The divide in American Christianity over right wing politics is deep.

[lees1975]

https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2023/07/the-divide-in-american-christianity.html

And it is a danger to the conservative, Evangelical churches who are now losing members in the millions. It is an even bigger danger to American Constitutional Democracy.

Americans who are politically liberal, and who tend to be religiously unaffiliated or not directly involved in a Christian church, can sometimes be dismissive of something they've resolved in their own minds, and which they now see as having developed from a major nuisance to a danger to American democracy itself. If it is, indeed, that much of a danger, then being dismissive isn't going to resolve the issue, nor will it be of much benefit in confronting the problem and solving it...

...None of the Republicans who have served as President since Jerry Falwell and James Robison brought Reagan into the fold with their endorsement in 1980 have been Evangelical in the practice of their Christian faith. As it turns out, Reagan, according to Nancy's statements about it after his dementia set in and his death, was involved in New Age religion, considered a cult by Evangelicals. Bush Senior was a liberal Episcopalian, a weak, wishy-washy President pushed around by stronger elements in the GOP, resentful of much of what they made him do. Dubya was a member of a liberal Methodist church, in spite of "knowing the lingo," did not share a lot of conservative theology and doctrine with conservative Evangelicals. Trump is just a more worldly, unethical, morally bankrupt character whose lack of knowledge of anything having to do with Christian faith is obvious and visible.

But having strong Christian credentials and setting a strong Christian example doesn't matter. Conservative Evangelicals have invented a thousand convolutions to get around Biblical instruction and Christian principle when it comes to their embrace of right wing extremism as their political expression. They do not see the inconsistency of this, and, as Rick Pidcock points out, it is driving the sincere, genuine Christians whose convictions and faith practice are governed by the gospel of Christ, out of the church. And it has caused the disillusion of two generations of young Americans who have turned away completely from any interest in Christian faith, and made many of them hostile to the conservative, Evangelical version of it.

[ret5hd]

1. they WANT the world to burn.

they will do everything they can to bring it about.

It would prove them right.

And that is ALL that matters. Not their children, not their grandchildren…being right. Their blood cult is the ONLY thing that matters.

[MayReasonRule]

7. The Abrahamic Blood Cults Of Christ Have Always Been At War With Reason

They still are.

Reason is my “god”.

Doubt is my”savior”.

May reason rule.

[usonian]

2. The hypocrisy is staggering to me.

I attribute it to cult behavior, where people are bound by lies, and they manifest denial and projection (and more, but these three are plenty toxic enough.)

I have read a bit about cults, and of the few breakaway mechanisms, two top ones are a sense of betrayal and the inability to hold the immense contradiction in their heads any longer.

I hope for the sake of many that they awaken to the contradiction and the self-destructive nature of the cult they very wrongly and shamefully call Christianity.

Every wacko accusation is a confession.

Is anyone listening to their little confessions?



Could very well be!

[anciano]

3. A few random thoughts......

First, IMO there is a two-fold foundation for most religions: belief in a supernatural "higher power" and a moral imperative to treat others as oneself would want to be treated. It is when this two-fold foundation is formalized into a religion in the first place that the seed for problems is planted. A religion by definition cannot exist without a set of rules, regulations and beliefs to control the adherents. And when these beliefs are then extended into the political arena, we have a situation like we are now experiencing in evangelical Christianity with the influence of right wing politics. I believe the exit from evangelical churches that we are seeing is due to the awareness being experienced by their members of the inappropriateness, incompatibility and unsuitability of this intrusion by the leaders of their "faith" into the political sphere. So much for the current religiously inclined.
Secondly, fewer people nowdays are embracing religion at all because many people see religion as increasingly irrelevant. They can still be spiritual but simply don't need a formalized set of rules, regulations and beliefs to control their lives. Science and technology have enabled mankind to transcend to a completely new level of awareness and possibility that makes a reliance on religion for a feeling of hope and security no longer necessary. Reason and logic have replaced fear and uncertainty.
Thirdly (and finally) right wing Christian nationalism is definitely a danger to our democracy. But I am not convinced that the movement has enough support to bring a theocratic dystopia into reality.
But then, what do I know?

[lees1975]

4. That's a pretty good analysis of it, I think.

Christian nationalism is also proving to be divisive as those who believe in it as doctrine think those in the church who don't are heretics and this further splits churches. It's really depedent on church leaders, mainly pastors, to keep this intrusion of false teachers out.

As far as the danger to democracy, that hangs by a thread in places of the constitution's own creation, namely the antiquated and outdated electoral college.

I don't think the unholy alliance between Trump and more conservative Evangelicals will hold for long. They demand more and more of a share of the power and he's given them as much as he is going to give. He thinks he's thrown enough bones their way, they have a whole agenda, much of what conflicts with his interests, and they're not going to let go.

[keithbvadu2]

5. Much of American Christianity is being subverted...

Much of American Christianity is being subverted...

Political Christians rather than Christians of faith.

Jesus has become a commodity, a tool.

They support Trump who says he is so perfect that he does not need Christ or his forgiveness.

Like today's evangelical/religious right supporters, Trump is a Political Christian, not a Christian of faith.

Evangelicals/religious right are easily able to spin their beliefs for political expediency.

The Donald who does not have to ask Jesus for forgiveness.

The Donald who ridicules Holy Communion.

Trump: Drink my little wine, have my little cracker

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2015/08/13/donald-trump-religion-serfaty-dnt-erin.cnn

[MayReasonRule]

6. "True Scotsmen" and "...sincere genuine christians ..." - How Might They Differ?

I do not see any difference.

Here’s to the rule of reason so that our freedoms may forever exist

[lees1975]

9. The difference is that there is an objective set of doctrine and theology that defines Christianity

from the Apostles works in the Bible. Use of the term "Christian" is broadly applied to anyone who thinks they are, by their own definition, but that doesn't make them Christian in the manner which the faith's founder determined it to be. So the "no true scotsman" comparison is apples and oranges.

Evangelicals miss the point on their literalism and lack of historical context in their interpretation.

[MayReasonRule]

10. "...an objective set of doctrine and theology that defines Christianity..."

Last edited Mon Jul 24, 2023, 08:00 PM - Edit history (1)

"...from the Apostles works in the Bible. ...the faith's founder..."

Thank you for your response. It's interesting to see multiple appeals to "authority" used conjunctively in an attempt to be "the" definition of "Christianity". There is a vast swath of humanity that disagrees with you in part and in whole.

I purport that "Foucaults Pendulum" by Umberto Eco provides a clearer definition of what objectively defines the doctrine and theology that you say defines Christianity.

It's a seminal work providing all too clear insights into what objectively defines Christianity and or any religion. I recommend it be read concurrently with Transformations of Myth Through Time by Joseph Campbell.

Those books were instrumental in transforming my own life and those of my life partner and our daughter.

Here's to the rule of reason! Vote Democrat - The party of reason!!!

[lees1975]

11. I've read Campbell's "Transformations of Myths Through Time" and watched the video series

Last edited Tue Jul 25, 2023, 10:37 AM - Edit history (1)

he put together with Bill Moyers. It actually traces historical developments of myths which lead to a better understanding of the background and historical context of the Bible, especially the New Testament. I actually referenced it in a paper I wrote in Grad school. Their thesis would support the idea that there is an objective set of doctrine and theology in Christian writings. That doesn't preclude reason and human intellect, it sees both as gifts of God's grace.

I used to think I was isolated and alone as a Christian who saw living out the values and virtues of the faith as more imortant that selling it to someone to attempt to "convert" them, and to conclude that being Democrat was much more consistent with the true values of Christianity than the other party would be, in spite of its vocal claims to the contrary. But that's not the case at all. There are a lot of people who realize that not being woke or Democrat is inconsistent with Christian practice.

I should make that clearer. Being Christian is consistent with being woke and with belonging to the Democratic party.

[MayReasonRule]

12. Here's To A Good Orderly Direction

Happy Tuesday

[wnylib]

8. The article uses the word "liberal" when referring to both religion and politics.

without making any distinction between them. But liberal theology is not the same as liberal politics.

In liberal Christian theology, the Bible is not taken with absolute literalism as it is in Evangelical and Fundamentalist churches. Depending on the denomination, interpretation of the Bible and of the tenets of Christianity can be quite broad and metaphorical.

Quite often, churches that are theologically liberal are also socially liberal. They try to live up to the teaching about looking after fellow human beings as a moral value.

But, a theologically liberal church can have both liberal and conservative political members. Conservative members of such churches agree on the Christian teaching to care about fellow human beings. They think that social action should be done by churches and NGOs, not government.