Politics

Collin Hansen at CT writes about the very apparent “Left-Left” connection. The connection is there he says, but not “inevitable.” He names several who, as Mark Driscoll claims for himself, are (or were) theologically conservative and politically and socially liberal.

The subhead asks, “Does one lead the other?” I think the answer is yes, but it’s hard to say which. I’ve known quite a few people who held liberal views of society and politics, and felt uncomfortable with the conservative beliefs they’d held.  So they became emergent or progressive Christians.

I’ve only known a few who were really guided by their liberal theology. It seems too often that politics comes before Jesus.  I catch myself from time to time saying things in a political conversation that make me cringe as the sentences are still forming. At that moment I can choose to make my theology meet my politics, or make my politics meet my theology.  It’s a struggle.

H/T JT

For all of you who are annoyed when you come here and I’m talking politics again, I have a great surprise for you.  And for those of you who have come here only for the political commentary, I have a surprise for you, too. Henceforth, nearly all of my political comments will be found at newkindofpolitics.com.

Issues that involve church and theology as well as politics will probably be found in both places, but I need a place to spill my thoughts on politics without the burden of knowing I’m outside of the intended focus of this site.

The name is a tongue-in-cheek reference to Barack Obama’s oft-turned phrase.  He’s said it several times, like this time, June 23rd of last year, in Hartford:

So let’s rededicate ourselves to a new kind of politics - a politics of conscience.

Since then, his politics have been politics as usual, and I’ve got a lot to say about it.

Nuclear power is happy power.

I just read through the energy plans of John McCain (The Lexington Project) and Barack Obama (New Energy for America). I was surprised by both.

Obama’s is deeper than I expected it to be.  That says more about my expectations than the plan, though. McCain’s, however, is thoroughly impressive. If you put the two side by side and were honest with yourself, I don’t think even the strongest O supporter could reasonably disagree. Unreasonable disagreement is always a possibility.

The candidates have a few goals in common: development of alternative energy, regulating speculation, increase fuel economy, develop clean coal, and a few others. But they differ in some profound ways, even where their goals seem the same. (continue reading…)

"How can I win with just one voter?"

Some subpar reasoning from one of the prominent leaders of Emergent and progressive evangelicalism:

“I’ve only met one person in my travels in recent months who has said he is voting for McCain, and that was because he was an admittedly single-issue voter,” Mr. McLaren said. “Nearly all the vocal people I’ve met are enthusiastic about Obama. Based on the people I’m in front of as a speaker, I’d never guess the poll numbers are as close as they are.”

This is a pretty limited perspective. It would be like me saying, “I’ve only met two people in all my travels who were actually born in China.  Based on the people I talk to, I’d never guess there were a billion Chinese people walkin’ around.” Unfortunately for me, there are, in fact, a billion Chinese people.  And unfortunately for Mr. McLaren:

While national polls show Mr. McCain to be neck and neck with Mr. Obama, a survey from the authoritative Barna Group shows that Mr. McCain holds a commanding lead among evangelicals, with 61 percent to Mr. Obama’s 17 percent.

I find it hard to believe that he thinks he’s speaking in front of a representative sample of evangelicals.

Washington Times via Between Two Worlds

There’s a movement afoot (how often do you get to use that word?) whose leaders like to repeat a particular statistic over and over.  I’ll pause and let you try to figure it out, as you list everyone who fits this description in your head.  Okay. Here’s a smattering of statements from the group in question:

“…there are more than 2,000 verses of Scripture that call us to express love and justice for those who are poor and oppressed.” Tony Campolo

“The religious right wants to say there is only one or two issues that reflect our values, but as Rick would say, I’m sure, poverty, if there is 2000 verses in the Bible about the poor, that becomes a religious issue, as well.”  Jim Wallis

“He [Rick Warren] became fond of repeating that the Bible has 2,000 verses dedicated to the poor…” Time Magazine, link via GetReligion.org

I’ve always been a bit skeptical about this.  I’ve heard this stat repeated dozens of times, but never have I found any references to accompany it.  I’ve actually been searching the internet for it periodically, with no luck.  If anyone has the list, let me know.

My issue isn’t that I don’t think caring for the poor is important.  It clearly is.  The problem I have is that these leaders are making care for the poor through politics the focus of the Christian mission. But that’s not what the Bible is about. As Gary DeMar said in The American Vision, the philosophy “takes verses that are directed at individuals and turns them on their head and gives them a political twist.” (continue reading…)

Next Page »