Posted on 11/19/2006 1:53:01 PM PST by davidosborne
WASHINGTON - Like many fellow Democratic politicians, Sen. Barack Obama is no stranger to the pulpit.
But in December, Obama will go where few progressive Democrats usually venture - to a large, conservative evangelical church that boasts a Sunday attendance of more than 20,000 people.
Even more unusual is that he'll attend at the invitation of megachurch Pastor Rick Warren, evangelical icon and author of the popular Christian book "The Purpose-Driven Life."
Aides to Obama say he will appear at Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., on Dec. 1, World AIDS Day, drawing attention to the kind of issue the senator from Illinois says should unite all people of faith, regardless of their particular religion.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
passing it on...
Rick Warren's staff should hear from any who are bothered by this... here's the phone number: 949.609.8000.
Who will take the pulpit next? Barney Frank?
I thought some of the discussions in the original thread were very good.... aparently it did not meet the FR criteria for activism and was pulled.. I have asked that the thread be re-opend in the bloggers section...
PLEASE don't identify Rick Warren't Saddleback Church as Evangelical. It is "seeker sensitive" "Purpose Driven" New Age.
it is not my title.. I am not authorized to change the title of the referenced news article.. but you do make a valid point..
You know what I think is curious about all these politico appearances in churches is that it unavoidably looks like an endorsement.
I believe the pastor thinks of it as "reaching out," but to surrender the pulpit--the place of teaching in a "Christian" church--to a pro-abort, pro-gay, finger-in-the-wind socialist--is the sign that the pastor has completely lost his will to teach.
it is part of that Emergent Conversation movemant that claims to be evangelical, but isn't even close to it!
How many times is this going to be posted?
Since this pastor has also endorsed the "Global Warming" lie and the "Prisoner of War Torture" lie, he tends to play into the liberal Democrats' hands lately. I think the Christians in Saddleback should be asking to replace their pastor in favor of one that actually teached the Bible.
teached = teaches.
It DOES seem like an interesting story--a reported "conservative" pastor turning over his pulpit to a shameless pro-abort.
I forgot about the Tony Campolo global warming nonsense. He's in the heart of Orange County; I don't see how those people can listen to that nonsense and expose their children to it.
My orginal post was deleted because it was placed in the activism sidebar... I reposted it in bloggers.. and have just been informed that this news was previously posted...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1739550/posts
Oh no - could it be that something you don't agree with is happening in this world? :-)
Should an army be massed? beheadings? Calls for hangings? or worse - should those who do things we don't agree with be attacked and condemned - publically beaten up and smeared for having the audacity to do something that we disapprove of?
Imagine a pastor reaching out to one who is not a republican? Oh, the horror! It would be the end of the world, wouldn't it, if a black church invited a repubican politician to speak :-)
what you call "reaching out" would be inviting Mr. Obama to ATTEND the event... giving him the pulpit goes beyond "reaching out" and approaches "endorsement"
If Obama is there to lend support to ending world AIDS, then I have no problem. Pres. Bush is on record before either of these 2 with a plan to provide billions to fight world AIDS. It is something about which we can agree; diseases of all kinds should be fought.
If Obama is there as some kind of endorsement of him as acceptable to evangelical Christians, then I would point to the remains of a dismembered, aborted infant, and I would vehemently disagree. Obama advocates the party of death.
And wars under false pretenses square with a consistent ethic of human life just how?
There was no false pretense.
First, every other nation in the world affirmed that Iraq was involved with WMDs.
There are other things, as well. Numerous documents have been found showing the capacity for rapid start-up of a WMD program was part of Saddam's strategy. They retained the industrial and chemical base to do so.
Numerous delivery systems for WMDs have been found. This is the most significant issue, since WMDs themselves degrade.
Recent actions by the head of US intelligence to close off documents about Iraqi nuclear research demonstrates that Iraq retained the capacity and desire for nuclear weaponry.
Extensive international terrorist ties have been proven.
Finally, the Congressional resolution gave the president authority to wage war whereever he judged was necessary.
The false pretense argument doesn't work with me.
If that were the real reason, why the shifting bumper-sticker slogans to justify the war? If Bush said "we did the only responsible thing, and acted based on the information we had at the time," I'd believe that. But his justifications have shifted to making the world safe for democracy to fighting the terrorists there so we don't fight them here to "cut and run."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.