NationStates Jolt Archive

I give evangelical christians a lot of well-deserved shit on this forum, so I feel it is incumbent on me to note when one of them turns out not to be a complete douchebag. (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/30/us/30pastor.html?hp&ex=1154232000&en=fc81bfdd0ee7feb1&ei=5094&partner=homepage)

MAPLEWOOD, Minn. — Like most pastors who lead thriving evangelical megachurches, the Rev. Gregory A. Boyd was asked frequently to give his blessing — and the church’s — to conservative political candidates and causes.

The requests came from church members and visitors alike: Would he please announce a rally against gay marriage during services? Would he introduce a politician from the pulpit? Could members set up a table in the lobby promoting their anti-abortion work? Would the church distribute “voters’ guides” that all but endorsed Republican candidates? And with the country at war, please couldn’t the church hang an American flag in the sanctuary?

After refusing each time, Mr. Boyd finally became fed up, he said. Before the last presidential election, he preached six sermons called “The Cross and the Sword” in which he said the church should steer clear of politics, give up moralizing on sexual issues, stop claiming the United States as a “Christian nation” and stop glorifying American military campaigns.

“When the church wins the culture wars, it inevitably loses,” Mr. Boyd preached. “When it conquers the world, it becomes the world. When you put your trust in the sword, you lose the cross.”

Mr. Boyd says he is no liberal. He is opposed to abortion and thinks homosexuality is not God’s ideal. The response from his congregation at Woodland Hills Church here in suburban St. Paul — packed mostly with politically and theologically conservative, middle-class evangelicals — was passionate. Some members walked out of a sermon and never returned. By the time the dust had settled, Woodland Hills, which Mr. Boyd founded in 1992, had lost about 1,000 of its 5,000 members.

But there were also congregants who thanked Mr. Boyd, telling him they were moved to tears to hear him voice concerns they had been too afraid to share.

“Most of my friends are believers,” said Shannon Staiger, a psychotherapist and church member, “and they think if you’re a believer, you’ll vote for Bush. And it’s scary to go against that.”

Sermons like Mr. Boyd’s are hardly typical in today’s evangelical churches. But the upheaval at Woodland Hills is an example of the internal debates now going on in some evangelical colleges, magazines and churches. A common concern is that the Christian message is being compromised by the tendency to tie evangelical Christianity to the Republican Party and American nationalism, especially through the war in Iraq.

Read the whole thing--it's very good.

yay for sanity!

When you put your trust in the sword, you lose the cross.

That's a terrific quote. I'm gonna use that.

ah, the implication being that this is the only church like that... oooh....

Bah. So what? The only way an evangelical can redeem themselves is by not being an evangelical.

nice to see some Evangelical that bellies my beliefs and concerns about Politics and Religions.

“More and more people are saying this has gone too far — the dominance of the evangelical identity by the religious right,” Mr. McLaren said. “You cannot say the word ‘Jesus’ in 2006 without having an awful lot of baggage going along with it. You can’t say the word ‘Christian,’ and you certainly can’t say the word ‘evangelical’ without it now raising connotations and a certain cringe factor in people.

“Because people think, ‘Oh no, what is going to come next is homosexual bashing, or pro-war rhetoric, or complaining about ‘activist judges.’ ”

How true.

In his six sermons, Mr. Boyd laid out a broad argument that the role of Christians was not to seek “power over” others — by controlling governments, passing legislation or fighting wars. Christians should instead seek to have “power under” others — “winning people’s hearts” by sacrificing for those in need, as Jesus did, Mr. Boyd said.

“America wasn’t founded as a theocracy,” he said. “America was founded by people trying to escape theocracies. Never in history have we had a Christian theocracy where it wasn’t bloody and barbaric. That’s why our Constitution wisely put in a separation of church and state.

“I am sorry to tell you,” he continued, “that America is not the light of the world and the hope of the world. The light of the world and the hope of the world is Jesus Christ.”

If I wasn't at work, right now, I would applauding this.

Mr. Boyd responded: “I don’t think there’s a particular angle we have on society that others lack. All good, decent people want good and order and justice. Just don’t slap the label ‘Christian’ on it.”

It was always my personal philosophy never to mix Politics with Religion.

ah, the implication being that this is the only church like that... oooh....
The only one? Probably not. But it is decidedly a rarity, and if you deny that, you're being intellectually dishonest.

Clearly, the Reverend Boyd is in this for the religion, not to make a name for himself, nor to get rich. And many small churches are like that. The feuds are over more important things, like whether or not there should be music accompanying the song leader ...

We've quit a couple churches because they were more interested in expansion than Walmart. All we ever heard about was the current bond issue.

The only one? Probably not. But it is decidedly a rarity, and if you deny that, you're being intellectually dishonest.

Well, I also object to your automatic description of "evangelical" as being somehow the same group.

You are probably unaware of the extreme difference between the various churches within the very broad brush of "evangelical".

It's as much a smear word nowadays as the N-word.

I'm not being intellectually dishonest about actually knowing what goes on in various branches of what you call "evangelicals".

It's as much a smear word nowadays as the N-word.

Now, that's a silly statement, right there.

Anyway, "thinks homosexuality is not God’s ideal." So, he may not be crazy, but he's still dumb, IMO.

Well, I also object to your automatic description of "evangelical" as being somehow the same group.

You are probably unaware of the extreme difference between the various churches within the very broad brush of "evangelical".

It's as much a smear word nowadays as the N-word.

I'm not being intellectually dishonest about actually knowing what goes on in various branches of what you call "evangelicals".
That statement alone shows you're incapable of looking at this subject rationally.

Bah my mom is an evangelist, a bad one a REALLY bad one the kind that would panic if she saw a pair of shoes on the sidewalk "I'VE BEEN LEFT BEHIND OH NOOOOEEESSS!!!":headbang:

Well, I also object to your automatic description of "evangelical" as being somehow the same group.

You are probably unaware of the extreme difference between the various churches within the very broad brush of "evangelical".

It's as much a smear word nowadays as the N-word.

I'm not being intellectually dishonest about actually knowing what goes on in various branches of what you call "evangelicals".

Evangelical, by definition, means that you are evangelising, which means that you place your ultimate goal as the conversion of everyone to your point of view. If that is your goal then your goal is not compatible with a free society whereby freedom of conscience and variety of opinion are held sacrosanct. That is the common thread in Evangelism, it is arrogant and authoritarian, which is why people are perfectly within their rights to 'smear' it.

Finally we have a minister of religion getting into the headlines. I have no time for Religion but this guy has me listening.

As someone who spreads the Word of God, I agree with Pastor Boyd. There is to much religion inside the Republican Party that it makes it very hard to spread His Word and to be taken seriously.

It is time that Religion be taken out of politics and for Religion to stop endorsing it. Its just as bad as the Divine Right of Kings where Kings think they have God's blessing to do anything they wanted to do.

The Nazz, I thank you for posting this. It warms my heart to see that there are others who agree that the religious right is hurting the very messege they want to spread.

Mr. Boyd said he never intended his sermons to be taken as merely a critique of the Republican Party or the religious right. He refuses to share his party affiliation, or whether he has one, for that reason. He said there were Christians on both the left and the right who had turned politics and patriotism into “idolatry.”

Well said and entirely agreed to.

Anyway, "thinks homosexuality is not God’s ideal." So, he may not be crazy, but he's still dumb, IMO.
Nah, just a Bible pounder. It comes witht the turf. At least he's not a jerk about it, right?

It was always my personal philosophy never to mix Politics with Religion.
Which is why you support banning gay marriage.

The only one? Probably not. But it is decidedly a rarity, and if you deny that, you're being intellectually dishonest.
I don't see how either of us can know either way. You're not a member of the Christian community and I'm not American.

I especially agree with this quote
“I am sorry to tell you,” he continued, “that America is not the light of the world and the hope of the world. The light of the world and the hope of the world is Jesus Christ.”
Americans need to realise that they are not the chosen people. They are sinners and just as subject to the Lord as the rest of us.

Evangelical, by definition, means that you are evangelising, which means that you place your ultimate goal as the conversion of everyone to your point of view. If that is your goal then your goal is not compatible with a free society whereby freedom of conscience and variety of opinion are held sacrosanct.
How is it incompatible with a free society? As long as there are no forced conversions, there is no problem.

Christians vary widely in the political spectrum. It often depends upon the denomination. The Anabatists for example are very anti-statist, especially when it comes to church involvement in the government. The liberal denominations like Episcopalians or Presbyterians are generally democrats. The majority are conservative though. I myself, on a personal level, am conservative. My political views are more in line with moderate Libertarians though. I highly oppose any sort of theocratic leanings in any state. I think man is evil. I think the government is evil as well. But, the government is a lot more powerful than an individual man, so when a government is powerful and evil it can do a lot more damage. A government can be very evil even when it is supposedly a Christian government, so I oppose all strong government.

There is one issue where I would be socially conservative however. Then again, many Libertarians feel as I do. We defend the rights of ever human being. It is just a matter of whether you consider an unborn baby a human being. I do. Therefore I oppose abortion. Some people would say it isn't my business. But, if I were in Germany during the holocaust I would stand up for the Jews. I would do my best to save thier lives. It is hardly different in the case of abortion. It is not just a matter of the woman's rights but of the child's right to live.

Clearly, the Reverend Boyd is in this for the religion, not to make a name for himself, nor to get rich. And many small churches are like that. The feuds are over more important things, like whether or not there should be music accompanying the song leader ...

We've quit a couple churches because they were more interested in expansion than Walmart. All we ever heard about was the current bond issue.
I think you're right about this--the thing that makes this guy unusual is that this isn't a small congregation we're talking about here. It was a 5,000 person church--4,000 after subtracting the people who walked out.

Which is why you support banning gay marriage.I stated my reason for my Support for the banning of Gay Marriage... and it has nothing to do with Religion but the actions/postings of a few people here in NSG who would not accept my stance of being Neutral on the subject.

they argued that I had to choose a side so since they, who were Pro Gay marriage, would not accept my stance while others (most of whom were Anti-Gay Marriage) did, I sided with those who allowed me my choice.

BTW, where the hell are all the forum RepubliChristians like Designated

As someone who spreads the Word of God, I agree with Pastor Boyd. There is to much religion inside the Republican Party that it makes it very hard to spread His Word and to be taken seriously.

Even worse, there's too much Republican party inside religion!

He said there were Christians on both the left and the right who had turned politics and patriotism into “idolatry.”

The US has a Christian left?

I think you're right about this--the thing that makes this guy unusual is that this isn't a small congregation we're talking about here. It was a 5,000 person church--4,000 after subtracting the people who walked out.
How can one church hold 5,000 people?

I stated my reason for my Support for the banning of Gay Marriage... and it has nothing to do with Religion but the actions/postings of a few people here in NSG who would not accept my stance of being Neutral on the subject.
So your opinion has nothing to do with the issue itself, or the people involved, but you merely hold it to spite some assholes on the internet.

[QUOTE=Meath Street

The US has a Christian left?


[/QUOTE]

Not sure if it counts as left but the United Church of Christ (I think) ran a series of ads that said they were fine with gay couples, single mothers and all the other whipping-boys of the traditional religious right being in their churches.

The churches in most western nations have a strong leftist contingent though this may be relative (given that the Israelis bitched about 'anti-semitism' when the Anglicans decided to withdraw their shares in companies that provided equipment used in their 'anti-terror' operations I'm liable to be biased here).

Certainly in my own church there is a massive diversity of views (so much so that we've never had any coherent policy on anything not unanimous to most NON-christians as well :D) with a general tendency to socialism (or at least charity) and/or individual liberty and pacifism.

Even worse, there's too much Republican party inside religion!

I think that is what I said.

The US has a Christian left?

Every party has christians in it. And yes there is a Christian Left. They are less vocal than the Christian right.

How can one church hold 5,000 people?

I think you are asking the wrong person. Pastor Boyd would be the one to ask. :D

So your opinion has nothing to do with the issue itself, or the people involved, but you merely hold it to spite some assholes on the internet.

That is the way things are done. If you stifle someone's point, they will flee to the other side. It happens in politics alot.

The churches in most western nations have a strong leftist contingent though this may be relative (given that the Israelis bitched about 'anti-semitism' when the Anglicans decided to withdraw their shares in companies that provided equipment used in their 'anti-terror' operations I'm liable to be biased here).

Certainly in my own church there is a massive diversity of views (so much so that we've never had any coherent policy on anything not unanimous to most NON-christians as well :D) with a general tendency to socialism (or at least charity) and/or individual liberty and pacifism.
Correct, I think that the majority of Christians in the world lean Left, except in America.

Correct, I think that the majority of Christians in the world lean Left, except in America.
In his book American Theocracy Kevin Phillips points out that if you look at the churches as a percentage of the population, the more liberal churches have been declining in influence and size and the more fundamentalist churches have been increasing in influence and size since very nearly the founding of the republic. It's almost a straight line down for one and up for the other.

In his book American Theocracy Kevin Phillips points out that if you look at the churches as a percentage of the population, the more liberal churches have been declining in influence and size and the more fundamentalist churches have been increasing in influence and size since very nearly the founding of the republic. It's almost a straight line down for one and up for the other.
Were there many liberal churches back in the 18th century?

Were there many liberal churches back in the 18th century?

However, in the Third World the church is often far more right-wing, socially at least. Just look at the whole 'Gay Bishops' business in the Anglican church.

So your opinion has nothing to do with the issue itself, or the people involved, but you merely hold it to spite some assholes on the internet.nope, I hold those opinions because those who were trying to "force" me to choose Pro Same Sex Marriage were showing the same lack of acceptance that they accused others of showing.

in other words they were, and are, in my mind, hypocrits. Even the fundie-like on these forums accepted my decision of "I have no opinion of this subject, and I choose no side." it was only those where were for SSM (Same Sex Marriage) that were insulting, rude, and told me there was no middle ground. so I chose the side that showed more support for my original choice and views.

now to choose otherwise would just be "Giving into the pressure" and not being true to my feelings and real opinions on the matter.

Were there many liberal churches back in the 18th century?
Sure--they're also known as mainline churches. Anglicans, Presbyterians, Church of Christ, Episcopalians, etc. The two big fundamentalist denominations now are the Southern Baptist Convention and the Pentecostals and their many various offshoots. And there's been some metamorphosis of denominations over the years. At one point, Methodists, I believe, were considered fairly fundamentalist, and now they're nearly mainline, and of course, that varies from church to church--Methodists in Alabama are different from those in Connecticut, as are Baptists and Episcopalians and every other sect..

Correct, I think that the majority of Christians in the world lean Left, except in America.
Don't forget Africa. There's been a big issue with right-wing fundamentalists in the Anglican community there over both the homosexuality issue and the general fire-and-brimstone attitude.

Edit: Guess AC got there first.

However, in the Third World the church is often far more right-wing, socially at least. Just look at the whole 'Gay Bishops' business in the Anglican church.
And they're teaming up with some US breakaway churches to form what they're calling the Global South. They're looking to become the official US arm of the Anglicans in the US and get rid of the older groups--the ones that are gay-friendly.

However, in the Third World the church is often far more right-wing, socially at least. Just look at the whole 'Gay Bishops' business in the Anglican church.
I was thinking more about economic matters really.

I give evangelical christians a lot of well-deserved shit on this forum, so I feel it is incumbent on me to note when one of them turns out not to be a complete douchebag. (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/30/us/30pastor.html?hp&ex=1154232000&en=fc81bfdd0ee7feb1&ei=5094&partner=homepage)

Read the whole thing--it's very good.

It's OK to be Christian, so long as you only go to church on Sunday, and don't actually believe anything that the Scripture says.

This is what you mean....

It's OK to be Christian, so long as you only go to church on Sunday, and don't actually believe anything that the Scripture says.

This is what you mean....

When was the last time you actually said something you meant old chum? The act is getting rather tiresome.

It's OK to be Christian, so long as you only go to church on Sunday, and don't actually believe anything that the Scripture says.

This is what you mean....

What have you been drinking son? I am a Christian and I go to church every sunday and I do believe in what the scripture says.

What is wrong with that? :confused:

What have you been drinking son? I am a Christian and I go to church every sunday and I do believe in what the scripture says.

What is wrong with that? :confused:
Don't bother engaging C&T. He's a troll who contradicts himself from one minute to the next.

Don't bother engaging C&T. He's a troll who contradicts himself from one minute to the next.

Ah ok. Thank you for the Tip The Nazz.

Evangelicals don't lose their mind, they give them away.

That is generally how religion works.

Hmm, most of the evangelicals I know hold that same sort of idea.

How is it incompatible with a free society? As long as there are no forced conversions, there is no problem.

If a group holds its ultimate goal to be complete ideological domination they are going to be using a pretty liberal definition of forced. For example, it is not unheard of for Evangelican groups to provide community projects (especially in the Third World) only for the 'faithful'. Once this subtle bribing has captured as many lost souls as it can, they will undoubtedly move on to a new, ever more sinister technique, for as long as their resources allow it.

If a group holds its ultimate goal to be complete ideological domination they are going to be using a pretty liberal definition of forced. For example, it is not unheard of for Evangelican groups to provide community projects (especially in the Third World) only for the 'faithful'. Once this subtle bribing has captured as many lost souls as it can, they will undoubtedly move on to a new, ever more sinister technique, for as long as their resources allow it.
That's basically the tactics that have been used since the earliest days of Christianity--you either convert the heathen by bribing them (and modifying your church rites to match their usual celebrations like in Christmas or Easter) or by killing enough of them that they'll submit to your worship. The killing is looked down on these days, so it's generally the bribery road in underdeveloped countries.

You'll notice that education is generally far down on the list of things they offer as a bribe.

I think you're right about this--the thing that makes this guy unusual is that this isn't a small congregation we're talking about here. It was a 5,000 person church--4,000 after subtracting the people who walked out.
I didn't write that especially well. I was trying to distinguish small churches from the behemoth that Boyd administers. I can't imagine a congregation of 1000, let alone 5000.

Good to know some Rev. are still in fair mental capacity and not overwhelmed by bigotry and greed.

It's stupid.

I didn't write that especially well. I was trying to distinguish small churches from the behemoth that Boyd administers. I can't imagine a congregation of 1000, let alone 5000.

Heh, the church I go to in P-cola is around 5500.

It's a monster of a church, and with HUGE coffers behind it.

Good to know there are people like this that actually exist.

It's stupid.

What is stupid?

Heh, the church I go to in P-cola is around 5500.

It's a monster of a church, and with HUGE coffers behind it.

now that´s a lot of people!

My dad´s a pastor as well, at 2 main churchs with smaller ones throught the state, but in those two alone he´s lucky to get 60-80 on a good Sunday. Then again the deaf churches really do need help as only 1-2% are saved so that might explain the smallness...

Heh, the church I go to in P-cola is around 5500.

It's a monster of a church, and with HUGE coffers behind it.

Aye ... the Lakewood church here in Houston recently took over the Compaq Center and has a membership in the 10s of thousands. Joel Osteen is a millionaire.

Fun to see him preaching about helping the poor while he's wearing a $3,000 suit.

I give evangelical christians a lot of well-deserved shit on this forum, so I feel it is incumbent on me to note when one of them turns out not to be a complete douchebag. (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/30/us/30pastor.html?hp&ex=1154232000&en=fc81bfdd0ee7feb1&ei=5094&partner=homepage)
The difference between "cultural christians" and actual Christians:

“When the church wins the culture wars, it inevitably loses,” Mr. Boyd preached. “When it conquers the world, it becomes the world. When you put your trust in the sword, you lose the cross.”

Heh, the church I go to in P-cola is around 5500.

It's a monster of a church, and with HUGE coffers behind it.

Why do you attend it?

[ Pastor Boyd ] said there were Christians on both the left and the right who had turned politics and patriotism into “idolatry.”

All I can say to this is "AMEN!"

Heh, the church I go to in P-cola is around 5500.

It's a monster of a church, and with HUGE coffers behind it.
Which one is it? That big campus on Navy Blvd, or Warrington Road? We lived in Navy Point quite a few years ago.