Posted on 04/24/2007 10:55:22 AM PDT by ktupper
Over the last few months, I've noticed a definite shift in attitudes among many of the Christian forums and blogs I read and with many of my friends.
The emerging church movement (for lack of a better term) is making strong in roads into what was once a lock vote for the Republicans.
It seems many are looking at areas of social justice, the war, etc...as much as abortion. The discussion is that a lot of these people who always formerly voted Republican will vote for someone like Obama.
The problem is many of them are conservative with respect to issues, not with respect to political philosophy. I've tried amongst my friends to stress that a government solution is usually far more costly and often doesn't work...but to no avail.
Is anyone else experiencing this?
They're not real Christians. They select and redefine scripture to fit their fabricated version of god. Brian McLaren is one of the primary proponents of the Emergent Church movement, here is an excerpt that might give you an idea where he's at...
I don’t believe making disciples must equal making adherents to the Christian religion. It may be advisable in many (not all!) circumstances to help people become followers of Jesus and remain within their Buddhist, Hindu or Jewish contexts … rather than resolving the paradox via pronouncements on the eternal destiny of people more convinced by or loyal to other religions than ours, we simply move on … To help Buddhists, Muslims, Christians, and everyone else experience life to the full in the way of Jesus (while learning it better myself), I would gladly become one of them (whoever they are), to whatever degree I can, to embrace them, to join them, to enter into their world without judgment but with saving love as mine has been entered by the Lord (A Generous Orthodoxy, 260, 262, 264).
So you see, being a Christian is no longer a requirement to being a christian in the emergent church mindset.
Emerging Church = where liberals go to pretend to be Christians.
Emerging Church Christian: Their life revolves around rock music, special coffees and eating french-fries during a 20 minute sermon.
It's scary.
“Soft” Christians are those who keep their faith to themselves for fear of offending anyone by mentioning the name of Jesus. You see, that name might offend some who don’t go to church. Aren’t we thankful that the Disciples didn’t think that way? All but one were killed or crucified for their outspoken faith in the Savior. If Jesus were a phony, why would these men give their lives for Him?
Isn’t it noteworthy that the only name used in profanity is the name of Jesus? That should enlighten those who care to think. Maybe there is something about that name. Maybe He actually was the only one to rise from the dead. Maybe He actually is the only begotten Son of God and if so.... that requires allegiance to His words and obedience to his commands. There’s the rub for the “soft” Christians.
Yes, rock music, coffee and A.D.H.D.-friendly services are “typical” of emerging churches, but that’s pretty much everywhere now anyway. That’s not what defines them. You might call them post-modern, but it might be more accurate to call them post-Dobson or post-Falwell. They have little or no affinity for the Evangelical mainstream or its nexus with Republican politics.
our new (Jesuit) pastor makes sure there is a weekly invocation that all world leaders seek justice for all - but the only time in the 7 or 8 months he led an invocation for the safety of our military folks was at Christmas and Easter - every other Sunday it’s all about ‘justice’.
Maybe they are just to damn dumb to vote. I still think you should have to pass a test. Have some understanding of issues and how gov. works. Being a tax payer would be a help too.
If I had my way, being a taxpayer would be an absolute requirement to vote. Also, every Federal election would take place on or around April 15(when the pain is fresh).
“They are after the soft Christians
These are the Christians the poster is talking about.”
Hardly anything to worry about. The left has figured out that attacking the Church is futile. If anything it tends to energize the so-called Religious Right. We’ve seen this coming for some time now. They’re attempting to co-opt or hijack the backbone of the Republican base with semantics and posturing. The real problem for them is no one is buying it. THey’ve taken the term “church” and applied it to a group who’s never given a rip about the Bible or Christianity (beyond imposing their own beliefs on the same). Same old libs, new name.
I agree. I think that the franchise should be limited to those otherwise qualified who pay at least one net dollar in tax to the governing jurisdiction. Anyone living on the dole must forebear.
Their acceptance of diversity and reliance on open dialogue rather than the dogmatic proclamation found in historic Christianity leads emergents to diverse beliefs and moral standards.
Sounds like a good plan for engaging the world and losing to it.
Most Americans feel no pain on April 15 - in fact, they’re getting their refunds and celebrating. That’s a huge flaw in the system - primarily only those of us with our own businesses actually feel the pain. The rest are insulated by witholding and all the tax credits.
There are examples on this thread of how christians ARE buying it.
Many, many christians are NOT fiscal conservatives. They are very weak on the message of socialism.
The left made huge inroads in the South American church using this same social justice approach.
Precisely.
"...paradoxically there is one idea that it treats as unquestioned truth -- namely, Darwinism itself. Evolution is treated as an objective fact and not merely a human construction -- because unless it is true, there's no reason for accepting postmodernism. If the mind is a product of Darwinian evolution, then ideas and words are merely tools for controlling the environment, including other people." Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth, p. 243.
It’s public education’s failure to teach free market economics coming home to roost. Socialism sounds so fair and compassionate to those who are ignorant of economics and history.
Very true.
What is “social justice”? I’m not intending to be a smart alec here. It is a term I’ve heard several times in reference to things that our congregation should be mindful of- and it always gives me a pause. I associate the term as some sort of leftist codeword. Clarification, anyone?
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.