Posted on 11/16/2006 5:33:58 AM PST by Mr. Brightside
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.
"Sen. Obama has a deep respect for Mr. Warren's commitment to fighting AIDS and poverty," said Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor.
While he was working on his latest book, "The Audacity of Hope," Obama asked Warren to help by reading one of his draft chapters. Warren issued the invitation to Obama to speak at the church next month.
The messages that Friday will focus on AIDS and HIV, a key area of ministry for Saddleback Church. While many conservative Christians have shied away from AIDS because of their discomfort with its connections to premarital sex and homosexuality, Warren and his wife, church co-founder Kay Warren, have been vocal advocates for patients living with the disease.
Shortly before the release of his latest book, Obama issued a call to progressives to shed bias against religious people and to recognize "overlapping values."
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
Such harmful actions as vengence, violent hatred, condemnation etc should be left to God. Humans are not qualified to make those decisions.
So when Paul called the Galtians "foolish" he was taking on the mantle of godhood?
You're being way too sensitive. When people are wrong, tragically wrong, you need to tell them--sometimes with language that will wake them up.
Writing posts on free republic is NOT telling Rick Warren anything - especially when all that is really going on is gratuitous condemnation.
I might agree with you about telling someone the truth - if it is done with the intention of helping them and not with the callous view that the ends justify the means. When it is done with the intention of shaming them or humiliating them or publically crucifying them - that is consciously harming.
That is your opinion. My point is that to consciously condemn is to consciously harm and even if what you say is true - you are no better than what you condemn if you are willing to consciously harm.
Nonsense.
The entire experience of mankind puts paid to that invalid tautology. Condemnation is a necessary part of man's existence. Government cannot function without the ability to make condemnation. Seeing as how you've listed this as an opinion, i state my opinion that those who don't make judgements are naive fools who have no understanding of reality.
Do you condemn Hitler? Stalin? Pol Pot? Mao?
Of course not. That's the whole point. Condemnation, hatred, vengence, attack are for God to do. That doesn't mean I wouldn't lock them up. You are reaching for such extreme examples - do you equate Rick Warren with Hitler?
Will you knock it off with the disagreement=hatred already? That was disproven long ago, and demonstrated to be nothing more than your condemnation of critics of Rick Warren.
Even with this statement you're being inconsistent. Lock them up? For what? Shouldn't they be condemned (judged) before you go locking them up? You really need to think that one out, 6 Million Jews, 7 million European Gentiles of various ethnicities, 20 million Soviet Citizens in WWII, 30 million Soviet Citizens killed by Stalin, 2 million Cambodian citizens killed by the Kuhmer Rouge under Pol Pot, and untold millions of Chinese would demand that you do so...funny, all those were supposedly non-judgemental Atheistic societies (with the exception of Hitler's Germany, which was pagan in it's upper levels). Take that into consideration before you talk about how Christians who take an errant 'minister' to task are acting like Muslims.
You are reaching for such extreme examples - do you equate Rick Warren with Hitler?
i'm not reaching at all. i'm merely testing your thesis. The technique is called Reducto Ad Absurdum. Your thesis is found wanting.
I'll repeat it again. Condemnation harms others. Do you understand that?
"Any lie told often enough will be believed"...Joseph Goebbels.
Not this time. Condemnation requires judgement. If the judgement is valid, the condemnation is valid. Since you've stated repeatedly that you don't want to discuss dogma...while persistently asserting dogma...not quite cricket...you have no basis to condemn the condemnation, and your own condemnation makes you hypocritical.
And if so, do you feel that you are specially authorized in some way from God to harm others? And if so, why?
Rick Warren has been harmed by no one except himself, by his own actions, and his own statements. Your question has no basis in fact, and is meaningless.
I am a nice person :-)
And I'm sure you are a sincere person. However, we do not agree here. I read this thread and the level of condemnation was appalling. You say that some people *deserve* to be shamed and belittled. I disagree. Those are decisions for God to make. No one is shamed and belittled and humiliated into being a good and decent person. All that shaming and belittling does is cause more suffering and bring the shamers and belittlers down to the level of what they condemn. I repeat: you are no better than what you condemn if you stoop to the level of consciously harming.
If that is all that you can think of to do when you disapprove of someone's actions - perhaps consider not doing anything. I don't see any reason why people on this thread couldn't have been gracious and say that they don't agree with Rick Warren's doctrine but that they are glad that he is helping people with AIDS and those in Rwanda - or whatever else they see as good.
I applaud the good works that Rick Warren does. I am grateful that he has been a part of the allieviation of suffering. I don't see why you need to condemn or belitle him in order to communicate with people here that you think they are better off in a smaller congregation. I don't agree with you that it desirable or spiritual to be punitive and mean.
I'll ask again - do you understand that condemnation hurts? Do you understand what I am talking about when I use the word condemnation?
Others that are writing at this time - acknowledge that condemnation does hurt but they think it is ok to hurt others. What is your belief about condemnation? And I am not talking about what government does - I am talking about when one person condemns another as has been demonstrated here by those on this thread who condemn Rick Warren.
Your posts about talking doctrine are tiring. I am talking about what I want to talk about. Others have wanted me to discuss *their* doctrine.
Having nothing to do with him is a fine choice, imo. Publically crucifying and condemning him is stooping to the same level. The means matter. How you explain your position and your view matters. Taking the high road matters. Being a good and decent human being matters.
Leave to God what is God's and be about the business of loving God and loving others.
Sunsong--this is pure extra-biblical nonsense on your part. All of the Lord's servants have been willing to speak harsh words when required. What was Peter's first sermon to the Sanhedrin. "You killed Him! Now repent."
I am not a Christian, farmer18th. But neither are my views nonsense. Those who consciously harm are part of the problem, imo.
Those who are mean-spirited, those who belittle others or shame them or whatever cruelty they choose are NOT spiritual people, imo, regardless of what book they say they live by. The Islamists swear that the Koran is God's Word and that God wants them to behead people and stone women and kill infidels. I don't believe that any more than I believe that God wants Christians to belittle and shame and publically crucify others.
Righteous hatred of that which is evil is very much a part of our world, Sunsong. There is no sweet-talking Pol Pot or Stalin. There is no honey-balm that will turn a Charlie Manson into a rational, civil human being.
Sometimes you can fight fire with water, but other times--as any fireman will tell you--you fight it with fire.
Whether Hitler or Pol Pot or Saddam Hussein there is no requirement to hate them or to in your heart condemn them. Certainly it is understandable - but it is unneccessary. God will take care of eternal Justice. The Iraqis will likely hang Saddam. Hitler apparently killed himself.
We have government to incarcerate those who break the law. Our business is to love God and love one another. That does not mean that we are not actively engaged in life and in interacting with others and in trying to set an example or in trying to persuade others in that which we believe is good and true. But it is not necessary to be cruel or punitive or hurtful in the normal actions of living our lives. Surely we can be better than that!
Someone may have already made this point on the thread, but did Jesus allow Zacchaeus or Mary Magdalene to speak to his flock? I don't think so. Obama having private meetings with Rick is far different that Rick giving his pulpit to Obama. Yes, religious leaders should try to influence government leaders, but giving them a voice to their flock is a far different proposition. Such a move by Rick is the same as commending Obama and everything he stands for to his flock. That is wrong and irresponsible.
No he doesn't. There is already too much hatred and condemnation and suffering in this world. It helps nothing to add to it. If you believe that someone is acting in a way that is wrong do what you can to educate them. No one becomes a better person by being treated cruelly.
If you believe that someone is acting in a way that is wrong do what you can to educate them. No one becomes a better person by being treated cruelly.
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.