George W. Bush do all of those things.

But based on his policy decisions and his public actions, I haven't seen any fruit in his life. I honestly hope that someone can show me some examples.

D

Jewish Group Rips Southern Baptist Convention

2005-10-03T11:07:00.000-07:00

A leading Jewish organization is condemning the Southern Baptist Convention for using a group of "messianic" Jews -- people who have already converted to Christianity -- in its evangelism.

Anti-Defamation League director Abraham Foxman said the effort is offensive because the Southern Baptists are using Jews who have converted to Christianity "to go after other Jews."

"If people convert, that's their individual business," Foxman said. "But don't use them as a tool to convert other people."

At the heart of the ADL's complaint is a decision by the Southern Baptist Convention executive committee to ask its missionary boards to study the idea of recognizing the Southern Baptist Messianic Fellowship as "an evangelistic mission to Jewish people."

The fellowship is made up of about a dozen congregations in the United States. Its Web site says its mission is "to encourage Jewish believers that their ethnic and historical heritage need NOT be lost upon their commitment to Yeshua (Jesus)."

...

I have to be honest here: I do not understand what the ADL is upset about. It is a tenet of the Christian religion to evangelize all non-believers. This evangelism is non-violent, and in any country where freedom of speech and freedom of religion are allowed, Christians should be able to evangelize.

Messianic Jews provide a very strong testimony about Christianity, especially when they reach out to other Jews due of the commonalities involved. Why should Jews find this to be offensive, any more than Christians should find other religions' efforts to convert them to be offensive? Whenever you have different religions competing for the hearts and souls of people, there will of course be some conflict, but as long as there is freedom of choice and non-violence, what's the problem?

It's not like Christians are singling out Jews as the only ones they want to convert. Christians want everyone to experience the love and joy of salvation through Jesus Christ. If Christians want to try to do that as effectively as possible, how is that an affront to anyone else? Each of us is a "tool to convert other people" in our obedience to the Great Commission (even though it is the Holy Spirit which will do the actual work). Even though Mr. Foxman uses the term in what appears to be a disparaging manner, I believe most Christians would embrace it.

I'm not sure how this can be seen as a "threat" to Jews, or how it can be viewed as any kind of "defamation" of Jews. As Mr. Foxman indicates, if Jews want to convert, that's their business. And if Christians want to encourage those conversions by reaching out with the Gospel, that's our business.

D

What's in a Name

2005-09-29T00:14:00.000-07:00

I was pleasantly surprised when I successfully registered this blog address. If you've hung out on Blogspot at all, you know that all of the good names are taken.

Then I started thinking about it, and became a little discouraged when I realized that if the name was available, then perhaps there really aren't a ton of Christian Progressives out there. ;-)

D

Confronting Believers, Loving Non-Believers

2005-09-23T01:25:00.000-07:00

According to the Bible, we have a duty to confront fellow brothers and sisters when they sin. First you confront them privately, then you take one or two other brothers and sisters with you to confront them. If that fails, you take it to the congregation. If that last ditch effort fails, then they are removed from the congregation entirely until such time that they repent.

In contrast, we are to provide a loving witness toward non-believers, in the hopes that our testimony and our example will help open them to the Holy Spirit and Christ. We are to leave judgment to God, and do our best to be loving and sacrificial toward them.

Accordingly, I find the attitude in many Christian communities toward many gay folks to be puzzling in the extreme. Is reacting with revulsion a loving response? Is singling them out for punitive legislation a loving response? Is denouncing them and "gay culture" (whatever that is) a loving response?

In contrast, why are we so ready to overlook the sins of many so-called Christians who commit adultery, often without the slightest sign of repentance? Why are we so forgiving of so-called Christians who engage in non-Biblical divorces? Why aren't we confronting these people? Why aren't we holding them accountable, and if they refuse to repent, why aren't we removing them from our congregations?

I do not feel comfortable naming names, but even a cursory review of the news over the past decade will reveal many examples of so-called Christian politicians who have engaged in adultery and non-Biblical divorces, yet not one (and I beg you to prove me wrong on this) high-profile Christian leader has confronted any of these politicians regarding their behavior.

This is disappointing. Just because a so-called Christian politician pays lip service to issues of interest to the Christian community, that does not give such a politician a "free pass" when it comes to church discipline.

We need to confront people who call themselves believers, and we need to love non-believers in the hopes of bringing them to Christ. I refuse to accept the quid pro quo business as usual that is special interest politics...even if that special interest is what a politician claims is Christianity.

D

Welcome!

2005-09-15T23:08:00.000-07:00

I created this blog because I felt it was important to express a viewpoint that I believe is sorely lacking in today's society: the viewpoint of a born-again Christian fundamentalist who is also a political progressive.

Don't get me wrong, I realize that there are many self-identifying Christians who are very liberal, politically and/or theologically. Yet all of the people that fall into this category who I know personally happen to hold to a doctrine that is relatively liberal. They do not typically believe in the inerrancy of the God-breathed Word, eschatology as expressed by Revelation or even the true divinity of Christ.

I believe in the Bible, and I attend a conservative, Bible-teaching church. Yet I also believe that it is much more important to help the poor than to demonize gay folks. My views on abortion are currently undecided (I was once very solidly pro-choice), but I know that regardless, we are to submit to worldly authority and do our best to endure all manner of oppression in good cheer so that we can preserve our testimony and be effective witnesses, all while keeping our minds on Kingdom things. And I believe that although God will judge sinners after death, we should try to be loving toward them while they are still alive.

Christ taught us to love the least among us. I find that attitude to be sadly lacking among many in today's world.

Dennis