American Christianity is at War Against Itself

Posted Jul 31 2012 by Kathy Vestal with 158 Comments

    As the national political climate becomes increasingly more polarized and as religion increasingly identifies itself in political terms, we are seeing a widening divide in Christianity itself, one for which at this point there seems to be no possible truce. When an entity wages war against itself, it is almost assured that it will lose more than it wins, and at great cost.

    Each side claims to be “real Christianity” and is increasingly angered by the claims of the other, often pertaining to women’s rights or more recently to gay rights or the interpretation of the founding documents of our country, but at its core it’s a war about Biblical interpretation.

    Let’s call fundamentalist Christians the orange forces. In the 1970s this army married itself to right-wing politics, blending its theology with Republican ideologies and creating a new political powerhouse different from either of its two parts. Becoming ever more separatist with each passing year, this group of Christians teaches that the Bible is handed down directly from God as God’s rules for our daily living; and the political connection simplifies the tough social issues, because whatever is the Republican position on any issue is by nature also seen as God’s position.

    The green army consists of most other Christians, those who have not embraced fundamentalist ideologies. This group usually focuses on Jesus’ life and ministry, and is driven more to do the Gospel than to speak it. These Christians work to eradicate poverty and hunger and to stand up for those who are oppressed by race, gender, disability, sexual identity, religion, or economic status. This is a group that is inclusive to all groups of people, welcoming them fully into God’s family. Politically most of this army is Democrat or Independent, but they generally believe in a separation of religion and politics and do not combine the one with the other.

    Both armies are passionately living out their perception of what it means to be Christian, and both are increasingly thinking of the other as its enemy. The war is not between Christians and non-Christians but between self-proclaiming Christians and self-proclaiming Christians.

    Must this war play itself out to the end? Is there a possible compromise? I’m not sure there is. While the green army talks of agreeing to disagree, they are leaving the fundamentalist churches, sometimes uniting with green congregations, but too often leaving church altogether, in disillusionment. The fundamentalists do not mimic the “agree to disagree” compromise, but rather welcome those who think differently, only if they are repentant and want to put on an orange uniform. And perhaps they are right that we have fought too far to simply agree to disagree.

    Indeed, how can a church compromise that women can serve in leadership roles and that they can’t; or that gay people are welcome and accepted, and that they are abominable sinners in need of repentance; or that church and state are to be kept separate, and that God ordained us as a Christian nation? So churches are splitting. Denominations are splitting. Families are splitting. Communities are splitting. Hurting words. Mean-spirited accusations. We are at war.

    To fight amongst ourselves, killing off many from both sides and wounding the rest, is tragic. Yet, the greatest casualties, it seems, might be those outside who are watching us fight. What was that “great commission” Jesus gave us? To attack our own brothers and sisters who don’t agree with everything we believe? (Matt. 28:16-20) How many outsiders watching our war are seeing in us the Jesus we claim to represent, and how many are rushing to become a part of our “faith”? Shamefully for us, many are running as far away from our so-called faith as they can.

    Jesus’ heart wrenching prayer for ALL believers:

    “I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one — I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.” (John 17: 20b-23 NIV)

    And two more prayerful thoughts for us all:

    “Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen. And he has given us this command: Anyone who loves God must also love their brother and sister.” (1 John 4:20-21 NIV)

    “My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, for man’s anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires.” (James 1:19-20 NIV)

    —-
    Kathy Vestal is a college educator in Salisbury, NC. She has a Master’s of Divinity from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary and a Master’s of Education from the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. An avid writer, gifted teacher, and occasional public speaker/preacher, her passions include civil rights, social justice, church reform, and education. She has traveled to Mexico, Honduras, Argentina, Ecuador, and The Gambia, Africa, and enjoys reading, nature, and history.

    Print Friendly

      Popular Posts

      Related Posts

      • Anonymous

        I agree with Kathy’s overarching point that it’s regrettable that Christians argue amongst ourselves so much (I’m doing to ditch the over-used and unhelpful war metaphor, because an argument is really what this is; it’s not a war).  It hurts us and it hurts our witness to the non-Christian world.  But while it’s regrettable, it’s also inevitable.  People are going to disagree and when they disagree they’re going to have a debate about who is more accurate. There’s nothing wrong with this.  How we conduct this debate is important however.  Is it done respectfully and civilly or is it done using the language of hate and name-calling?  The tone of the debate is the problem, not that the debate is going on in the first place.

        Unfortunately, Kathy’s set-up of the debate and the opposing sides doesn’t help matters one bit.  Let’s start with her characterization of the “orange” team as “fundamentalists.”  She’s either referring to the group of Christians in the early 20th Century known as the fundamentalists or just using the term as a pejorative (as in Islamic fundamentalist, extremist, etc.)  If it’s the former, then she needs to come up with a more modern term to describe the “orange” team because I haven’t heard any Christian describe himself or herself as a fundamentalist.  If it’s the latter, then she’s not helping tone down the rhetoric.  Either way, the term “fundamentalist” isn’t helpful.  I’d prefer to call them theological conservatives.

        But this is a minor problem compared to what comes next.  She writes of theological conservatives being a separatist movement and “becoming more separatist with each passing year.”  But who are the real separatists here?  It’s the “green” team or “theological progressives” who are diverging from traditional Christianity.  Yet why are the theological conservatives the separatists?

        The statement that theological conservatives believe the Bible is a set of rules for our daily living, as if that’s something that sets them apart from theological progressives, also confuses me.  Do theological progressives not believe this?  I thought both sides pretty much took the Bible to be a guidebook on how to live out our faith in our daily lives.  

        (I’m not even going to bother rebutting the statement that theological conservatives believe that the “Republican position on any issue is by nature also seen as God’s position” because it’s so ridiculous.)
        As Kathy moves to the green team, I don’t think the world’s best advertising executive could improve on her characterization of them.  Contrasted with the evil orange team, the green team is a bunch of saints.  They spend all their time feeding the hungry and sticking up for the oppressed and wouldn’t even think of trying to impose their theology on others using the political process.  And in a strange conundrum, they focus on Jesus’ life and ministry but skip the part about going out and preaching as the apostles did in the early church (because apparently evangelizing using words isn’t something Jesus or his followers did in the early church). After reading these two paragraphs, I’m still a little confused as to who the bad guys and good guys are in this “war.” (sarcasm)

        One other thing I’m confused about is the statement that the members of the green team “generally believe in a separation of religion and politics and do not combine the one with the other.”  So where would Jim Wallis and Sojourners and others like them fit in here?  They seem to believe that their faith calls them to engage in politics and that their faith has serious political implications.  I would have put them down squarely on the green team, but now I’m confused.

        Kathy then writes of splitting congregations and denominations.  Again, this splitting is unfortunate.  But she writes that the “green army talks of agreeing to disagree.”  That’s not what’s going on here.  When the green team is control of a denomination they don’t seek compromise, they advance their particular theology over the protests of the orange team.  Telling someone that we’ll just have to agree to disagree when you’re making the rules is like telling them to shut up and give up.  And when the orange team is in control they perpetuate their theology.  But let’s get one thing clear; it’s not the orange team that is bringing up divisive theological issues that split the church.  It’s the green team that’s doing that.  That’s not to say the green team is wrong on all the divisive issues, but trying to pin the blame on the orange team for dividing Christians doesn’t ring true.

        But maybe after all it’s not that useful to try and squeeze every single Christian into one of two “teams” and set them against each other using some of the most biased and unhelpful over-generalizations possible.  And Kathy wonders why Christians seem to be at each other’s throats…

        • 21st Century Episcopalian

          I agree with you, SamHamilton. You’ve written a very helpful summary.

          • Anonymous

            As did you. Thanks.

      • 21st Century Episcopalian

        With all due respect, Kathy Vestal, if you’re going to try and pretend
        to be an objective analyst, you need to at least try to write in a more
        objective way. It’s very evident your position and though I agree with
        your final outcome (two sides of Christianity in complete disagreement),
        the thrust of your wording betrays an agenda. At least be honest and
        open about your agenda. Sorry to be so blunt, but it’s a string of same-agenda posts that are beginning to become tiring.

        ——————————-

        This article attempts to make it seem as if historic Christianity has
        stepped away from the gospel. As if there’s been a break away from
        Jesus and his loving truth. The opposite is true.

        An analogy: Imagine a family that has always eaten balanced meals for
        dinner in a culture that honors balanced eating. One day, a parent
        (dad, or mom, doesn’t matter) decides they love dessert so much, it
        brings him/her so much pleasure and sensual joy, that every meal from
        then on needs to be dessert. Other family members argue that it’s not
        healthy, not historically the way that family (or that culture) has
        eaten, and begin to argue to remain with the diet of the past.

        The parent becomes entrenched, vitriolic, begins to find skewed
        “research” to support a dessert-only diet, and begins to speak in
        judgmental terms to the other family members. Over time, a few family
        members, having become habitualized to the high-sugar dessert-diet,
        takes his/her side, and the argument gets heated. At some point in
        time, there’s a break.

        From the “progressive” standpoint, the stuck-in-the-mud other family
        members are keeping everyone from enjoying the sweet life (pun intended)
        and are arguing that the other family members are haters, judgmental,
        stuck in their ways and interpretation of proper nutritional thinking.
        But in the “conservative” mindset, they haven’t changed, they haven’t
        broken with the rogue family member(s), they just have known and have
        experienced (and millenia have proven and established) that the
        balanced-meal approach that’s been historically held is the proper
        nutritional approach.

        ———————————-

        So stop trying to paint “conservatives” in such a negative light. It’s
        repulsive. Having said that, there has been a lot of HATE thrown back
        from conservatives (mostly fundamentalists) and nobody is innocent.

        What needs to happen: Everyone needs to dig deeper, avoid these silly
        “surface” issues (like Chik-Fil-A) and go to the Christ core of the
        gospel and focus there.

      • http://www.facebook.com/briansherylingalls Brian Ingalls

        Fundamentalists as you have defined them here, do not exist. Countless organizations, churches, and Christians who interpret the Bible as God’s rules for daily living, spend enormous amounts of time, money, and efforts helping the poor, needy, and forgotten. Your characterization lacks any credible recognition of this and as such is offensive to a fundamentalist” as you would call me, when I have spent so much of my life teaching and showing others on the mission field and in the inner city about living as Christ. You have so much to offer the kingdom, remember your brothers and sisters who may disagree with you over abortion or same sex marriage are working just as tirelessly as you in the soup kitchens and slums of the third world to bring light into the darkness.

        • Anonymous

          Good points Brian. The idea that “green” Christians spend their days helping the poor while “orange” Christians don’t is ludicrous. Her characterizations are really sloppy.

        • Michelle

          Thanks, Brian. Well said.

      • http://www.facebook.com/mikey.gee.169 Mikey Gee

        This is just an amateur opinion based on my own limited experience. But my mostly Orange perspective is that the difference between Orange and Green has to do with the belief whether they are a part of a church or part of the Church. Viewing Christianity as a predominantly divine institution makes us Oranges a tad less flexible in what we can teach or believe and also keeps us from giving up. Greens (as best as I understand) view churches as predominantly human organizations which not only allows but demands that beliefs and teaching conform to the people and also allows members to walk away more easily.

        I don’t know any great argument to convince those darn blasphemous Greens the obvious truth of my divinely inspired position… so instead I focus on what I ought to be doing myself. Let’s say that Revelation chapters 2-3 provide (among other things) ways Christian churches and Christian persons can go wrong. I am going to focus on my own failings (let’s say it is like the Ephesians church) rather than making it a personal, I mean holy, mission to tell other churches what they are doing wrong.

        • http://twitter.com/MAGuyton Morgan Guyton

          Thanks for offering a remarkably charitable response.

      • Drew

        Sam and 21st have already provided excellent critiques so I have no need to rehash what they have already said. All I will say is that Tony Campolo should be ashamed of himself for what he has allowed to transpire on this blog. This is no longer a gathering place for Evangelicals to promote reform and draw closer to Christ. This is now a place where liberals of all backgrounds (secular, non-Evangelical, very few Evangelicals) launch hate-filled attacks against other Evangelicals. If this is a war, Kathy, you just launched a missile.

        • http://twitter.com/MAGuyton Morgan Guyton

          Drew, why not write your own piece and submit it? They can only use the content that actually comes in. I try to always be Biblical and fair in whatever I submit.

          • Drew

            I’m not a blogger, author, or writer. I actually only comment on this website and occasionally one other website.

            At the same time you say you try to be Biblical and fair, you also say you have been scarred and haunted by the SBC. Kathy and Bert are also ex-SBC’ers that do not have kind things to say. I hope you realize that three ex-SBC’ers in the regular rotation, plus Piatt (liberal mainline Protestant denomination), starts to skew the website to where it it mostly people who strongly disagree with Evangelicalism as an outsider.

            • Michelle

              Yaaay, Drew. :)

            • Michelle

              I hope you write a piece. You are a great writer, thinker and defender of Christ and the Scriptures.

      • Pastor Joe Bell

        No really- which side are you on? This is a horribly slanted viewpoint. The amazing thing is you can judge your opponents in a supposedly “open” forum with a straight face.
        “The green army consists of most other Christians, those who have not embraced fundamentalist ideologies. This group usually focuses on Jesus’ life and ministry, and is driven more to do the Gospel than to speak it. These Christians work to eradicate poverty and hunger and to stand up for those who are oppressed by race, gender, disability, sexual identity, religion, or economic status. This is a group that is inclusive to all groups of people, welcoming them fully into God’s family. Politically most of this army is Democrat or Independent, but they generally believe in a separation of religion and politics and do not combine the one with the other. ”
        Good grief! I can’t believe someone with a master’s degree has gone through higher education with an ability to be that slanted without at least owning it. There aren’t polls, surveys or any valid data which support your views- but go right ahead and believe them. I won’t be listening any more, though. I joined this group because back in the 80s Dr. Campolo changed my view of the faith. But this “Red Letter” group is so slanted as to make conversation difficult. May God be with you- but I won’t.

        • 21st Century Episcopalian

          I recall the solid grace-filled messages of Dr. Campolo from years ago too. Who wouldn’t be moved by his “Birthday Cake for the Hawaiian Prostitute” story) — pure gospel. But now he has attached his name and obviously no editorial oversight or filtering process to this silly Red Letter site. C’mon Tony, open communication is one thing. Blanket approval through silence is another.

          • guest

            That was a great story…

          • guest

            That was a great story…

          • Drew

            I have been saying the same thing for the last six months. I’m glad that you, Sam, and others are finally jumping on my bandwagon and seeing what’s happening here.

      • tarl_hutch

        The commenters here raise many valid points regarding the language used and the broad brushstrokes used to paint this argument. Generalities are ugly beasts, but are somewhat necessary in a discussion of this magnitude, as they make general points to follow. They in no way do justice to the amazing work done by conservative evangelicals or the deep personal spirituality of many progressives. But they do serve to set up the framework for the current issue.

        The biggest trend that stands out to me from these comments though, is the fact that the same problems you have with kathy’s post are the same tactics you employ in your arguments. Thinking that current conservative theology has not changed from the days of the early church, misses two thousand years of church history. In fact the early church was not one church with one theology at all, but many churches working to make sense of various theological perspectives. Paul and Peter even had disagreements in regards to certain issues, though they tried to unite their principles. Even paul and Jesus seem to be at odds a bit, if you read the first three chapters of revelation that so many like to quote. Jesus lists eating meat sacrificed to gods as a sin he hates, yet Paul tells us that there is nothing wrong with that. So the idea that the church has ever had only one, orthodox way is a bit misleading, and accusing certain denominations of straying from the “right” way while the other is perfect is not totally true. Both sides have changed over the years.

        We are setting up false battlelines when we begin to treat each other this way, as Kathy points out. So the real question is, how do we love each other as Jesus commanded us to do?

        • Drew

          Like Emerson says, “Your actions speak so loudly, I can not hear what you are saying.” While Vestal calls for unity, her slanderous characterization of conservatives speaks so loudly that I cannot even hear the call for unity. All I heard was a slanderous, bearing false witness type of attack.

          Right away, Vestal says the war is “fundamentalists” vs. “most other Christians, who have not embraced fundamentalist ideologies.” Why are fundamentalists labeled but the other side is not? Why is it set up so that fundamentalists – generally thought of extreme right – are up against the rest of Christianity – right, moderate, and liberal?

          Fundamentalists are seen as married to right-wing politics, but the “rest of Christianity” separates politics from Christianity. Really? Has Kathy ever heard of Tony Campolo, Brian McLaren, Jim Wallis, and Shane Claiborne?

          Fundamentalists are separatists, while the rest of Christianity does not separate but “unites” with like-minded folk or or becomes “disillusioned” by Fundamentalism. First, this is not objective, saying that one group is “separatist” while the other group is “uniting.” Second, the statistics show the opposite, that generally people are becoming disillusioned with liberal, mainline Protestantism and joining more conservative, Evangelical denominations.

          Finally, the part where Kathy launches an all-out missile attack. Fundamentalists think the Bible is God’s rules for our daily living. Meanwhile, the “the rest of Christianity” focuses on Jesus’ life and ministry, act out their faith in contrast to the inaction of Fundamentalists, eradicate poverty and hunger, stand up for the oppressed, is inclusive and welcoming.

          First off, if you cannot see that this is skewed to favor Kathy’s preferred group (negative Fundamentalist, positive rest of Christianity), then you are blind to the truth. However, let me point out that statistics show that “conservatives” volunteer more, tithe more, and give more than “liberals,” even when comparing religious conservatives to liberal conservatives. Evangelicals consistently out-tithe mainline liberal Protestants. Third, Kathy essentially compares Fundamentalists to Pharisees (rule book living) and “the rest of Christianity” to Jesus (Jesus living). This is a war cry, not a call for unity.

          Next time Kathy wants to write about unity, love, and peace… she actually has to write in a way that brings about unity, love, and peace.

          • tarl_hutch

            Drew, my man, you also misunderstand me on this. I am not interested in defending Kathy’s choice of words or tone, but am more interested in pointing out that she is not unique. Sad to say, but her post echoes the tones I hear when people disparage progressive Christians. Her words mirror the words that get thrown at “liberal” Christians and the “us vs. them” mentality is the same. In fact I could see her attitude developing out of frustration at the treatment she receives from some “conservative” Christians. I am not saying its right, as i try to rise above that, but we all should be honest with ourselves. It is fine to disagree, but we should do it respectfully and out of love, and that is not happening.

            We all have issues and neither side is more “holy” than the other. We need to think about what it is about our particular beliefs that turn others off and address them, instead of blaming the other side for disagreeing.

            • Drew

              And you misunderstand me on this. I am not seeking a false equivalency here. I do not need Kathy to portray both sides as being equal when they are not equal or when she does not believe they are equal. What I want is a *fair* characterization of both sides. Heck, she doesn’t even start from a point of fairness (Fundamentalists vs. rest of Christianity).

              • tarl_hutch

                I work in the hospitality industry and one oft repeated saying there is ” perception is reality”. Unfortunately, this statement holds true for life as well. The stereotypes of both camps would not exist, or at least not be so tenacious, if we didn’t make them so true. Of course, reality is that we probably agree on much more than we would like to admit and that we hold mixtures of belief.

                If we were honest about this, instead of constructing and attacking stereotypes, we may be able to figure something out. Or maybe its as Kathy said, and we are just gonna batten down and keep fighting till we damn ourselves and Damn the whole world with us.

                Truthfully, I am so sick of arguing the same crap and giving/hearing the same damned arguments. It breaks my heart and pissed me off to see good people, Christ’s people, continuously squabbling like spoilt brats. No wonder people are leaving the church in droves, and dont kid yourself it is happening in conservative churches too. I love my friends, conservative and liberal, we argue over pints and hang out with coffee, but so often i see people driving fences between each other, when if we just grew up and had adult conversation we might realize that we are all the same. We have the same problems, the same sins, the same hope, the same desire for God, but instead we call each other names and send each other to Hell for doing the ecact same crap we do. I pray for strength and love, cause all this bickering we do makes me want to give uo sometimes.

              • Drew

                Are you trying to justify untrue stereotypes as being true because some people may think they are true?

                Again, I am all for what Kathy is saying at the end of her post, but the way she sets it up is so slanderous and false and one-sided that it is not a post that inspires unity.

              • tarl_hutch

                …….no. I am saying that despite the untruth of most stereotypes, in as much as we don’t play into them, the perceptions of others form the reality in which we are viewed. It should cause us to consider why such stereotypes exist and what we do to perpetrate them. We can’t sit back and blame the preceiver for misunderstanding us, the preceiver only has our words and actions to judge from. Therefore, when people have a negative view of us, no matter how untrue it is deep down, it is up to us to examine why and change what we deem to be revealing us falsely.

                Of course, sometimes you will be doing things the right way and others will still misread your actions and intent, in which case you try to be the best example, but knowing you can’t win them all. Even in this case we should ask why would they see me that way?

                Even you in your comments on this site have slipped into using stereotypes to frame those with whom you disagree. I know you are a great person, with a Passion for God, but even you ate guilty of the same rhetoric

              • Aaaaaaaaargh

                Tarl, I’ve intimated this before, but I thank you for being consistently gracious in your responses. I can always count on you to insert something caring or thoughtful when I would be tempted to just let loose with two barrels of invective. You demonstrate by far the most Christlike spirit of any commenter on this site. Keep it up.

              • tarl_hutch

                Thank you for the encouragement, it really means a lot, as I become quite frustrated at the while situation. It is truly only through Christ that I can be filled with love for others, as I am naturally quite opinionated and confrontational. God has really shown me that we miss the mark in being what he desires for his church, and I try in my small way to change that. I have been humbled many times and have been on all sides of our current issues, so I try to extend grace to those that I disagree with. But just wait, I am sure I will blow up sometime. Ha.

              • Questioning

                Agreed

              • Drew

                Fair enough.

          • Michelle

            Drew, I absolutely *love* what you wrote. I am definitely your “amen corner.” I agree theologically with evangelicals (I term those who believe the Bible as the inerrant Word of God, as “evangelicals”). My grave concern is that many evangelicals have equated Christian beliefs with the Republicans. They have taken two issues: gay marriage and abortion and made those the banner issues of Christianity. I believe that if Romney is elected very VERY dark days are ahead for poor and working class people. I believe that evangelicals who oppose gay marriage (as I do) and abortion, are blinded to other significant issues that affect marginalized Americans. If the world votes in gay marriage, the church will go on. We will evangelize to everyone. I am voting for Obama despite the fact that I STRONGLY disagree with the Dems now putting gay marriage as a major platform issue. The Dems constantly pimp the Black vote (of which I consider myself a part) and the progressive Christian vote because they know we will not vote for Republicans. The Republican platform and ideology directly opposes the interests of the vast majority of people of color and poor people. I will vote against gay marriage in MD, but I will vote for Obama and the Dems. Economic war against the poor, I consider to be violent. From everything I see, Republicans appear to hate the poor and scorn the very things that would help us. They tell us to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps when we have no bootstraps. Also, as a note, when I lived in Tampa, I was asked the progressive radio station to invite Jim Wallis to give a different view of Christianity. i was very concerned about our various wars which I believe/d were unjust and murderous. When i went to see Jim speak at the local liberal church…I raised a question about homosexuality. he basically dissed me, and it seemed like the whole church of liberals and liberal Christians cheered him on. From that day, I have never picked up his magazine, which I used to read. Liberal Christians bully the rest of us and i see very little difference between their ideologies and regular liberal ideologies, which is one of the reasons for the continued decline of the mainline denominations and the flourishing of the evangelical churches that preach and reach the entire Bible from beginning to end as God’s Word (not just the parts we like and agree with).

            • Michelle

              I didn’t mean that I oppose legal abortion. I am conflicted about this issue. But I believe it should be allowed before a certain point in the pregnancy.

            • Drew

              I voted for a gay marriage ban in my state, but at the same time, I have voted for Democrat for every office (local, state, national) since 2000. This year will be the first year I vote for a Republican (it will be at the state level; undecided on the national level). It is definitely hard to find a home in politics when you have conservative theology and social beliefs but also believe the government should step in and provide a strong safety net where the private sector or charities fail to do so.

              • Michelle

                Drew, believe this or not…you are the only other person that I have found who is similar to me. It could be because I am not engaging in these discussion with some people. I would never dare bringing this topic up in my small group out of fear (which is why I want to leave the group). But your words have encouraged me, that I do fit into American Christianity and there is a place for me somewhere. God is faithful. Drew, could you please pray for me and my son? I need a permanent job quickly (in the field of social work); I want to also obtain my Master’s in Social Work. Also, I have been advsersely affected by Democratic actions. My state has requested and received waivers from the Obama Administration, to be exempt from major provisions in the No Child Left Behind Law. I was able to transfer my son to a school that is leaps and bounds ahead in performance (from the local school which has been failing for years). Bus transportation was provided. Now, the Democrats have taken that away from me. They have removed public school choice and they have given me only one more year of the school bus although I need the school bus for three more years for Chris to finish elementary school. This is causing me anguish as a single mother. Please add me to your prayer list, if you don’t mind. Yours in Christ, Michelle

              • Drew

                Hi Michelle,

                I don’t automatically get e-mailed when people respond to me but I try to check back every few days or so since this is the only site I generally comment on. I’m glad I found this post. I wrote down your prayer on my prayer list and will keep you and Chris in my thoughts. I have had periods of no health care and unemployment or underemployment and it is difficult. Thankfully both came to pass. It is neat that your son has a mom that loves Christ, is ambitious, and wants the best for him. God bless.

              • Michelle

                Hi Drew, have you considered registering with Disqus so that you will be notified when someone replies to you? Also, please feel free to keep my email…I will risk putting it “out there” because I think you are such a neat person: Thank you for praying for me and Chris and for being so encouraging. Be blessed and please feel free to keep in touch.

        • 21st Century Episcopalian

          Partially true in that the body of Christ has had to work through disagreements on application of scripture (more so than interpretation), but some of both. God’s Holy Spirit continues to guide the Bride of Christ through these issues as time progresses.

          However, the body of Christ has NEVER before in history accepted homosexual behavior as acceptable, or as anything other than sin… until our recent times in our Western culture. So one like myself who argues a “historical christian” view of this issue (homosexual behavior in the “Church”, as I think we all agree is the very thinly veiled agenda of Kathy’s article, yet again), is a historically foundational view of consistency of interpretation and application… until current times. That’s where your comment is inaccurate.

          • 21st Century Episcopalian

            Edit: Please understand that I use the term “sin” as used in Bible, that of “missing the mark”, of falling short of ideal. I am NOT using term “sin” to denote some deeper dysfunctional level of depravity. Just to clarify.

          • tarl_hutch

            I actually did not really get the “gay agenda” undertone from this myself. It could very well be there and I think I see where you are getting it from, but it frustrates me that it always seems to come down to that. As I have voiced my opinions of the subject multiple times before, I will not do that now, but I do think the article addresses even more than that. That is but one symptom of the overarching problem, which I would say is a lack of grace in the church towards one another and the influence of partisan rhetoric. Until those issues are dealt with we will keep going round and round with the same stupid arguments and the same talking points going no where but Hell.

            • 21st Century Episcopalian

              Tarl, re: agenda: Paragraph 2 of article speaks of the agenda. Plus context of author’s previous articles as well as general discourse fueling progressive desire to call for “change”.

              Tarl, re: lack of grace. Though I respect you for feeling this way, I see it completely differently. It’s not a lack of grace when an individual/group come in to completely overturn the way things are. And you’d have to agree that the Body of Christ has been uniform that homosexual sex is not acceptable; this has been the view of millenia, not a back and forth accept/not issue.

              An analogy: What would you do if a growing group called for a complete overturning of how the country understood “time”? That they called for day to be night and night to be day. That as soon as legislation could be passed, everyone would have to accept that it’s normative to sleep during the daylight and work/play during the dark night hours? But you know differently, not only from experience, but because highly-respected experts in sleep theory have been clearly communicating about the need to establish healthy sleep cycles during dark hours.

              So this issue, homosexual sex, isn’t about a minor little thing that doesn’t affect others. It’s not an innocent “other view” that’s evolved as a good thing. It’s a complete upsetting of the way life has been acceptably lived from DAY ONE (within God’s community; not talking about civil govt).

              So therefore I will speak out. I do not want the day and night hours to be switched nor do I think that’ll be good either for our churches OR the individuals who participate (over time).

              So please understand that where you may see “lack of grace” in the words of me (or others who oppose), it’s really quite the opposite.

              The onus isn’t on historical christianity to defend itself but it’s on progressive pro-homosexuality agenda to prove that a massive change in understanding scripture, eradicating Church history/tradition, and rewriting the biological philosophy is right. So far, that’s NOT be done. Nor will it ever. Sorry. With all due respect, — 21stCE

              • tarl_hutch

                In regards to the lack of grace, I am more referring to how we disagree not that we disagree. We should be gracious in our dialogue, especially when we don’t see eye to eye. I have no problem with others speaking uo for what they believe and disagreeing with me, that is goid and healthy. My issue is with how its done. I believe you typically do very well at that, but some others go on the defensive instead of logical consideration.

                As for progressives having the burden of proof in any issue that is called into question, I agree. While you may not feel they have met that on some issues, a growing number of others have. This is why we keep discussing, researching, and praying over different issues. Some of us question the “status quo” on certain things and bring them up to challenge them to establish their worth or lack thereof. Many conservatives view this as attacking the traditional ways of the church, but it is largely a questioning to provide a check on how we proceed. I don’t believe that just because something has always been done one way, that that signifies its inherit rightness. All matters of doctrine should be tested to determine its validity. This should be dine gracefully and prayerfully, which sadly does not always happen, to strengthen the church, not weaken it.

                Trust me, I see your point and appreciate your concerns about going to far away from authentic Christianity, but I remain open to change. We need people fighting for tradition, it anchors us, but they too must be open and prayerfully consider alternatives. This still leaves open the door for you to say, nope, you guys are way off base, but please remember that progressives too are trying to follow the example of Christ the best they know how.

                I understand your example, though it is imperfect in relation to the issue, but I still have to wonder how gay marrriage really destroys Christianity and traditional marriage. It is something I am still working through. So far, I am putting the responsibility to convict on Jesus and trying to focus instead on showing the live of God to others. What other thoughts do you have?

              • 21st Century Episcopalian

                I highly respect your gracious approach to communication. As a person who also is open to change, as I’ve modified major world views in the recent past, I too want to learn and dialogue.

                I’m certain, however, that my view on this particular issue will never change. However, I hope I’m always able to communicate and love graciously and freely.

                PS- my focus is on the Church, those who have been redeemed. Not on visitors, sojourners, not on what the civil government does/not decide re: gay marriage. That seems like a done deal. But the precious Bride of Christ is another matter.

              • tarl_hutch

                That is a good distinction to make, that we are conversing and arguing about family issues, not those who have yet to become Christ followers. Unfortunately, our inner debates are become public battles, which in turn affects how others view us. I may be naive, but I still there is room in the church for conservatives and progressives. In fact, I believe it is necessary. I personally feel we each reflect different aspects of the same amazing God. Just as the trinity is a relational dance, thanks eastern orthodoxy, we too must learn how to dance together. Our mission is so important that we can’t afford not to. This is the gracr I advocate and that I believe will be a beacon of hope to a troubled world. Brian Mclaren’s book A Generous Orthodoxy, actually pays great respect to all streams of Christianity and how we are interconnected. If we can keep in mind that we all hold the image of Christ within us, then we can disagree while still holding together. I also think the variations in Churches allow us to attract more people with varied personalities, all experiencing the same God in unique ways.

              • tarl_hutch

                That is a good distinction to make, that we are conversing and arguing about family issues, not those who have yet to become Christ followers. Unfortunately, our inner debates are become public battles, which in turn affects how others view us. I may be naive, but I still there is room in the church for conservatives and progressives. In fact, I believe it is necessary. I personally feel we each reflect different aspects of the same amazing God. Just as the trinity is a relational dance, thanks eastern orthodoxy, we too must learn how to dance together. Our mission is so important that we can’t afford not to. This is the gracr I advocate and that I believe will be a beacon of hope to a troubled world. Brian Mclaren’s book A Generous Orthodoxy, actually pays great respect to all streams of Christianity and how we are interconnected. If we can keep in mind that we all hold the image of Christ within us, then we can disagree while still holding together. I also think the variations in Churches allow us to attract more people with varied personalities, all experiencing the same God in unique ways.

              • Michelle

                Oh my gosh, I love what you wrote. You said exactly what I feel/think. Thanks.

        • Michelle

          Tarl, your response was brilliant…I guess for me, there are certain things that I just cannot compromise on. there are some liberal denominations who, because they do not view Scripture as God-breathed, in my view, impose current social beliefs into the church that the Bible is very clear about (homosexuality/gay marriage as an embraced path). Some liberal denominations have endorsed gay marriage and open partnerships. With that line of thinking, we should also be welcoming people into church who want to attend with someone else’s spouse because “it’s love.” For me, the main schism is between those Christians who believe that Jesus/the Holy Spirit/God the Father are…*God*: Three in One; that the entire Bible (Old and New Testaments) are inspired of God–and those Christians who believe that the Bible is not inerrant in it;s original translation. As well, the Christians who defend gay marriage and homosexuality as an embraced path…say that Jesus never said one word about homosexuality. But for people like me who believe that the entire Bible is from Jesus and that God is three in one: well, He DID mention homosexuality in the Old AND New Testaments because man wrote down His thoughts in both testaments. So when Paul wrote various things about homosexuality (among other numerous topics), he was writing what he was led to write by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit, Jesus and God the Father are three in one. Because both Christian camps disagree theologically…that leads to division. Also usually the Bible as the word of God folks usually believe in a moment in time when you are saved/born again. Liberal Christians usually do not believe that.

          • tarl_hutch

            There are two things I will not compromise on: loving God with all my heart, mind, strength, and soul; and loving my neighbor. All other scripture is filtered through that and the guidence the Spirit provides to determine hoe I should interpret the bible. I also think that from time to time people misunderstand the average progressives view of the bible, while some say it is only man’s writing and full of error, most liberals hold that it is God inspired, but not without the influence of man. This is a difficult distinction, but one that allows the bible to be the word of God, while allowing room to wrestle with difficulties. I know I for one love and cherish the bible, and there still are many liberals who do, just like there are many conservatives who believe it is the divine inerrant word of God but never crack the cover.

            Thank you for your words and I hope we can continue to work out our faith together.

            • Michelle

              Gm, Tarl

              Thank you for your words. I guess this is what makes me a “fundamentalist” (Oh, well) … You wrote: ”
              most liberals hold that it is God inspired, but not without the influence of man.” That’s the key difference. I believe that the Bible I am holding in my hand (which I do crack open; reading I Samuel right now) contain the exact words that God wants me to have: His thoughts to me, His follower. I can’t compromise on that. Whatever was hashed out between men, ultimately the Holy Spirit saw to it that the end product, the Bible, is what Christians are supposed to have regarding what the Creator wanted to tell us. This might leave room for how I apply what i am reading/interpreting. For example, the Christians who believe in the death penalty vs. those who do not. or Christians who believe in abortion rights vs. those who do not. We can read the same Scripture and reach different conclusions about the correct stance of a Christian in our society and the world; many times our stances are influenced by the backgrounds we come from (race, class, nation). But i do not believe Christians get to pick and choose which words God wanted us to have simply because we find fault with the teachings, for example the very clear teachings about sexual sin and homosexual sexual sin that liberal Christians repeatedly try to justify as a way of life. As a believer, I can show love to someone and yet disagree with their approach. that does not mean I do not love them. I have been disciplined many times by God because of sinful decisions, but redeemed nonetheless. For example, if a heterosexual person is continually engaged in sex outside of marriage and is a church member, it is the church’s duty to correct this person, not with hate or contempt, but with love. because God does call us to live according to certain principles:

              ”
              Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God–this is your spiritual act of worship.”

              “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” 2 Timothy 3:16

              • tarl_hutch

                Nice reply, keep on loving. As you know, if we do all the right things, but have not love, then it is all for naught. I trust with people such as yourself, the “fundamentalists” will be on the right track. Thanks for the dialogue.

      • Anonymous

        God and the world are watching to see how U.S. fundamentalists treat their neighbors, just as God and the world see how U.S. fundamentalists treat their fellow christian brethren like Barack Obama.

        • guest

          You didn’t read the other posts, did you? “Fundamentalists” is an offensive slur that does not help advance civil dialogue. Think about retiring it.

      • http://www.facebook.com/kvestal Kathy Vestal

        It was not my intent to offend with the “fundamentalist” word. My background is Southern Baptist, and that term is used proudly in the Baptist world. And I can assure you that in the Baptist world, the characterization I offer here is very real, and most of the Baptists I know would proudly own it. I also did not mean to give the impression that I was completely unbiased in the war I describe. On the contrary, as with all of us, in a commentary piece like this we speak from the view of our own tinted glasses, and, despite a very orange background, I have come to see God in greener shades. My intent here was not to make everyone see green, but to challenge us to get along with each other as best we can, to stop the name-calling, and to acknowledge each other in the Christian family.

        Some of you took offense to my statement that the green Christians do ministry more than speak it. I think I could have worded that more clearly. I can see how that could be taken offensively. What I meant there was that it’s usually the orange Christians who knock on doors asking the “If you die today,,,” questions and sharing their faith with words. It might be a criticism that the green Christians do less verbal sharing, but they are very focused instead on hands on ministries. Not that they never share verbally, and not that the orange Christians never do hands on. If you read between the lines, I think you might see some criticisms in some of the other green characterizations as well.

        • Charles

          Never commented on these articles before but I must agree this article is terribly disappointing. I work in the inner city and help run a community center. I’m also a seminary student. Kathy, you seem to have great passion but I’m afraid you’re the one creating the dissent you so lament. The divide between “green” and “orange” may not be so drastic and it’s a shame you find such a dichotomy in your sphere of ministry.

        • http://twitter.com/MAGuyton Morgan Guyton

          I grew up as a moderate Southern Baptist and was scarred by the experience. I’m still haunted by fundamentalism and probably always will be to some degree. Don’t be discouraged. The reality is that things are more complicated today than the world that we experienced growing up. And that’s a good thing. Social conservatives are discovering social justice, and justice activists are discovering spiritual discipline. The main enemy on all sides is our own pursuit of self-justification. Whenever we do good in order to prove something about ourselves and to make a case why we’re better than others, then we are effectively rejecting the blood of Christ, which is supposed to set us free from that trap. Conservatives and liberals alike self-justify; that is the toxin beneath our ugliness.

          • tarl_hutch

            Well said…

          • Drew

            “I’m scarred by the experience and still haunted by Fundamentalism.”

            So you can understand, then, when Kathy uses the word, it is often seen a pejorative, correct?

          • Michelle

            Wow, Morgan. Thank you for sharing that. You have challenged my thinking.

          • Michelle

            Wow, Morgan. Thank you for sharing that. You have challenged my thinking.

          • Michelle

            Morgan, if you are open to sharing more…would you be able to tell us what scarred you with regard to fundamentalism?

          • Michelle

            Morgan, if you are open to sharing more…would you be able to tell us what scarred you with regard to fundamentalism?

        • Michelle

          Kathy, your analysis is interesting. I believe both types of “work” are needed. According to your definition, I am a “fundamentalist” because I believe the Bible is the Word of God; God-breathed. I believe that I need to share the Gospel and that without salvation people will perish eternally separated from God. I also believe that works as an expression of faith, is important. We are called to express God’s love to Christians and to the world that we live in. Evangelism and also serving the human needs of the people are both needed. One should not exist without the other. For example, yes, I will fight for good housing and other benefits for the poor (which sometimes includes me and my son)…but I also don’t think that great housing and no message about God that could lead to someone’s salvation makes sense. the Great Commission is very clear; very explicit. My point is that there are Christians who encompass both categories that you have delineated. I do cringe at the idea of being lumped with a color. I am born again believer who grateful to be saved and I happen to have very “progressive” ideas about the world I live in with regard to economic and other social issues.

        • Michelle

          Kathy, your analysis is interesting. I believe both types of “work” are needed. According to your definition, I am a “fundamentalist” because I believe the Bible is the Word of God; God-breathed. I believe that I need to share the Gospel and that without salvation people will perish eternally separated from God. I also believe that works as an expression of faith, is important. We are called to express God’s love to Christians and to the world that we live in. Evangelism and also serving the human needs of the people are both needed. One should not exist without the other. For example, yes, I will fight for good housing and other benefits for the poor (which sometimes includes me and my son)…but I also don’t think that great housing and no message about God that could lead to someone’s salvation makes sense. the Great Commission is very clear; very explicit. My point is that there are Christians who encompass both categories that you have delineated. I do cringe at the idea of being lumped with a color. I am born again believer who grateful to be saved and I happen to have very “progressive” ideas about the world I live in with regard to economic and other social issues.

        • Anonymous

          Thank you for your clarifications Kathy. It probably would have been best if you’d prefaced your blog post by saying that this is written based on your limited experiences in your particular church upbringing and is not meant to be a characterization of Christians nationwide, but a (possibly imperfect) characterization of the people in the church in which you were raised. I think that would have defused some of the critical feedback.

      • http://www.facebook.com/kvestal Kathy Vestal

        It was not my intent to offend with the “fundamentalist” word. My background is Southern Baptist, and that term is used proudly in the Baptist world. And I can assure you that in the Baptist world, the characterization I offer here is very real, and most of the Baptists I know would proudly own it. I also did not mean to give the impression that I was completely unbiased in the war I describe. On the contrary, as with all of us, in a commentary piece like this we speak from the view of our own tinted glasses, and, despite a very orange background, I have come to see God in greener shades. My intent here was not to make everyone see green, but to challenge us to get along with each other as best we can, to stop the name-calling, and to acknowledge each other in the Christian family.

        Some of you took offense to my statement that the green Christians do ministry more than speak it. I think I could have worded that more clearly. I can see how that could be taken offensively. What I meant there was that it’s usually the orange Christians who knock on doors asking the “If you die today,,,” questions and sharing their faith with words. It might be a criticism that the green Christians do less verbal sharing, but they are very focused instead on hands on ministries. Not that they never share verbally, and not that the orange Christians never do hands on. If you read between the lines, I think you might see some criticisms in some of the other green characterizations as well.

      • GraemeD

        I’ve just been recommended to this site. Big gulps of fresh air!

        Thanks

      • GraemeD

        The Bible cannot be a guide book for living our daily lives per se. That way you can justify any belief system you care to concoct that suits you. As with ‘proof texts’ you end up with whatever you want, and not Christ.
        Followers of Jesus will be:
        counter cultural
        Spacious people who have time.
        Defenceless
        Inclusive
        Preferring the other
        Global (not national)
        The Bible read with a dualistic western mindset with no historic socio- political context is misrepresentive at best, and tragically dangerous at worst. As history and the current schisms show.
        Holy spirit help us and God forgive us.

      • KeithT

        It’s Friday when Christians draw lines and face off to tear into each other in the name of Jesus, but Sunday is coming.

      • http://spiritualsidekick.com/ Tom Wideman

        This entire thread just proves Kathy’s point. It grieves me, as I’m sure it does everyone else on here. We’ve all experienced hurt and frustration in our culture debate and regrettably we have all said things we regret. We’ve acted out of emotion and not love. We are too busy pointing fingers and trying to determine who’s more Christian than the other. Lord have mercy.

      • http://twitter.com/MAGuyton Morgan Guyton

        Here’s the bottom line. The culture war is not really between liberals and conservatives, green and orange, or whatever terms you want to use. It’s really between accusers and advocates who can be either conservative or liberal. Advocates are those who emulate Christ, who is the advocate for sinners. Accusers are those who emulate Satan, who is the accuser of sinners. Advocates stick up for the dignity of other people, especially those we disagree with. Accusers take pleasure in trashing other people and taking the most cynical possible interpretation of their motives.

        The Internet is not the place to make arguments about sin. No one is convicted of their sin through accusations from anonymous speakers. Accusations only make people defensive. The only public message Christians should have for people in the world is that God loves them and wants them to accept His salvation through Christ so they can enter into eternal communion with Him and fulfill the purpose of their existence as His image-bearers. While there are social sins that need to be addressed prophetically, personal sins should be handled internally within the body of Christ, in covenant disciple relationships. As Paul says, “What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church?” (1 Cor 5:12).

        I said all this and a little more in my latest blog post: http://morganguyton.wordpress.com/2012/07/31/accusers-vs-advocates-the-real-battlefield-lines/

        • Nate

          If I could vote this up more than one I would. Very well said… and you even used some scripture in there would you believe that!! :)

          • http://twitter.com/MAGuyton Morgan Guyton

            Nate, I share your frustration with what happens on this site. I contribute fairly regularly and try to always stay Biblical and fair. My hope is that we would all become kingdom Christians and there would be no more liberal and conservative but rather one mass of disciples who exude the mercy they have received in everything they do and say in the world.

            • http://spiritualsidekick.com/ Tom Wideman

              Morgan, I wanted you to know that I posted a link to your blog on my facebook page. Several of my friends have appreciated what you had to share. Keep up the great work.

            • Nate

              Couldn’t agree more. We need to keep everything focused on Him. Politicizing issues and demonizing people will never fix anything.

        • Anonymous

          Morgan – I like your distinction between accusers and advocates. It’s a good way to think about it. Of course, the hard part, as you admit, is deciding when a “personal” sin crosses over to a “social’ sin and knowing when public prophecy is needed. But even when public prophecy is needed, it must be done humbly, respectfully and out of love rather than condemnation.

      • Nate

        In the wise words of Brick from Anchorman: “I DON’T KNOW WHAT WE’RE YELLING ABOUT!”

        • 21st Century Episcopalian

          Ha ha ha. That is AWESOME! Great quote.

        • Michelle

          LOL.

        • Michelle

          LOL.

      • Aaaaaaaaargh

        A couple of general thoughts responding to the article and comments:

        -yes, some Christians DO in fact label themselves as fundamentalists, even though it is surely a smaller number than Kathy places in the orange camp.

        -leaving the word “fundamentalist” aside, there is an undeniable split within Christianity based on the way we choose to interpret the Bible. The crux of the matter is literalism/inerrancy vs a more postmodern/social constructionist view. Both sides are guilty of labelling the other as “not real true Christians,” although one side seems to make that claim more often.

        -I feel the overall thrust of this article has been overshadowed by arguments over the way the two camps are characterized. That’s too bad. This article reminded me that I need to have more grace for my theologically conservative brothers and sisters. Given that this is a site for generally left-leaning Christians, it accomplished its task in its target audience (at least in my case). To convict both kinds of Christians equally, the author evidently needs to shift some of her rhetoric.

        • 21st Century Episcopalian

          Not true. Inerrancy does NOT mean literalism. Genres, contexts, intent all play into interpretation. There is a third way, a middle way of interpretation between blind literalism and blanket revisionism.

          • Michelle

            It depends on what we are talking about. History, poetry, parables, allegory, doctrine. Sometimes I think that people think Bible believers are dumb, like we don’t know the difference between poetry, parables, Bible history and literalism.

          • Aaaaaaaaaaargh

            You’re right; that was unclear of me. I didn’t mean to imply that they are the same thing, as my slash may have indicated. I rather meant that they seem to wind up together on the same side if we break down Biblical interpretation by Christians into a binary: either all true on some level, or room for error/revision. Of course, binaries oversimplify matters, and I share your wish to find middle ground.

        • Drew

          1) Yes, some Christians label themselves Fundamentalists. However, Kathy should be intelligent enough to realize that when used by someone such as herself, it is generally a pejorative, and a synonym for the extreme right.

          2) I generally agree with you on this point.

          3) I generally agree with you on this point as well. I think if her characterizations were more accurate, then the point of unity would shine through.

      • Michelle

        Hi there. I think there is an in between. I am a “fundamentalist” Christian, as you’ve called it. That is, I believe the Bible o be the inerrant Word of God. However, I am a progressive. I do not believe in or support gay marriage…however…I do not believe that needs to be the defining issue for Christian voters. I am a woman of color and a single mother. I have much in common with the Christian Left *except* for the fact that they DO NOT believe the Bible as the Word of God. This presents a conflict for me, because I do not have a church group that i fit into. The evangelicals are rich, white Republicans and the Leftist Christians do not preach the Bible as the Word of God. Where does this leave me? The only place left in Christianity that believes the Bible is God’s Word AND ALSO is progressive in the areas that I am progressive in, is the BLACK church.

        • Drew

          Thanks for the post – I share many of the same frustrations that you do, and there is definitely a “moderate” group that Kathy excluded. I have only visited a Black Baptist Church once, but I will always remember it as one of the best Churches I have ever visited.

          • Michelle

            Drew, I have no idea what to do or where to go church wise. The Body of Christ is segregated. the multi-racial churches like Assemblies of God are vibrant, but there is an important doctrinal issue that I just can’t submit to. My church which is an independent Baptist church, predominantly white, and which I perceive to be Republican leaning…sigh…I’m just not happy. The wealth of the white churches attracts me because I have a son…but the preaching of the Black churches reaches my pain and what I am going through as a single mother struggling economically without family. But they stay separate. I am sick and tired of church because I just fit nowhere.

            • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

              So maybe you go to the Black Churches at this time because it meets you where you are now and over time you keep open to continuing growth in the Spirit to help discern what is best for you and your son?

              • Michelle

                Marc, I have been praying about it. I don’t totally fit into Black churches or white churches (I am Jamaican of Indian descent with a strong connection to the Black community). There are aspects of each that I like. I am torn because my son loves our church…he is 8 and he has his relationships there and his individual likes. I am interested in evangelizing in Baltimore City…but I wonder if the people at my church would even want to go to poor and/or black neighborhoods? I am praying about where God wants me to be. I am also going through challenging times and am aware that Satan can also bring confusion. I have visited two Black churches, but they are not right for me. My son is now away at the Christian camp sponsored by my church and I could see that some of the men were beginning to reach out to me and my son. The perfect place for me would be a multi-racial congregation (more than ten people of color, please) that has a heart for the least of these, a heart for evangelism and missions (where you don’t have to be upper-middle class to go on a missions trip), and most importantly, a Bible believing and teaching church (Bible as the Word of God). Any suggestions? Until the Holy Spirit shows me clearly, I will stay where I am, continue to listen to the gospel station in Baltimore for music and sermons….I need Him to lead me in the way that I should go.

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                Good plan, Michelle…perhaps your calling will be to bring more people of color into your church and helping the church community and the new folks learn from one another?

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                BTW, I find that there is usually plenty of mission work available within a half hour’s drive of most churches if folks care to see it….

              • Michelle

                You are correct. Can’t argue with you on that…

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                BTW, I find that there is usually plenty of mission work available within a half hour’s drive of most churches if folks care to see it….

              • Michelle

                Hi Marc…yes, i want to bring more poc into the church…*but* if the people at church don’t feel the same need, I’m not wasting my time. I know this might sound sarcastic…but why should the woman of color start the “affirmative action” plan for the predom white church? I want white Christians who have the heart for the city that I do…to stand with me. Plus, I want a peer group at church too. i want women of color who are my age who understand what I am saying without writing a dictionary. It’s kind of a two-fold thing. I do not want to force Black people on my church. B’more city is primarily black. The surrounding suburbs are white. I don’t see any big push from my church to go to the city. they go to areas to evangelize to people of the same color and class as they are. sigh…Drew suggested that I look into Christian and Missionary Alliance. I am going to google that now. I grieve that the Body of Christ does not worship together. For people like me who are torn between communities…it feels like we are torn apart by separate worship and separate houses of worship that just reflect our larger society.

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                Well, Michelle, I’d say that as long as Sunday continues to be the most segregated hour of the week we’re not going to find much peace in the Body. You might want to investigate
                http://www.bmoremenno.org/about-us/ and
                http://friendshipcob.org/ for some alternative church homes in your area,,,

              • Michelle

                I will def check out your links. Thank you!

              • Drew

                Thanks for the links Marc… even though I am pretty happy where I am at, I am going to check out more about your denomination as well.

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                Oh, LOL, they’re not my denomination…I’m an Episcopalian! LOL

              • Drew

                Oh dear… but I still love you brother : )

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                I admire the historic peace churches…smile

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                Oh, LOL, they’re not my denomination…I’m an Episcopalian! LOL

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                Well, Michelle, I’d say that as long as Sunday continues to be the most segregated hour of the week we’re not going to find much peace in the Body. You might want to investigate
                http://www.bmoremenno.org/about-us/ and
                http://friendshipcob.org/ for some alternative church homes in your area,,,

              • Drew

                Michelle,

                I went through the same struggle as you in finding a Church that speaks the Truth of God but with the Love of God. I also wanted a Church that was Bible-believing and teaching, but that emphasized missions and evangelism.

                A few years ago I stumbled across a Church in my area that met all of the above criteria, and I would strongly suggest you check it out – Christian and Missionary Alliance. http://cmalliance.org/

                CAMA actually has more Churches and Church members overseas than it does in the United States, and fulfilling the Great Commission is at the core of the Church. It is similar to AoG, but CAMA has more of an “open tent” on doctrinal issues, and focused more on missions.

                I can’t promise you that the CAMA Churches in your area are as good as the one in my area, but it’s worth checking out.

              • Michelle

                I liked it on fb and I am researching it now. Thank you for taking the time to encourage and guide me today. It has been absolutely wonderful to speak to my brothers in Christ on this page today. This was the encouragement I needed.

              • Drew

                It is “missions” season in my CAMA Church right now – we just had our long-term missionaries from Brazil and Indonesia stop back to visit, and we have sent out short-term mission groups to Haiti, Mexico, and India. In Mexico and Haiti they are visiting organizations that we work with and support throughout the year. It’s very cool.

                I hope if you do visit you are not disappointed. We have a pretty young, dynamic pastor and great music and children’s programs on top of everything else… seeing as how you have a son, I’m guessing a good children’s program is very important.

              • Michelle

                Drew, that sounds fantastic! Have you seen the posts between me and Marc? I am wondering about your views on what i have written on the other stuff. I researched the three churches that I found through the CAMA website. The one that I would be interested in visiting is about 33 minutes away. Before missionary work abroad, I am interested in the city that I am close to first. I have a local vision, tied to my international vision. But I just feel called to the city. What part of the country are you in?

              • Michelle

                Drew, that sounds fantastic! Have you seen the posts between me and Marc? I am wondering about your views on what i have written on the other stuff. I researched the three churches that I found through the CAMA website. The one that I would be interested in visiting is about 33 minutes away. Before missionary work abroad, I am interested in the city that I am close to first. I have a local vision, tied to my international vision. But I just feel called to the city. What part of the country are you in?

              • Drew

                Our Church is in the Milwaukee suburbs and planted a Church in the middle of a poverty-stricken area of Milwaukee and we send volunteers to that Church constantly and support it financially. We don’t do nearly enough for Milwaukee, but we are doing something. I agree that it is a tragedy when poverty is next door we do nothing sometimes, but think nothing of going 1000 miles away and spending a lot of money to do something.

              • Michelle

                Drew, I wrote to Marc about my experience just getting off fb…where I stood up for Chick Fil A– to liberals (I’m subscribed to a million liberal pages)…and I think one blocked me. So, it’s like, I could practically be a socialist in the Democratic Party, but disagree with gay marriage…and all of sudden–I’m considered an “intolerant” “hater” “bigot” and KKK wannabe. I find it very interesting. I’m getting tired of the Left and the Right. I am not one who believes that I get my salvation from politics or from a political party…I get that from God. i do believe however, that as a citizen, I have the right to assert my views and interests in the public square. This whole thing is exasperating. I’m tired of church. i want to curl up in a fetal position and read my Bible at home and just forget all of this.

              • Drew

                I would have voted for McCain in 2000, but he lost to Bush. I felt like the Republican party changed in 2000 when McCain lost and Bush won, and it has been downhill every since, becoming more and more radical. However, I feel like that in 2008 when Obama won that the Democratic Party has became very radical on social issues. It is now part of the Democratic Party platform to support gay marriage… part of the litmus test. I am starting to feel that the Democratic Party is so radical on social issues and hostile to religion that I am starting to swing back towards the Republicans and will vote for at least one Republican (on the state level; undecided on Romney vs. Obama) for the first time since 2000.

              • Drew

                I would have voted for McCain in 2000, but he lost to Bush. I felt like the Republican party changed in 2000 when McCain lost and Bush won, and it has been downhill every since, becoming more and more radical. However, I feel like that in 2008 when Obama won that the Democratic Party has became very radical on social issues. It is now part of the Democratic Party platform to support gay marriage… part of the litmus test. I am starting to feel that the Democratic Party is so radical on social issues and hostile to religion that I am starting to swing back towards the Republicans and will vote for at least one Republican (on the state level; undecided on Romney vs. Obama) for the first time since 2000.

              • Michelle

                Thanks Marc. You have been so kind today with your advice.

            • Drew

              What is the doctrinal issue that you do not agree with? I might have the perfect Church denomination in mind for you to look into.

              I entirely agree with what you said. What struck me about the Black Baptist Church I visited, besides the obvious zeal and passion, is that the preaching really reaches the community and relates to what they are going through. After leaving I felt really encouraged and reassured.

              • Michelle

                Drew, you and Marc are giving me free advice and therapy today. Thanks! :) (along with stimulating discussion from this entire list). Okay, I do not believe that you can lose your salvation if you are truly saved. I do not believe that a believer needs to be baptized separately with the Holy Spirit (I believe He enters at the point that you accept Him). And I do not believe that anyone needs to speak in tongues as “evidence” of being saved. I also believe that there is confusion about calling glossalia “tongues.” I don’t mind glossalia because I see it as something that can happen in prayer or worship, but it is not the biblical “tongues” from Acts. Looking forward to your thoughts. This is better than fb!

              • Drew

                This is too funny : )

                AofG actually separated from CAMA in order to become more dogmatic about doctrine. In fact, one of the main reasons AoG broke off was due to tongues and the fact that AoG wanted to be more dogmatic about it. CAMA has the same attitude about tongues that you have. CAMA also believes that baptism is an ordinance, not a sacrament, so that while it is strongly encouraged, it is not necessary for salvation. CAMA has no doctrine on eternal security of believers; they leave that open for discussion.

      • Joyce

        Great Post Kathy!

      • Frank

        While American Christianity fights the majority of Christians (which are outside of the US) continue to grow. One question we should ask our selves is what do those Christians outside the US believe? I can assure you they believe nothing that Liberal Chrisitianity claims to believe. It should be a lesson but sadly those that need to learn the lesson the most will ignore this truth.

        • Drew

          I think this is a little off-topic… how does this relate to Kathy’s post?

          • Frank

            I certainly wasn’t clear about exactly what I was saying.

            I agree with Kathy that the “fighting” looks ugly. I believe that US Christianity is in worse shape than anyone believes but the ugliness is simply a symptom of an attempt at a redefining of beliefs, and that is volatile ground.

            The solution partly is to look where Christianity is growing exponentially. What are their churches teaching? What are those Christians believing?

            • Drew

              Gotcha… and I agree 100%. Amazing what is happening in places like Brazil. 1st world secularism is on the rise, and it won’t be soon where the U.S. is similar to Europe, where liberal Christians eventually just become agnostic or secular.

      • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

        Hmmmm Perhaps a more accurate and honest distinction is between those Christians who give the biblical text supremacy in their understanding and living of their faith and those who consider the biblical text important but not necessarily of greater authority than, say, the Holy Spirit.

        There is a need and place for all voices…I find the terms Conservative and Liberal or Evangelical and Mainstream both inaccurate and misleading. I would say that the common theme of this site, as I understand it, has been and is meant to be focusing on living into the Kingdom through Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount. I do not believe anyone here would find that problematic as an ideal or a worthy set of principles by which to live.

        I close with Augustine of Hippo’s much cited advice, “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, charity; and in all things, love.”

      • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

        I add that either/or is not as accurate as a multi-dimensional continuum of beliefs and practices to describe an individual Christian’s faith walk and that one reason for discussion of post-denominationalism is that individuals are less interested in compromising on what they consider essential in their faith in order to be part of a local community…thoughts?

      • Michelle

        Morgan, what you have stated is correct. However, there are times when as a Christian I am *forced* to vote my conscience as a Believer. When an issue like gay marriage comes up, I cannot vote for that. In every day life I really don’t care who is gay or straight…as a Christian, I have plenty of my own sins to deal with, repent for, turn away from. in every day life, my heterosexual sin is the same as someone else’s homosexual sexual sin. Sexual sin is sexual sin. However, the piece that is missing here is this. If politicians and special interest groups asked me to endorse an “heterosexual adultery is okay, let’s all do it” Bill, I would vote NO. In the same breath, I will not vote for a gay marriage bill. Does it make me “judgmental” and “homophobic”? NO!!!!! I am a BELIEVER in the literal Scriptures. There are times when i am called to vote my conscience. As well, on every other issue, I am left-leaning because I believe that progressives more closely resemble Christ’s teachings on the least of these than do Republicans. The problem is I fit nowhere. Loving others should not mean endorsing sin. I no more endorse gay marriage than i endorse heterosexual couples living together outside of marriage. It stinks that Christians who do not believe in gay marriage keep getting vilified as haters.

        • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

          Actually, Michelle, I believe you are representative of how many Christians feel these days. I think you might find that most Churches have a group of folks who see things as you do, but because they aren’t strident about their beliefs they seem to be missing in action…which is not the case…I find that if you hang around awhile and listen to the folks and watch the way they walk their talk you’ll be able to pick out your fellow travelers fairly quickly

          • Michelle

            Oh my gosh, who would have thought I’d be getting free therapy today from red letter Christians? Hallelujah! Marc, is it unfair for me to assume that because I go to a predom white church in an affluent area…and we believe that the Bible is the Word of God….is it wrong to assume that most of the people in my church are Republicans? That’s probably the main reason why I feel alienated, more than the race issue…although they are interconnected. I feel divided from the Christian brethren. I have ever since I was “saved.” It’s probably different for others who were not progressive activists prior to being “born again.” If you never really thought much about society, inequality, and systems prior to being “born again” you have less of a conflict after you become “saved” because you can just blend into the giant happy evangelical family….but if you are still committed to social and economic justice *after* being “saved” and you feel like you are voting against your brother and sister in Christ at the voting booth…that is a predictor of internal conflict and angst.

            • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

              Smile I find that my besetting sin is giving into stereotypes. I find that there are many Republicans who are liberal on social issues but conservative on fiscal issues and Democrats who are the reverse – shocking to me but true…lol Some of the most thoughtful folks I know about issues of social and economic justice are born again evangelicals; some of the most hidebound say we can only do things one way as we have for the last 100 years and are card carrying liberals!

              Point being, how you get to deciding what is a better walk with Jesus is less important to me than are you actually taking the walk with me? At times we’re gonna have to walk around the puddles which may separate us for a bit. Sometimes we’re gonna have to bunch up to get past a narrow spot or take a break and think through where to go from here and the best path to get there…but as long as we keep walking together we’ll eventually get where we both hope to be…thoughts?

              • Michelle

                Hmm… I know this will sound really bad…but the problem is that I feel so strongly about politics…and I feel so strongly that the Republican Party is, um, okay, I didn’t want to say evil…but, okay…I think they are pretty evil on issues related to poor/middle/working class people and are wedded to protecting the interests of the rich/corporate/elite. Because this is my presupposition…that the Christians i sing with at church are against me and my interests (and the interests of the poor/working class and people of color I see myself as a part of)…that makes me feel like they are my political enemies and therefore, if you are political enemies with someone…how do you not demonize them and sing warm and fuzzy songs in your small group? i want to scream out to my small group that I’m a Democrat, I used to be a union organizer and I’m voting for Obama. Oh yeah and: Justice for Trayvon. And one more: I don’t watch Fox news. Okay. If I could get all of that off my chest, I’ll be straight ;-)

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                Hmmm? This doesn’t sound bad at all, Michelle, just human! grin I feel a lot of time it is hard for folks to see through my eyes because I’m not always sure if my vision is 20/20 (wearing glasses as I do ought to be a hint to me, huh? :-) )

                What I have found, as God chooses to let me keep moseying along here, is that I tend to confuse means and ends: I share a desire with lots of folks that I want poverty ended, but rather than focusing on this, I get all tied up in how I think it ought to be done. Given there are a lot of smart Christians around with other great ideas I find myself worrying more about the shortcomings of their ideas and not the huge holes in my thinking….I’ve wasted more years (!) than you can imagine on this sort of unproductive approach.

                So I finally came to the realization that I leave the choice of means up to God and stay focused on the ends and welcome everyone willing to work for the Kingdom. Some folks do it by making millions and giving it to charity. Some folks give time and talent. Some folks give humility and listening. It’s all needed and all necessary…or so I believe…of course, if you’re interested there is also the Society of Sacramental Socialists in the Church of England I can put you in contact with…

              • Michelle

                Marc, honestly…I just got off fb…and i can’t win for losing. I am subscribed to every single liberal site on fb. But now a bunch of them are posting all this stuff about Chick fil A (which i support). And what I am finding is that the liberals seem to have the same “intolerance” towards Christians that they claim we have towards issues around gay marriage. If you don’t agree with them, you are “intolerant,” a “hater,” “ignorant,” next of kin to the KKK. It’s totally ridiculous. makes me just wanna throw my hands up. Regarding what you wrote above, idk. I hope you can take a look at the op ed piece in the NY Times today, by Peter Edelman speaking about poverty. Republican policies have clearly made poverty worse, so how do i not take a position on that? I happen to be in a very unique position: educated, but yet, struggling economically as a single mother. The Dems have polices that benefit me but they have even slashed programs to appease conservative voters. These policies are not abstract: they impact my life and other people’s daily life. We, as Christians are expressions of Christ in our everyday lives. I see republican policies towards the poor as being violent. I am not interested in being a socialist. I just think Christians who are Republicans need to actually read what God wrote about poor people, the widow and the orphan. And I think liberals need to understand that we are Believers.

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                I agree with you in all that you say, Michelle. The problem on the Left is that while they have some valid critiques they aren’t particularly Christian in their way of presenting the critiques or working with others to address them…add in folks who think because they read a piece of Das Kapital or the Communist Manifesto in college they are qualified to say “religion is the opiate of the masses” or are outraged by the Church because of their own mishandling at the hands of nominal Christians – well, you take my point….

                Again I would say, Michele, you are not alone: “educated, but yet, struggling economically as a single mother (or father)” is a much more common deographic these days than in the past.

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                And I suspect that many, many Republicans are not convinced that everything in the party platform is acceptable – many simply do not like or trust the Democratic Party or the President. Maybe the question for all parties and politicians is, “Fine, if you propose to do away with or change the safety net, how do you address my concrete needs and issues and those of my family and neighbors, especially during the transition?”

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                And I suspect that many, many Republicans are not convinced that everything in the party platform is acceptable – many simply do not like or trust the Democratic Party or the President. Maybe the question for all parties and politicians is, “Fine, if you propose to do away with or change the safety net, how do you address my concrete needs and issues and those of my family and neighbors, especially during the transition?”

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                I agree with you in all that you say, Michelle. The problem on the Left is that while they have some valid critiques they aren’t particularly Christian in their way of presenting the critiques or working with others to address them…add in folks who think because they read a piece of Das Kapital or the Communist Manifesto in college they are qualified to say “religion is the opiate of the masses” or are outraged by the Church because of their own mishandling at the hands of nominal Christians – well, you take my point….

                Again I would say, Michele, you are not alone: “educated, but yet, struggling economically as a single mother (or father)” is a much more common deographic these days than in the past.

              • Drew

                To be fair, the difference is about the role of the Government. Studies show that religious conservatives tithe more, give more, and volunteer more than any group. They just don’t think that the government should play a large role. I disagree with them about this, and sometimes strongly, but I do not think they are generally evil, just unaware of the fact that government has to step up because Christianity has by and large failed to provide an adequate safety net to society and to one another.

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                I think that Drew makes an interesting argument…

              • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

                Finally, Michelle (I really ought to get some work done :-) ) , I find that in building personal relationships we have the opportunity to be honest and share our concerns and be heard….

              • Michelle

                Thanks Marc. I got *no* work done today. Yikes. okay. It was great talking to you. Take care!!

              • Mike

                Once again, Michelle–I wholeheartedly agree. My problem with almost every Republican I encounter that claims Christianity is that almost all their opinions about things are self-centered. There is virtually nothing that the Democratic party stands for that helps me. I am not poor, gay, etc. But, Jesus was totally focused on others–not on making more money for himself or getting more stuff for himself. And, another thing about Republicans I have such difficulty with is the hypocrisy. If Democrats were running a presidential candidate who was a Mormon, the Republicans would be skewering him as being unChristian, yet most Christian Republicans will vote for him instead of a candidate who publicly testifies for Jesus Christ and is the only presidential candidate that I can ever remember actually saying that it is the blood of Christ that has saved him from his sins.

              • Drew

                Good insights Mike.

            • http://www.facebook.com/marc.kivel Marc Kivel

              BTW, I find that political affiliations can be the result of a variety of things: family, friends, perception of one’s class, ethnic affiliation, perception of future benefits under a given party’s administration, etc. Being Christian doesn’t necessarily make politics easier – a candidate may be perfect in one dimension and abhorrent in another. So I suppose it comes down to what are my personal priorities in my faith walk and am I supporting folks whose priorities best reflect my own? Not the best answer but what I have to offer today…grin

          • Michelle

            Oh my gosh, who would have thought I’d be getting free therapy today from red letter Christians? Hallelujah! Marc, is it unfair for me to assume that because I go to a predom white church in an affluent area…and we believe that the Bible is the Word of God….is it wrong to assume that most of the people in my church are Republicans? That’s probably the main reason why I feel alienated, more than the race issue…although they are interconnected. I feel divided from the Christian brethren. I have ever since I was “saved.” It’s probably different for others who were not progressive activists prior to being “born again.” If you never really thought much about society, inequality, and systems prior to being “born again” you have less of a conflict after you become “saved” because you can just blend into the giant happy evangelical family….but if you are still committed to social and economic justice *after* being “saved” and you feel like you are voting against your brother and sister in Christ at the voting booth…that is a predictor of internal conflict and angst.

        • Anonymous

          Well stated Michelle. You’re definitely not the only one in this situation.

        • Mike

          Wow, Michelle. I have never encountered someone such as yourself who so closely resembles my beliefs.

          • Michelle

            Maybe it’s because our names both start with “M.” :)

            Thanks and have a blessed day. It’s great to find a fellow traveler/thinker.

      • Mike

        We are caught up in a man made political conspiracy to divide us on these wedge issues. A Interesting read is HOW MONEY and POLITICS BEGUILED CHRIST WORSHIPPERS and BLINDED THEM.Maybe if we separate the church and state we can see more clearly what a country should do for its citizens{and visitors} leaving the Church to attract people thru loving each other.

      • Johnson

        Michelle, is anyone asking you to vote for a “Homosexuality is okay. lets all do it” bill? NO. The issue at stake is the legality of gay marriage. not whether or not we should all be homosexual. I don’t think anyone is arguing that everyone should be homosexual. If they are, I would like to talk to them. Do you believe that adultery should be legal? It is in our country. And it is outlawed in the bible. Do you believe that women speaking in churches should be legal? It is in our country and it is outlawed in the bible. So what makes homosexual marriage different? Why so intent on legislating some parts of the bible that are mentioned once in the new testament and not once by Jesus and yet not care about legislating things such as greed. The sin which Jesus speaks by far the most on.

        • Michelle

          Johnson, this is typically what liberals do…you start throwing around different things from the Bible out of context. Are we now engaging in a discussion about what Paul wrote about women keeping silent? That was directed to a specific situation. As i have stated repeatedly. The Old and New Testaments which convey God’s thoughts CLEARLY state that homosexual acts are not to be endorsed. Similarly as a SINGLE WOMAN, I remain CELIBATE. Therefore, Johnson, I try to live my life according to the Scriptures. So, why then would you expect me to be celibate because I live according to what the Bible teaches me on sexual sin, but then i would turn around and vote for gay marriage which implicitly and explicitly endorses gay marriage. That would make me illogical. So, as a citizen, you and i will both go to the polls and vote our conscience. If the liberals win, hey, my life will go on. But i will continue to teach my 8 year old son that when he sees gay men married, that is NOT acceptable to me. Am I allowed to have a different viewpoint as a Christian, Johnson…or will you now label me “intolerant”?

      • Bearzee

        In Europe, in the past (and even the present), “Christians” have killed millions of “Christians” over who the real Christians are. The Spanish and other Inquisitions, the Reformation (particularly in the 80 Years’ War in Holland and the 30 Years’ War in Germany), the English Civil War, and specific persecutions (my own Anabaptist ancestors in Switzerland were chased out of Switzerland by both Catholics and Calvinists) all contributed to this death count. Even in the colonies, in some states one had to belong to a specific denomination to even own property or vote. Thus, the wording of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

        Many groups came here to flee the religious persecution (Texas history books have recently been revised to say otherwise). In Europe, even the Protestant countries had state religions. This, more than any other reason, caused Marx to be anti-religion and Hitler’s “Christian Nation” (as he called it in 1934) is the main cause of Europe’s current atheistic/agnostic stance. If we were to call the USA a Christian Nation, I guarantee the definition of “Christian” will lead to blood (as will our definition of marriage; I do not believe in denying gay marriage, because codifying such denial in terms of defining marriage as between a man and a woman can lead to narrower and narrower definitions, e.g. between a white man and a white woman, between a Christian white man and a Christian white woman, between a ___(whatever denomination or denominations) white man and a ___(whatever denomination or denominations) white woman – and then we can start with eye color, height and weight range, BMI, etc.)

        There are literally thousands of Protestant denominations. The issue of slavery divided all the major denominations at the time of the Civil War. Kathy’s terminology is not quite accurate (though the orange and green armies reminds me of recent “Christian” bloodshed in Northern Ireland). It feels more like Old testament Christians v. New Testament Christians. Punishment v. Mercy. An eye for an eye v. turn the other cheek. Stoning v. forgiveness. Shunning the disabled v. healing them. And so on. I believe the Christian right-wing more closely resembles the Pharisees and Jesus’ indictments of the Pharisees can be applied to them. So can Luther’s 95 Theses. I won’t use the term fundamentalists because Christian fundamentalists were progressives and even socialists during the time of the Social Gospel. The WCTU behind Prohibition was led by socialists (Frances Willard), the Pledge of Allegiance was written by a Baptist minister and socilaist (Francis Bellamy), and the “WWJD” phrase was from the book, In His Steps, written by a Congregationalist minister and socialist (Charles Sheldon).

        The devil’s greatest trick has been to get Christians to believe they are doing God’s work when they support greed, hatred, bloodshed, and torture. In 1997, a brochure came across my desk at work advertising an atheist conference sponsored by the Ayn Rand Institute. Before that, I only knew Ayn Rand as a sarcastic line in a Simon and Garfunkel song. I researched her and I find her philosophies and disciples to be troubling. She is the original “greed is good” lady. She called Christinaity the “kindergarten of Communism” and faith man’s greatest vice. She hated altruism and considered all workers to be parasites if they collected a paycheck. I then realized the Republican Party was following her, not God and they were duping conservative Christianists by their abortion and gay stands, though they could care less about the. Paul Weyrich, who founded the conservative ALEC, even said that he did not win over the “Christian” right with abortion, but because Carter was threatening their tax-exempt status for segregated, private, “Christian” schools. Rand disciples include Reagan, his economist Milton Friedman, Alan Greenspan (Bush I’s appointment), Ben Bernancke (Bush 2′s appointment), Paul Ryan, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Rand Paul, and others of the same ilk. That’s scary.

        Dovetailing with the Randians were the Christina Dominionists (a.k.a. Reconstructionists) who were disciples of R.J. Rushdoony and Francis Schaffer. Their influence over “evangelicals” has been increasing each decade. They advocate theocracy, stoning based on Leviticus (which Shar’ia Law also does), slavery (for criminals, not just blacks), and other things Chrsit would disapprove of. Katherine Harris, Rick Perry, and Michele Bachmann all follow this. This has exacerbated the situation.

        First we should ask, “What Would Jesus Do?” and then ask, “What Would Hitler Do?”. If Jesus would not do it or Hitler would, don’t do it. There are trends that American Christianity is trending towards Hitler. Legalizing abortion has not increased the number of them, but the availability on safe conditions has increased the survival of the woman. Remember, not every unwed pregnant teen has a mother running for VP that can use her as a political prop. Gay marriage? If it lasts longer than 55 hours or 72 days, then they are doing better than some straight marriages. I know some straight spouses have cheated gaily on their spouses, but that is the only way it would threaten straight marriage. But those issues sure get a lot of people endorsing the devil’s economics.

        In short, American Christianity is in need of a Reformation separating it from partisan politics and following the New Covenant, not the Old. The right wing is becoming more like the enemies we have faced and like the old European state churches. Considering some denominations were founded primarily based on racism and subjugation, how Christ-like can they really be? I end with an anecdote: Macauley Culkin went to a Christian rock concert doing research for a role. He said he felt welcomed by people who thought he had become a Christian and actually enjoyed the concert. When he left, however, there were “Christian” picketers protesting the use of rock music for Christian songs. Culkin was very confused by “Christians protesting Christians”. Unfortunately, this is a common feeling by others.

        • michelle

          Bearzee, as a Believer in the Bible, I will not vote for gay marriage when it comes up for vote. If gay marriage hadn’t been imposed on the entire state, it would be a non-issue because ALL people sin and many, straight or gay, engage in sexual sin. I find some of your arguments troubling. For example, Hitler was NOT a Christian. A Christian reflects Christ. Acts of Satan are not evidence of the Holy Spirit. As a Christian who is a citizen of the USA, I have the right to engage in politics and to express my opinion. With most other progressive ideas, I agree, because they do not conflict with Scripture that I as a believer and follower of Jesus Christ believe to be the truth. To ask a Christian who believes the Bible as the Word of God, to vote for (endorse) gay marriage is ridiculous and insulting. And stoning? It seems like the liberals or liberal Christians as well as the media take the most ridiculous sounding Christians who must live in caves…and use them to represent the rest of us who believe the Bible. These people are from the extreme fringes of their interpretation of Christianity and do not represent the vast majority of church going evangelical Christians who believe Scripture is God-breathed.

      • http://www.facebook.com/walter.edwards.1238 Walter Edwards

        Never has 1 John 2;11 been more relevant.

      • http://www.facebook.com/walter.edwards.1238 Walter Edwards

        Never has 1 John 2;11 been more relevant.

      • http://www.facebook.com/walter.edwards.1238 Walter Edwards

        Never has 1 John2:11 been more relevant.

      • http://www.facebook.com/walter.edwards.1238 Walter Edwards

        Never has 1 John2:11 been more relevant.

        • Michelle

          Walter, I’m not sure who you are referring to? False teaching about the Bible, about Jesus/God, and about born again believers will be challenged. That’s not hate. But then again, I’m not sure whom your Scripture reference is referring to.

      • scott8652

        Those that follow the Old Testament are actually following
        the Judaism. Christ said “No one sews a
        patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; otherwise the patch pulls away from
        it, the new from the old, and a worse tear results. This is exactly what is happing. The so called organized religions use the Old
        Testament to show the good in their greed.
        They collect their money in the church with the collection plate knowing
        Christ hated money in the church. (There
        are too many instances of this to put them all down) Their leaders are rich men. “It is harder for
        a camel to pass through an eye of a needle, than a rich man get into heaven”. I can
        say I’m the Queen of England it does not make it true. Truly those that follow the Old Testament are
        not Christian.

        • Michelle

          Scott, what you have written is very unclear. What do you mean by “follow”? I am reading 2 Samuel right now. It is Jewish history. I’m not “following” it. The Bible consists of many different types of books and writings. Some are poetry, some are parables, some are history, some are doctrine, some are old laws given to the Jews. What you have written seems very disconnected from a proper understanding of the actual Bible and actual Believers. I hope you will prayerfully approach the Bible because I think you are very mistaken in your assumptions and assertions.

        • Drew

          Mr. Scott, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic
          things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent
          response were you even close to anything that could be considered a
          rational thought. Everyone on this board is now dumber for having
          listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your
          soul.

      • Michelle

        Psalm 119:160

        The first thing to know about your word is that it is true and that all your righteous rules last forever.

      • Les Scott

        If they’re fighting, they’re not Christians.

      ×

      TRENDING: It Is Time for the American Christian Church to Surrender the Gay Marriage Fight, Apologize, and Share Love >>