Replies

I don't see how someone can be a Christian and a liberal at the same time.

The liberals I've met in the conservative Christian churches I've been a part of over the years are liberals because of their compassion for the poor. They believe that government programs for the poor are the means by which we fulfull Jesus command to take care of the needy. I disagree completely; Jesus command was for his followers to do it voluntarily. His command wasn't for people to steal everyone's money and give it to others. But, for the liberal Christian, the end (the poor get taken care of) justifies the means.

Hi Ikemeister,

While it's true that Jesus, in His day and time, would've been considered a "liberal" (or more rightly, a "radical"), those terms have turned 180 degrees today. Jesus came to save mankind and thus abolish the LAW. That was considered blasphemous then.

Today, however, society has become extremely liberal, far beyond the changes Jesus was proposing. I firmly believe that Jesus today would be considered a conservative, or, to snatch a popular title, a "compassionate conservative". He'd tell people, lovingly, to go and sin no more. Yes, that would include abortion, homosexuality etc.

Just my .02,

Brian

You said: I don't see how someone can be a Christian and a liberal at the same time.
***

Neither do I, but that is because I view Christianity through the window of MY faith. We all do that. That is the central tension of religion and society. I acknowledge that what I believe I believe by faith. I cannot prove the existence or nature of God by any secular means. (I believe God intended it that way, again as part of my faith.)

The problems seem to come in when any of us, now firmly believing by faith, disagree with the tenets of anyone else's faith. I believe, for example, that abortion and homosexual behavior are wrong. Others, also claiming to be Christians, disagree, using various arguments to support their positions. I have options in how to deal with them: I can ignore them and continue my own beliefs;
I can attempt to convince of what I believe is the error of their beliefs;
I can allow them to convince ME of the error of my beliefs; I can force them to conform by my personal strength or that of the government, if I can convince it to do so;
I can join together with others who believe as I do to worship. (I am sure there are many other options)

Sullivan and his liberal friends seem to think, somehow, that my exercise of my personal faith is an affront to what they may or may not believe. I have never understood that. As long as I don't interfere with YOUR faith, why should you be concerned about mine (except as a spiritual matter)? If you don't believe in God, or don't believe in hell, why should my belief, for example, that if you don't believe as I do you will spend eternity there bother you in the least? Convince me otherwise, allow me to convince you otherwise, or just ignore me. (I suspect that people don't like hearing about the strongly-held faith of others because their own beliefs are NOT that strongly-held, but I don't know.)

Lastly, some of my beliefs, informed by my faith, have an impact on my secular life. In some of these matters there is widespread agreement, even across faiths, which often results in laws dealing with the subject (most everyone believes theft is wrong, even atheists, so we see laws against it.) In other areas there is disagreement, and no law deals with the situation. In yet others, abortion comes to mind, there is a sharp division on the matter, but it cannot be left purely as a matter of personal belief, because there are innocent victims whose voices cannot be heard except through others.

Sullivan disagrees with most Christian beliefs, at least on social matters, and thus wants to shut Christianity up. His faith must triumph. I suspect most of the rest of us disagree.