Rat Out a Church

I heard one of the founders of this site interviewed (more of a snippet) on WSJS this morning. What do you guys think about this.

very interesting

This entry was posted in Old Blog and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Rat Out a Church

  1. Jeremy says:

    Weird that this website thinks that everyone should be able to say whatever they want from the pulpit but they’re going to engage in the very tactics that they hate when they’re applied to them.

    Seems very “un-Christian”. What about turning the other cheek, having one’s mind focused on things above, not wordly things, etc. It’d be like the early Christians ratting out some other group because it wasn’t fair that they were being persecuted.

    Isn’t persecution supposed to be part of the package if you believe that you’re part of the “true” church? I mean, looking at it from their perspective, what should they expect other than being persecuted and maligned for their beliefs?

    I’m not saying that they should roll over at injustice, but I can’t really say that I like their attitudes, knowing where they’re supposed to be coming from.

    What’s the goal – to have a “Christ-like” attitude and take the moral high ground or to have your candidate elected?

    I can’t get into this discussion fully without talking about the involvement of conservative Christians in politics.

    I find it strange that conservative Christians think the world is going to end if they don’t succeed in politics. Some of the biggest growth movements in the Church have flourished under governments that were directly opposed to Christianity.

    I believe completely in the right of conservative Christians to try to elect candidates they support but it seems like they would have more success in transforming society by focusing on winning people over to belief in their interpretation of the life of Jesus Christ.

    What’s the goal? To recreate some mythical Mayberry-esque society that never existed or to radically transform the lives of the individuals who make up society so that they’re remade in the image of God? I’m not a part of conservative Christianity, but I understand it pretty well and the goals of the politically active conservative Christians just so often seem out of place with their theoretical long term goals.

    What if you had a society that was under “God’s law”? What if all of the political goals of the religious right were realized? What then? Would it be over? If the goals of the religious right are realized I, for one, am not going to suddenly consider myself a conservative Christian. That’s not how it works. Israel was under Romes law, but also religious law at the time of Christ and yet, according to Christianity, it was still a depraved society in need of salvation.

    I just think that groups like the one Im supposed to be commenting on have their priority skewed. Not that they shouldnt be politically aware and active, but that theyre willing to engage in acts that they consider morally despicable so that their candidates have a more even playing field. Seems like yet another group putting the creation of what they consider to be a morally right society above the gospel. Thats putting the cart before the horse.

  2. Josh says:

    I think everyone misses the point on movements like this. God is not a republican, democrat, green or consitutionalist. Check out http://go.sojo.net/campaign/takebackourfaith. I think most Christians have it backwards – faith is public, politics is private. One is to be shared, engaged and explored while the latter is an interpretation of the former. Personally, I think both parties have attempted to subvert my faith for their own gain – and that doesn’t benefit anyone.

  3. Dwight says:

    God is not partisan to any party, and yes Christians should expect to be persecuted, but let’s not forget that our democracy was an experiment in self-rule that was formed by Christians based on Judeo-Christian principles. Despite the many recent books that have attempted to negate or deny this influence on the first “band of brothers” the first-source evidence is so overwhelming to the contrary that it makes me wonder if people are really so gullible.

    John Adams said, “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature.”

    The first amendment to the constitution expressly forbids the government to make any law establishing or recognizing any particular religion, and it expressly forbids the government to prohibit anyone from practicing a particular religion. The constitution does NOT mandate that a wall of separation exists between the church and the state. Those who wrote the constitution intended to keep the government out of church affairs, while assuming that Christians would be involved in government affairs.

    Thomas Jefferson is the one wrote the phrase separation between church and state. He did it in response to a Baptist Association that was congratulating his election as president and encouraging him to respect the rights of citizens to practice their faith without interference from the government. Jefferson responded that he not only recognized that right but there was a wall of separation between the church and the state. This wall is to prevent the government from becoming entangled in matters of faith. You can read both letters on http://www.sparenoexpense.com .

    The volume of official state documents that quote from, call on and defer to scripture from the first 50 years of our republic is staggering. As are the number of court cases, laws and government policies. In each case the christian faith is shaping and influencing the government, not the other way around.

    I agree with Jeremy that in the past decades, many embarrasing things have been done in the name of Christianity to influence our politics. But that does not mean Christians should not seek to influence the government, be involved in government and address the government. Nor should they capitulate when the government violates their constituional rights. The apostle Paul resorted to his rights under the Roman government on several occasions. He saved himself from a flogging by appealing to his rights under Roman law, he used every available process in the legal system when he appealed his case to the emporer of Rome.

    What Rat A Church is doing is mean-spirited, cynical and self-defeating. I believe it comes from the great sense of frustration which many christians feel when they see constant violations of their first ammendment right. But that frustration should drive us to our knees in prayer, which would certainly temper attacks on those we disagree with.

  4. Dwight says:

    In anticipation of the pagan ritual of Halloween, the timing of your post is really spooky. The NAACP is screaming foul because someone had the guts to take them to task for violating the free speech rights of non-profit organizations. http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-usirs1029,0,4959347,print.story?coll=ny-top-headlines

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *