I am glad that people are already highlighting what I see as the senselessness of this controversy. It seems that Rick Warren is becoming a sensible and effective spokesman for evangelicals and I appreciate that.
There are so many aspects of this that get me fired up I can barely get it all out. First of all, I want to say how much I appreciate Saddleback Church is seeking to address the AIDS issue to begin with. How long was that a "hands-off" issue for evangelicals? It is a shame that this controversy is overshadowing the real work that they are trying to do in this area.
Secondly, I greatly respect Saddleback for inviting both a prominent Republican and Democrat to speak. As Warren said, "I've got two friends here, a Republican and a Democrat, why? Because you've got to have two wings to fly." How awesome is it that a Christian can try to put wind in the sails of bipartisanship?
Thirdly, I don't think you have to agree with someone on every single issue, even one as important as abortion, in order to hear their informed perspective on another issue, especially one as important as AIDS.
Aside from the Warren and Obama issue, I think we have to find ways to work with our opponents whenever there can be some measure of common ground. For instance, in the AIDS debate there has been controversy on abstinence-only education versus distributing condoms. Okay, I'm going to step out on a ledge here, but doesn't it make sense to first promote the benefits of abstinence, explaining all of the physical, emotional and spiritual impacts and consequences of sex outside of the confines of marriage, but also realize that there are people who will not respond to that message? If there are means of limiting the severe consequences of their actions on other people, should they not be utilized as long as they are understood as the non-preferred method? I know many Christians who have not maintained their sexual purity. Should I really expect unbelievers to when they do not have the spiritual means to subordinate the desires of the flesh? As Christians, do we not know enough theology to understand sin nature and the only means of overcoming it being the Holy Spirit? The problem is that we have divided into two all-or-nothing camps: the one saying abstinence only and not educating about the use of condoms or other means of birth control and the other simply distributing condoms and not educating on the moral and practical ramifications of their behavior but rather endorsing that lifestyle. I don't think it has to be that way. Can I really not say to someone, look in every way imaginable, it is best if you stay sexually pure until and within marriage and to not do so is a sin. But if you're not going to do that and you do choose to sin, at least use some common sense so that you do not do even further damage to yourself and those who care about you?
Okay, you may now proceed to burn me at the stake as a heretic.
6 comments:
You don't deserve to be burned for heresy. If you weren't such an introvert, you'd be a fabulous politician. It's about time someone expressed some freakin' common sense around here.
In Nov. 30ths News Journal, there was a Muslim man writing an editorial about how Muslims should not impose intolerance on American society. Normally, Muqtedar Khan's political viewpoints make me want to slap him upside the head, but this time he was really ON POINT.
The lesson of tolerance is a lesson that Muslims must learn now, and it is a lesson Christians should have learned long ago, but refused to confront the fact that people are lost in sin, both in and outside of the Church. Education without advocation is the answer. Keeping people in ignorance will ultimately hurt them when they fail (which, in all likelihood, they will).
No stake burning today. You pretty much summed it up nicely. I am tired of the all-or-nothing Christian approach that fails to recognize that the world is doing what it thinks is right by its own standards. Every day, people are dieing from a preventable disease without knowing Christ. This is a physical and spiritual battle- not a political one. Merely voting for the "right" candidate is not enough for us to one day hear the words "Well done, good and faithful servant." Mind you, this also applies to the abortion debate.
That was awesome, Erin. It made me wish I had written it!
Careful Steve . . . you're starting to sound more and more like a radical moderate. Pretty soon I'll have you throwing out your red ties and elephant lapel pin and turning to the dark side of registered independence.
The primaries are a sham anyway!
I like my elephant tie. But a switch to a registered independent isn't out of the question.
Post a Comment