Well, no.
Christian believer? Well that’s a hardy, har, har, uhm, NO!
There is no such thing as a Christian believer.
You either are or you are . . . Well, only God knows where you are going.
God is not liberal. He is, in fact, pretty a pretty strict literalist.
You will, one day, come to know this, eternally.
They’re going to play this “racism” thing for all it’s worth.
No, he's a devout leftist attempting to coopt Christianity to further his ends. I can think of a few past fascist states that tried the same thing. Wallis is the classic wolf in sheep's clothing. We're warned about such people by the Bible itself.
Didn’t King George III say the same stuff about our Founders? ... Those rowdy rebel rousers.
Wallis attempts to beat a dead horse.
Neither redistribution of wealth.
Ah now there is the logical disconnect. By putting forward two statements, both of which individually are quite true, he sets up a condition in the mind of the unwary that connects the two. Racism is not a Christian virtue, because racism is based on an unjust evaluation of what people are supposed to be like, and therefore it is not true. Libertarianism is not noted for its multi-cultural aspects, principally because its not something that true libertarianism per se is all that interested in. You might equally say that the American association of meat vendors isnt noted for its multi-cultural aspects. Of course not - they're more interested in filleting steaks. That is their principal concern. The principal concern of libertarianism is the constraint of statism, not stroking multicultural sensibilities.
Being proud of your own heritage and culture does not neccesarily mean you are hostile to other peoples and their cultures. That's nonsense. In fact its downright dangerous to assert so.
“Wallis is a devout and well-intentioned Christian believer, but .,,,,”
Wallis is a heretic and false teacher.
The libertarians that I know give much (usually quietly) to those truly in need and expect much from those who can help themselves.
“left-wing evangelical “?
That’s tantamount to a pyromaniac fireman.
Just wait till the GOP starts attacking the Tea Parties.
Niether side wants them, they are to much a threat to the status quo.
keep 4 later
Another jimmy swaggert.
LLS
I loathe the religious left.
A well reasoned, well thought out, and well written. One of a few people who have noticed that the segregation that existed until recently was anti-libertarian. It was segregation mandated by law. It was enforced by laws that restricted the free association of individuals. It was enforced by Democrats, most of whom could have been called “progressives.” Does anyone remember that Woodrow Wilson had all African-Americans fired from government jobs, many of whom had been hired in the (Teddy) Roosevelt and Taft Republican administrations?
Francis Schaeffer had Wallis’ type pegged forty years ago. He noted how the liberal and neo-orthodox tried to dress up pagan and humanist philosophy with Chrisitan words and symbols that actually had no meaning at all when one attempted to discern what was being said. Literally, wolves in sheep’s clothing. Willis is the classic example of this. You rarely hear emergents offer proof texts for what they are preaching. When they do it’s always a single verse stripped of all context - usually meaning the exact opposite of what it’s offered to prove. For example, Jesus never preached a collective ethic, his emphasis was always on the individual heart. He knew that collective institutions, ruled by wicked human hearts, could never accomplish anything for his kingdom. For man to progress he much change individually, one heart at a time. This was Jesus’ mission. The one time Jesus addressed politics was when he gave a major dressing down to the politicians of the time - the pharisees. (”Woe to you pharasees.....”)
“Tea” party.....the word “tea” should be in capital letters, TEA, because the letters TEA are short for the words “Taxed Enough Already!”