Greg Boyd and The Myth of a Christian Nation

[Smellin Coffee]

My problem is not with Christianity in politics, but with politics in Christianity. To many confuse Republican values with Christian values.

Many Republicans are nothing more than opportunists looking to garner support through coercion....by naming the name of Christ. At the same time, I can't blast a republican that I think is being sincere to his faith.

I agree. This is why Republicans (as a whole) probably won't work hard to overturn abortion allowances (like when they pulled out before Obama's last speech). The Republicans need abortion to limit the size of government by eliminating a great number of potential saps (as in a tree branch) in need of governmental assistance. There are sincere pro-lifers in the Republican party which would not support abortion (and kudos to them!) but as a party, Republicans need abortion to balance out their other alleged "small government" goals.

 

[subllibrm]

My problem is not with Christianity in politics, but with politics in Christianity. To many confuse Republican values with Christian values.

Many Republicans are nothing more than opportunists looking to garner support through coercion....by naming the name of Christ. At the same time, I can't blast a republican that I think is being sincere to his faith.

My issue is when good godly Christians are chased out of a Church because they don't toe the GOP line. Seen it happen and know of folks who keep their mouth shut because the "Rushophiles" and their ilk make it near impossible to actually discuss issues.

In my church you have more latitude to disagree on end times and freewill/election than on politics. It is a shame on the church.

A perfect example is the same sex "marriage" issue. Talking points from those stalwart paragons of traditional marriage, Newt and Rush drew not even a sense of irony let alone any push back that their input was not helpful. No, they just got repeated and emailed and FB memed and the church can't even see how compromised (in a true biblical sense) it has become. For many the elephant has become their idol. And if not full blown idolatry they have a hard time distinguishing between God's principles and the GOP party line.

 

[praise_yeshua]

My problem is not with Christianity in politics, but with politics in Christianity. To many confuse Republican values with Christian values.

Many Republicans are nothing more than opportunists looking to garner support through coercion....by naming the name of Christ. At the same time, I can't blast a republican that I think is being sincere to his faith.

My issue is when good godly Christians are chased out of a Church because they don't toe the GOP line. Seen it happen and know of folks who keep their mouth shut because the "Rushophiles" and their ilk make it near impossible to actually discuss issues.

In my church you have more latitude to disagree on end times and freewill/election than on politics. It is a shame on the church.

A perfect example is the same sex "marriage" issue. Talking points from those stalwart paragons of traditional marriage, Newt and Rush drew not even a sense of irony let alone any push back that their input was not helpful. No, they just got repeated and emailed and FB memed and the church can't even see how compromised (in a true biblical sense) it has become. For many the elephant has become their idol. And if not full blown idolatry they have a hard time distinguishing between God's principles and the GOP party line.

I've actually seen it both ways. I've seen hard core liberal democrats pretty much rule the political "roost" in a church. Even to the point they created political silence within the church.

We should all be more accepting of political differences. I do draw the line at moral issues. If you want to vote for a person that believes in abortion, that is your choice. However, don't try to change the Truth by claiming God is okay with the killing the innocent. He's not.

I imagine what I'm saying... just don't preach personal politics as means to pleasing God... but at the same time..... don't shy away from the moral issues of today. I think grown ups can see the difference.

 

[subllibrm]

<snnip> I think grown ups can see the difference.

Well there goes the Rush crowd!  ;D

 

[Just John]

I may be late to the party but I just picked up this book to read it. I find it interesting that a conservative evangelical can have unorthodox beliefs regarding the nature of God and be o.k., but imply that Fox News is not the gospel, and you lose 20% of your church.

If you have read it, what are your thoughts?
If not, what dynamic do you see between the church and politics?

Apart from any views about Fox News (which I personally detest), Greg Boyd is a radical Open-Theist who's "beliefs regarding the nature of God" are anything but orthodox.

Right. I said as much.

To me this reveals much of what is wrong with the church at large today. His unorthodox open theism is no problem, but imply that the church and Fox News are not on the same page and you lose 20% of your church.

The church has become more political and barely doctrinal.

The average church member takes in hours upon hours of Fox News talking points and scarcely picks up a Bible. I really believe, I could more easily get by at my church preaching heresy than disagreeing with Fox News. That is sad, and I have begun to address it, but I also believe it is a larger problem, not confined to my congregation.

I misread your post.  Apologies.

I haven't read the book, but from what I've seen in second-hand reports hasn't been impressive.

I'm of the opinion that the Church should speak to political matters, in declaring what the Scripture has already declared.  But I detest the manner in which Christians have latched onto The Republican Party/Fox News/Tea Party/etc. as the Christian Ideal.

As a conservative, Republican and a FOX-watcher. I couldn't agree more!!!

World News Daily (aka World Nuts Daily) ran an article today criticizing pastor Tullian Tchividjian for not being sufficiently vocal enough in the pulpit about "moral and social"issues although he is willing to do so in other public places.

Tchividjian is the grandson of Billy Graham and is the successor of D. James Kennedy at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church. Of course Kennedy was very political, even teaching about the constitution and founding fathers from the pulpit. Tchividjian however believes that "the pulpit in particular has a very specific and sacred job description. It is reserved to diagnose sinners by preaching God’s law and then to deliver sinners by preaching God’s gospel from every text every week.”  According to the article he doesn't go out of his way to make a major deal about abortion or same-sex marriage in the pulpit but then they acknowledge he has done so in his books. He does state that he believes the view of Christianity has suffered because of being wrapped in politics.

The article was written by one of the men who used to write for Kennedy so I assume some sour grapes. The sad thing is that most people responding to the article are calling him "lukewarm", a bible denier, a liberal, a Joel Osteen, yada yada yada. Sad.


http://www.wnd.com/2015/02/once-fiery-coral-ridge-sermons-hit-new-low-key/

Rewind to the days of the apostles....The Jews of that day..... tried and succeeded in making Christian into a political issue. Christianity has always been part of most anything relevant. You're falling into concerted efforts of others to take Christianity out of the main stream view of the masses. There is nothing wrong with Christianity on display in politics. Nothing. Share your opinion but realize it's nothing more than opinion. You have no Scripture to say otherwise.

In fact, John the Baptist made a political statement when he weighed in the marriage of a king. I imagine you're not going to rebuke John are you??

My problem is not with Christianity in politics, but with politics in Christianity. To many confuse Republican values with Christian values.

BINGO!

 

[Recovering IFB]

Calvinist just hate the affects on man's freewill. That man could possible affect his own destiny.

So God's sovereign will is a re-action to man's freewill?

 

[praise_yeshua]

Calvinist just hate the affects on man's freewill. That man could possible affect his own destiny.

So God's sovereign will is a re-action to man's freewill?

God certainly reacts to man's freewill. Why is that a foreign concept to you? The Scriptures are full of statements from God such as "if you will".... "I will".

You need to lose your Greek philosophical ideals about God. God predates Greek Mythology.

 

[Recovering IFB]

Calvinist just hate the affects on man's freewill. That man could possible affect his own destiny.

So God's sovereign will is a re-action to man's freewill?

God certainly reacts to man's freewill. Why is that a foreign concept to you? The Scriptures are full of statements from God such as "if you will".... "I will".

You need to lose your Greek philosophical ideals about God. God predates Greek Mythology.

No, I see in Scripture, God working all things for his perfect will

 

[Smellin Coffee]

Calvinist just hate the affects on man's freewill. That man could possible affect his own destiny.

So God's sovereign will is a re-action to man's freewill?

God certainly reacts to man's freewill. Why is that a foreign concept to you? The Scriptures are full of statements from God such as "if you will".... "I will".

You need to lose your Greek philosophical ideals about God. God predates Greek Mythology.

No, I see in Scripture, God working all things for his perfect will

Actually, one can see both.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Calvinist just hate the affects on man's freewill. That man could possible affect his own destiny.

So God's sovereign will is a re-action to man's freewill?

God certainly reacts to man's freewill. Why is that a foreign concept to you? The Scriptures are full of statements from God such as "if you will".... "I will".

You need to lose your Greek philosophical ideals about God. God predates Greek Mythology.

No, I see in Scripture, God working all things for his perfect will

Actually, one can see both.

Yes. They can!!!

I don't understand why its so hard for some to...... just let go of their religion and recognize it.

It really is amazing how someone can look at the Scriptures and see how man.... has time and time again..... refused to obey God.... and then... SOMEHOW, say it was God's will for that to happen.

God doesn't always get what pleases Him.  In fact, it can be perfectly summed up in this one verse.

Rom 15:3  For even Christ pleased not himself; but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.

Believe it or not. Its really about US. Many will tell you its all about HIM.... .when its so very much about US. Did you know you could tell the difference between God's love and the way others love?

You can always recognize the Love of God through "self sacrifice". God's Love is all about US. God's Love is about others. Man's love is so very self centered.

 

[Recovering IFB]

Eph 1:11 We have also received an inheritance in Him, predestined according to the purpose of the One who works out everything in agreement with the decision of His will,

Is 46:11 11 I call a bird of prey from the east,
a man for My purpose from a far country.
Yes, I have spoken; so I will also bring it about.
I have planned it; I will also do it.

 

[Recovering IFB]

Prov 16:9 9 A man’s heart plans his way,
but the Lord determines his steps.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Recovering.... Why did you ignore what I wrote?

How is anything I wrote incompatible with he verses you've posted in response? Be specific.... Please.

 

[Bob H]

In fact, he's got more theology in his little finger than most people have in their entire bodies.

And it's heretical where it counts. No thanks.

Where is it heretical? Its just not Calvinism.... and we all know how calvinist feel about anything that opposes them . EVERYTHING is heretical to them..

Open Theism has nuttin to do with the doctrines of Calvinism or Arminianism nor their differences.

 

[Bob H]

I may be late to the party but I just picked up this book to read it. I find it interesting that a conservative evangelical can have unorthodox beliefs regarding the nature of God and be o.k., but imply that Fox News is not the gospel, and you lose 20% of your church.

If you have read it, what are your thoughts?
If not, what dynamic do you see between the church and politics?

The words "conservative evangelical" and "unorthodox beliefs" are contradictions of terms. One can't be/have both.

 

[rsc2a]

I may be late to the party but I just picked up this book to read it. I find it interesting that a conservative evangelical can have unorthodox beliefs regarding the nature of God and be o.k., but imply that Fox News is not the gospel, and you lose 20% of your church.

If you have read it, what are your thoughts?
If not, what dynamic do you see between the church and politics?

The words "conservative evangelical" and "unorthodox beliefs" are contradictions of terms. One can't be both.

"The King Jimmy is the only true Bible." <~~ conservative, evangelical unorthodox wackadoodlry

 

[praise_yeshua]

In fact, he's got more theology in his little finger than most people have in their entire bodies.

And it's heretical where it counts. No thanks.

Where is it heretical? Its just not Calvinism.... and we all know how calvinist feel about anything that opposes them . EVERYTHING is heretical to them..

Open Theism has nuttin to do with the doctrines of Calvinism or Arminianism nor their differences.

Sure it does. You obviously know little to nothing about open theism.

 

[Bob H]

I may be late to the party but I just picked up this book to read it. I find it interesting that a conservative evangelical can have unorthodox beliefs regarding the nature of God and be o.k., but imply that Fox News is not the gospel, and you lose 20% of your church.

If you have read it, what are your thoughts?
If not, what dynamic do you see between the church and politics?

The words "conservative evangelical" and "unorthodox beliefs" are contradictions of terms. One can't be both.

"The King Jimmy is the only true Bible." <~~ conservative, evangelical unorthodox wackadoodlry

I'm no KJVO dude but there are basicly 5 groups concerning the KJO'ers:


1. Those who say "I like/prefer the KJ.....You pick your own"...These are not militant

2. Those who believe the text behind the KJ are more reliable...These are rarely militant

3.those who advocate using only the TR in translating.......Some are militant in this group, but not all

4. KJV inspired group.....Most all are militant

5 Those who claim the KJ contains new revelation...All of these are militant {and crazy}

A lot if not most of the KJVO's  fall in the first two groups. They're not as bad as made out to be. The Ruckmanites are the ones who take that position you speak of. There ain't enough of them around to worry about it

 

[rsc2a]

So one can be a conservative evangelical and have unorthodox beliefs...

 

[Izdaari]

I'm of the opinion that the Church should speak to political matters, in declaring what the Scripture has already declared.  But I detest the manner in which Christians have latched onto The Republican Party/Fox News/Tea Party/etc. as the Christian Ideal.

Thank you.

I agree. God is not a Republican or a Democrat... or even an American.