Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

What Lessons Can Progressives Learn from Evangelicals?

By Zack Exley, In These Times. Posted March 21, 2007.


Some churches have left progressives in the dust in terms of serving and engaging people directly. Now, a new evangelical movement offers tips for the left.
03212007story
03212007Story

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Zack Exley

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Recently, I blogged a series of essays titled "The Revolution Misses You," in which I called for progressives to revive the forgotten dream of practical yet radical change. Friends and colleagues immediately scolded me for using "extreme" terms such as "revolution" and "radical." "You'll only alienate people," they said. "This will come back to haunt you."

At first, I was surprised by what felt like a dramatic overreaction. But I soon realized why I had fallen out of sync with the progressive mainstream on the use of the "R-words": I had been spending time listening to and reading evangelical Christians who are preaching revolution.

In Grand Rapids, Mich., a 36-year-old evangelical pastor named Rob Bell regularly describes his ministry as "revolutionary," "radical" and "an insurgency." Far from alienating people with such language, Bell's Mars Hill Bible Church draws thousands of new worshipers each year from the mostly conservative and white suburbs of west Michigan. In one recent sermon, available as a podcast from MarsHill.org, Bell tells his congregation that the only time Jesus speaks of God directly taking someone's life is the Parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12:13-22), a story about a man who builds bigger barns to store a surplus harvest instead of sharing it with those in need. He closed the sermon by listing a dozen places around Grand Rapids where congregants could unload their own surplus wealth.

In his book Irresistible Revolution, 30-year-old author Shane Claiborne, who is currently living in Iraq to "stand in the way of war," asks evangelicals why their literal reading of the Bible doesn't lead them to do what Jesus so clearly told wealthy and middle-class people to do in his day: give up everything to help others.

The popular evangelical Christian magazine Relevant, launched in 2003 by Cameron Strang, the son of a Christian publishing magnate, contains a "Revolution" section complete with a raised red fist for a logo. They've also released The Revolution: A Field Manual for Changing Your World, a compilation by radical, Christian social-justice campaigners from around the world.

Bell and Claiborne are two of the better-known young voices of a broad, explicitly nonviolent, anti-imperialist and anticapitalist theology that is surging at the heart of white, suburban Evangelical Christianity. I first saw this movement at a local, conservative, nondenominational church in North Carolina where the pastor preached a sermon called "Two Fists in the Face of Empire." Looking further, I found a movement whose book sales tower over their secular progressive counterparts in Amazon rankings; whose sermon podcasts reach thousands of listeners each week; and whose messages, in one form or another, reach millions of churchgoers. Bell alone preaches to more than 10,000 people every Sunday, with more than 50,000 listening in online.

--------------------------

But this movement is still barely aware of its own existence, and has not chosen a label for itself. George Barna, who studies trends among Christians for clients such as the Billy Graham Evangelical Association and Focus on the Family, calls it simply "The Revolution" and its adherents "Revolutionaries."

"The media are oblivious to it," Barna wrote in his 2006 book Revolution: Finding Vibrant Faith Beyond the Walls of the Sanctuary. "Scholars are clueless about it. The government caught a glimpse of it in the 2004 presidential election but has mostly misinterpreted its nature and motivations." According to his research, there are more than 20 million Revolutionaries in America, differentiated from mainstream evangelicals by a greater likelihood of serving their community and the poor and oppressed within it, a more "intimate, personally stirring worship of God" in daily life, and a much greater chance of studying the Bible every day.

One indication that this movement is new, nebulous and spontaneous is that Gregory Boyd, a like-minded mega-church pastor two states away in St. Paul, Minn., knew nothing of Rob Bell's theology until recently. He only heard of the pastors' conference after the fact because his book Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power is Destroying the Church was distributed to conference participants.

"There's definitely something going on," says Boyd. "I've only become aware of it as people have responded to my book. It's not organized -- it's amorphic. It would include the 'emerging church movement,' but it's bigger than that. It's a vision of the kingdom [of God]. It's a new kind of Christianity."

Heather Zydek, the former "Revolution" section editor for Relevant magazine and the editor of The Revolution: A Field Manual for Changing Your World, says, "I definitely don't have a name for it, but, yes, something is happening. Some people say it's a Generation X -- or Y -- thing. But baby boomers are in on it too."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: evangelicals, progressives

Zack Exley is a senior strategist with OMP, a D.C.-based communications and fundraising firm, and co-founder of the New Organizing Institute. He can be reached at his Web site, ZackExley.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I am impressed...
Posted by: Blade on Mar 21, 2007 2:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article has everything that the Cornell West speech lacked.

I was brought up in a Baptist church, and left it behind years ago. Cynical, you would call me, and for a long time, so. But this new information strikes to the roots of why I left "the church" so long ago, inaction toward what and who really matters.

I am forwarding this link to some Christian friends of mine who really need to see it, and will further investigate it myself.
I wouldn't mind helping such an effort. A new sort of activism...

They may have a chance, if this "movement" is for real... If this article is not hyperbole...

See, my cynicism runs deep...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Cynicism... Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: I am impressed... Posted by: Veronique
» RE: I am impressed... Posted by: T-Mc
» Blade - Good to hear from you Posted by: Veronique
» I agree with you. Posted by: Philip Newton
This is something I've noticed for years
Posted by: ISlamIslam on Mar 21, 2007 3:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"There's definitely something going on," says Boyd. "I've only become aware of it as people have responded to my book. It's not organized -- it's amorphic. It would include the 'emerging church movement,' but it's bigger than that. It's a vision of the kingdom [of God]. It's a new kind of Christianity."

This observation may come as a surprise to Leftists such as this author, but it doesn't surprise most conservatives. In fact, I've never understood the Left's fear and loathing of present-day Christianity, not only because, in my estimation, the majority of Christians have always been about as threatening as toy poodles but also given Christianity's trend over the past decade or two toward Leftist ideology on many global issues. This article supports my observation that much of Christianity is evolving into a Rick Warren/Jimmy Carter variant that has much more in common with the Left in this country than the Right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I'm an agnostic, not a Christian Posted by: ISlamIslam
The lesson evangicals teach: Don't listen to them!
Posted by: HughScott on Mar 21, 2007 3:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If evangelical Christians weren't such hypocrites (on average), I would not only listen to them but engage in serious conversation. But it is clear to me that while they follow Old Testament doctrine to a "T", evangelicals (again on average) consider the New Testament a book of suggestions.

President Bush is a sterling example of born-again hypocrisy. He obviously doesn't follow the Ten Commandments, at least the one about lying -- "Thou shall not bear false witness." Dub-ya has made a career out of bearing false witness, as his history of deceptions shows.

And forget the peaceful proclamations of Jesus; the president has mocked those gentle words as well, such as turning one's cheek, forgiveness and loving other human beings.

For Bush loyalists who disagree, I suggest they research the Karl Rove-orchestrated smear campaigns against Vietnam War heroes John McCain, Max Clelland and John Kerry. Would Jesus have condoned those vicious actions? No, of course not. But Shrub the Charlatan did.

One of my proudest accomplishments in life happened during the seventh grade in Shreveport, LA, when I received a New Testament Bible for not missing Sunday school an entire year. The Good Book was written in plain English, without "thous" and "thees." I can still remember the text as being comforting and non-confrontational, just the opposite of George W.'s hypocritical words and deeds.

You can verify his two-faced charade by going online and visiting websites that compare Bush's behavior with the teachings of Jesus. There is no similarity. Shrub talks the talk of a Christian, but when it comes to the walk, like all snake oil salesmen, he slithers.

Hugh E. Scott, editor of King-George.biz -- the only website with hardcopy proof of White House corruption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» sbrooks - on Methodists Posted by: Veronique
» Research Posted by: Philip Newton
As A Christian Whose Friends Are Almost All Non-Believers...
Posted by: ZPaul on Mar 21, 2007 4:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
..And as a Christian who is fed up with the churches, this helps give me hope that there are not a few Christians who actually think.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What Lessons Can Progressives Learn from Evangelicals? NOTHING!
Posted by: Aufklaerung_Baboon on Mar 21, 2007 4:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What an absurd assertion this article is -- these people should be learning from the progressives!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Did you read the article? Posted by: Philip Newton
Following Jesus' example - WOW what a concept!
Posted by: sfortuna on Mar 21, 2007 4:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a profoundly committed athiest, I'm less concerned with the motivations of this movement than I am with their actions, passion and direction. I realize that 90% of humanity is genetically wired to believe in something, and as long as they do, it might as well move them to embrace the causes of justice, peace and community empowerment. I'd be glad to work side-by-side with these 'revolutionary christians" in reigning in corporate influence, empowering the poor, promoting sustainable communities and alternative fuels and bringing an end to our military-industrial complex. To me, shared goals are more important than individual motivations, and I am very curious to see how this movement will play out. I think people are tired of dogma, of the Falwell's and Dobson's "my well or hell" approach. It's pretty easy to see they covet gold and fame a lot more than modesty and compassion. I'm acutely aware of the anger, fear and guilt radiating from the right-wing fundies as they realize their sanctimonious obsessions do not lead to happiness. Let's hope that a new, socially aware christian movement may provide the numbers to accomplish our leftist goals of social and economic justrice, peace and the end of the military-industrial stranglehold. If they don't mind working with godless heathens, I won't mind working with them. A revolutionary is a revolutionary, no matter where their motivation springs. Even this athiest appreciates Jesus as a pretty good teacher and role model.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Revolutionary?
Posted by: redstarwraith on Mar 21, 2007 4:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is interesting to read this in light of Cornel West's recent speech. I thought West made a brilliant point in saying (paraphrased here) the political landscape of America is a religious one and that that factor has to be acknowledged by anyone trying to effect change. I winced when I heard West say that but I must grudgingly admit he is, for better or worse, correct. That IS the landscape we are dealing with. To deny that is to bury one's head in the sand.
Certainly it is easy to see the inherent and internal antagonisms in Dobson's, Robertson's, et al ministry. In fact there are so many that they threaten to tear that whole movement apart. People like Wallis are "the other side of the evangelical coin" so to speak. Though Wallis emphasizes a "kinder, gentler" Xnty more in keeping with the Gosples, I warn that the evangelical movement as a whole (specifically its insistance on a literal interpretation of the Bible) may split the progressive movement. What West said as a statement, I took more as a warning. No one can afford to ignore religion today, that much is certain, but that does NOT imply that the rest of us need collapse carelessly into religious mythology. The religious task should be to "get right with secular society" and NOT expect that it is somehow the task of secular society to reconcile itself to religion. To the extent that any religion in the US can accomplish this, then and ONLY then will I call it "revolutionary' - anything less deserves the title COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: evolutionary? Posted by: poppop_schell
» Not a monolith Posted by: Philip Newton
dammit! They stole "revolution"
Posted by: ladyoracle on Mar 21, 2007 4:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is absolutely true that there are progressive churches out there; you see them marching in anti-war protests and even gay rights events.

However, for the most part they are not, so it makes me frustrated to see them take "revolution" and "radical" away from us. And call me clueless, but I don't have a problem with those words anyway. However, since the French Revolution, which turned out so bloody, politics has had a tenuous relationship wtih that word.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The First Real Hope
Posted by: terradea on Mar 21, 2007 5:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is the first time in years that I've felt hope for America. If these "new" Christian ideas take the place of the Christianist ideas in the media and government, our country will stand a chance. Now, if only we can find out when and where Pat Robertson and his gang is planning to detonate the doomsday bomb ...

... and stop it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Amen Posted by: Philip Newton
Why is Shane so confused??
Posted by: MAD on Mar 21, 2007 6:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"30-year-old author Shane Claiborne, who is currently living in Iraq to "stand in the way of war," asks evangelicals why their literal reading of the Bible doesn't lead them to do what Jesus so clearly told wealthy and middle-class people to do in his day: give up everything to help others."

That's an easy one Shane: because the vast majority of Jews, Christians and Muslims don't truly give a shit about anyone but themselves. Most simply enjoy the status that being "deeply religious" confers upon them in their respective intolerant, ignorant and fascist circles.

Religious adherents are the most hypocritical people you could ever hope to meet who would sooner sever their right hand than follow in the footsteps of Jesus. Sadly though, non-religious adherents are, generally speaking, only slightly less hypocritical as the vast majority of them aren't out committing selfless acts but rather being selfish. They are less hypocritical only because they do not betray the mystical belief structure to which Christians pay great lip service but rarely comply. They do like to wag their fingers at Christians while actually doing very little themselves, but at least in most cases, non-religious adherents don't believe that killing Iraqis or Afghanis is a family value.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: MORMONS Posted by: CatDad
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING Posted by: CatDad
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING Posted by: morticia
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING VS Atheists Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING VS Atheists Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING VS Atheists Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING VS Atheists Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING VS Atheists Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING VS Atheists Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING VS Atheists Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING VS Atheists Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING VS Atheists Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING Posted by: morticia
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: MORMONS AND TITHING Posted by: morticia
» Those in need Posted by: fork
» RE: Those in need Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Those in need Posted by: fork
» RE: Those in need Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Those in need Posted by: fork
» RE: Those in need Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Those in need Posted by: fork
» RE: Those in need Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Those in need Posted by: fork
» RE: Those in need Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Those in need Posted by: fork
» Virtual mission Posted by: fork
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: fork
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: fork
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: fork
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: fork
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: fork
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: Virtual mission Posted by: fork
» Tarbrush Posted by: Philip Newton
This is not new information
Posted by: rileycase on Mar 21, 2007 6:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Zach Exley writes an interesting article, and it should be helpful to the AlterNet folk who tend to have a skewed view of evangelicals. I live with this reality every day. I chair the local Rescue Mission with a budget of $1.7 million, not a cent of which comes from tax money. The donated man-hours are worth far more than the money. The people who do all this are both liberal and conservative, progressive and evangelical, but anyone close to the situation knows the vast majority would be labeld evangelical, charismatic, fundamentalist, or generally right-wing. There is nothing about politics in this. No one is talking Republican, Democrat, or whatever. It is people doing what they are called to do. The preachers in the churches these people attend preach the rich young ruler and the man who builds the bigger barns all the time. I admit this is not New York or San Francisco where I find people much more alienated and cynical and politicized. But this is an important part of Americana (and Christianity).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This is not new information Posted by: poppop_schell
» No, actually... Posted by: doctorsquared
» RE: No, actually... Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: No, actually... Posted by: poppop_schell
» RE: No, actually... Posted by: poppop_schell
Thanks for the openmindedness.
Posted by: Jim on Mar 21, 2007 6:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most alternet pieces that mention Christianity have been very negative. Thanks, Alternet, for publishing something that mentions the Christians who take the teachings of Jesus seriously. I have been part of the intentional Christian community movement for decades, and welcome the new growth of truely Biblical Christians. The revolution is growing!

But watch out if you choose to work with us on progressive agenda. We also will be quietly praying for your receiving of eternal life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What if I asked you not to? Posted by: doctorsquared
Progressives can learn to avoid apocalyptic prophesies...
Posted by: rwa on Mar 21, 2007 7:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...fear mongering, psuedo-scientific, faith based predictions of calamity such as peak oil etc... It's actually just armegeddon for the secular crowd. There seems to be a powerful attraction to these dogmas which actually have very negetive consequences.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Read Stephen Mitchell
Posted by: silkreed on Mar 21, 2007 7:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those sceptical of Christianity have reason given its history and all the politically motivated stuff that found its way into the Bible. But sift it out and the core teaching is clear. Try "The Gospel According to Jesus" or "Jesus: What He Really Said and Did" (a shorter and young-people friendly version) by Stephen Mitchell. It's all the Good stuff and there is so incredibly much heart and depth there...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HOW WONDERFUL TO SEE EVANGELICALS CATCHING UP TO THE MORMON CHURCH
Posted by: poppop_schell on Mar 21, 2007 7:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a Mormon, I am so glad that "progressive" evangelicals are beginning to really see what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is really all about and to see them developing people orinted programs similar to what the Mormon Church has been doing for over 50 years.

The major item lacking in their movement is to have a God called and ordained Prophet like Isaiah or Jeremiah lead them and provide continuing revelations for today's world. Unfortunately, they are left to the good intentions of pastors.

That is NOT the case with the Mormon Church which has had living prophets since 1830 when the Church was established in NY but now has over 12 million memebrs in every nation which allows the preaching of the Gospel. The current Prophet is named Gordon B. Hinckley who is 96 years old but travels to countries around the world proclaiming along with 12 Apostles the message of the Restored Gosepl of Jesus Christ.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

SOME PEOPLE MARCH TO THEIR OWN DRUMMER
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Mar 21, 2007 8:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not everyone has a need to 'belong to a movement'. Progressives have not missed the boat. Maybe they like it their own way. It's possible to have a religion without making loud public statements. Some of us like our privacy. That doesn't mean we've missed anything. It's unfair to make assumptions about others. It's judgemental. I choose not to be part of the Evangelical experience. I do not feel left behind. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

REAL TEMPLES RATHER THAN SHOPPING MALLS
Posted by: poppop_schell on Mar 21, 2007 8:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
God's holiest works have always been done in Temples. One of the few times that Jesus got "angry" was when the Jews were acting as moneychangers within the walls of the Temple.

FYI, the Mormon Church is the only Christan one that has Temples where Jesus's presence is often there. The highest and holiest of acts are done within the walls of these Temples. There are over 130+ Temples around the world today.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What Lessons Can Progressives Learn from Evangelicals?
Posted by: pfm on Mar 21, 2007 9:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a certain degree of stage theatrics associated with the Evangelical movement which taps into our contemporary need for sight, sound, movement, a bit of flamboyancy and theatrics. Progressives might be wise to consider incorporating some of that into the messages we send and whatever are messages are they need to be attuned to the contemporary 30 second sound bite mass media solutions and methods of presentation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good News: Evangelical Troops Now Wearing Shiny New Liberal Uniforms!
Posted by: thirdmg on Mar 21, 2007 9:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"According to Wallis, the Revolutionaries are 'breaking away from the Right in droves -- but they will never be captured by the left. They're going to challenge the left on a lot of things: For these Christians, sex is covenantal and not recreational. And they oppose abortion and they are not going to move away from that.'"

If "sex is covenantal," then nothing fundamental is changing in the mentality of the zealots. Translate "sex is covenantal" to mean that sex is acceptable only in the context of marriage between a man and a woman for the purpose of procreation. Controlling sexual behavior and attitudes towards sex is at the heart of the authoritarian mentality. (Just ask gays about their experience.) There's nothing revolutionary about the "Revolutionaries" this article talks about. They've just exchanged the old dingy uniforms of conservatism for the new shiny uniforms of liberalism.

True revolutionaries don't talk only about going back to the roots of Christianity. They talk about changing and updating Christian values from the roots upwards. Here's some genuinely revolutionary commentary by a liberal bishop about the need for Christianity to revise its attitudes toward sexuality:

Sex and Christianity: Re-thinking the Relationship

"The point I am trying to make is that Christianity as a religion stands in need of a better theology of sexuality, a better understanding of the complex role sexuality plays in our human nature, and of the purposes of God in creating us as sexual beings, among other things. The Church must find a way to discover that human beings are sexual beings and, in the words of the creation stories in the Book Genesis, that 'this is very good.' Our sexuality is essential to who we are."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nope Posted by: Philip Newton
J Edgar Hoover School of Advanced US Politics
Posted by: eddie torres on Mar 21, 2007 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All the lessons a US leader needs to know were written decades ago by J Edgar Hoover and his henchmen:

1) don't get caught with a dead girl
2) don't get caught with a live boy

Evangelicals chose to ignore these rules (Haggard, Foley, etc) and paid the price. Progressives appear, at least on the outside, to have a better appreciation of history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Revolution?
Posted by: oregoncharles on Mar 21, 2007 10:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Indeed, it's been obvious for some time that the Religious Right were extremely un-Christian - even anti-Christian. After all, they're preaching hate, not love.

The basic values of progressives come mostly from the ethical teachings of Jesus, as modified by the Enlightenment. That makes liberal churches, which have given up their authoritarian history, our natural allies.

Now we see the same discovery in CONSERVATIVE churches. Big surprise: Jesus was a socialist. And he said nothing about abortion or gay marriage (aside from "succor the downtrodden," that is; as opposed to kicking them while they're down).

Nonetheless, I worry when essentially conservative churches start preaching "revolution!". Have they first given up any ambition to impose their "values" on others? I think not, given the continued emphasis on sexual Puritanism. Their "revolution" could easily turn political and authoritarian, just as the earlier evangelical movement did.

As long as they stay out of politics, they are valuable allies. I would love to see a commitment to tolerance and secularism from these people. Until then, I will not feel safe in their presence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: evolution? Posted by: drmflorida
» RE: evolution? where you going to go? Posted by: oregoncharles
Are we sure these aren't lessons that evangelicals learned from leftists?
Posted by: drmflorida on Mar 21, 2007 10:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are we sure these aren't lessons that evangelicals learned from leftists? We seem to have a short memory. While church leaders (sometimes) spoke out about establishing peace, equality and social justice, we've done most of the heavy lifting, frequently to be told that we are still going to hell the next Sunday.

I would agree that the evangelicals of both political persuasions have had some success in engaging people, at least temporarily. I also agree that progressives need to be a little bolder in retoric, etc. But I would say that the modus operandi of the progressive movement and the evangelical movement are distinct and fairly incompatible. The progressive movement's objective is to empower minorities (meaning disenfranchised persons) through democratic and direct action. The evangelical movement's objective is to praise God through prophecy (God's Word) and Christian acts. The poor and unfortunate are shown God's love through Christian charity. While they might establish non-capitalist alternatives, it is done out of compassion at best and pity at worst.

This is no replacement for a political movement, which is at essence a quest for power. Indeed, many Christians (progressive or not) would find this quest for power to be either unseemly or un-Godly. But without power, we cannot create a lasting change because it is conditional on the consent of rulers and the whims of compassionate christians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Such a deal I got for you!
Posted by: willymack on Mar 21, 2007 10:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I used to sell cars, and was pretty good at it. I quit the racket because of ethical and moral misgivings I had for working in a business with extremely dubious honesty issues. The first-and most important ingredient in selling ANYTHING is selling yourself. This generates the enthusiasm necessary to hit 'em with the Old Bamboozela. This is more difficult when working one-on- one than when you have a group, such as a whole family present. In a group, a certain synergism takes place wherein it's easy to get everybody aboard. This is called "crowd dynamic", and you can see it at political speeches, sales symposiums, and church services. You merely look for the leader-the one most likely for others to look to and follow. In sales gatherings, political rallies, and megechurches, there are shills interspersed throughout the crowd to provide clues as to how the people are to react to a certain turn of phrase phrase or salient point. They begin the applause or start the cheering with a word or two aimed at stirring up emotions and passions. This is very important because the last thing the salesman, politician, of preacher wants is for people to use their gift of deductive reasoning or critical thinking. They want the group to be carried along by a wave of mindless emotion and enthusiasm for whatever it is they're selling, and THIS is what makes their actions immoral. It is possible to appeal to the intellect of a crowd without resorting to this ancient deceit. A good example of this is Al Gore with a remote control and a slide projector while he presents "AN Inconvienent Truth" He states ONLY FACT, and in his understated way, elicits the opinion of the audience with phrases like"don't you think?", or "this is not a political decision; it's a MORAL decision", these points always being agreed upon by the audience, because they're the truth. John Edwards is more flashy and showmanlike (because of his courtroom experience), but he doesn't exagerate the truth or try to sell snake oil remedies. In short, there ARE honest and genuinely concerned politicans out there; they're not all used car salespeople.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Such a deal I got for you! Posted by: outsideagitator
the revolution of 2012
Posted by: solrev on Mar 21, 2007 12:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is about time somebody other than a troll like me, said something about the revolution of 2012. There is an underground movement that is a response to the Christian right. Some of you on this sight have called me a moderate Christian. I have been trying to tell you we see ourselves as revolutionaries. We are fundamentalists and our fundamental is the words of Jesus. Just for your info we always knew Jesus was a liberal. We know that if Kerry in the presidential debate would have said in response to Bush calling him a liberal, “if it’s good enough for Jesus it is good enough for me”. The world would be a different place today. If the Christian right would have debated that at the time most of them would have become revolutionaries. We are not Christian soldiers killing Jews and Arabs in some crusade. We see the Bible as just a collection of men. We do not jump on every word in the Bible as Gods word. There are lessons that can be learned throughout the Bible but most of the Bible’s lessons were for another people and another time and open to interpretation. We try to stick to the teachings of Jesus. If you want to get an idea of where we are trying to go, visit solrev.org for fun. We plan on getting in the game. The bottom line is this, we believe the destruction of the United States is being engineered. Whether you believe higher forces are involved as we do is irrelevant. If you believe the destruction of the United States is being engineered, help us. You are way to small of a minority to accomplish anything on your own. Unity 2008 is the smartest thing going right now. Personally I think they made a fatal mistake with the one of each party ticket bullshit. However, that does not matter what is important is to create a voting block that can take back the presidency. It does not even matter who is elected. Once that power is established we can not lose. Get some of your verbal people to quit spreading the news and engage. Try being a progressive revolutionary. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The revolutionaries have to win or we are going to be exterminated. The Christian right will be screaming it is the curse of god. It is the beast. It is our own stupidity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Evangelicals
Posted by: bob t on Mar 21, 2007 12:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read this article twice here and once at In Thes Times. These evangelicals seem to be on the right track. But thier zealotry and vehemence is stiil frightning. They have a long way to go before I will accept their ideas. They will have to prove themselves and earn my trust, as well as the trust of many millions of americans who see the damage and death caused by the 'other evangelicals' both catholic and protestant, all of whom endorse and support GWB, the Jesus pretender.
So much for catholicism and born agains.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: vangelicals or die Posted by: solrev
Stop asking for Money
Posted by: muymal on Mar 21, 2007 12:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every progressive "group" or organization I encounter asks for money up front. As a recovering evangelical, when we were door knocking or doing the survey questionaire thing, we never asked for cash. No one would join our church, or be "saved" if we did this. They would just see our motive as greed or something negative. Yet progressive groups do this all the time:
"Do you agree with my beliefs? Then please contribute" If they folowed the evangelical model, they would form small communities (churches) with sub-communities (sunday school classes, or watever warren's church calls their small groups, the communists called their groups cells, I think). That when large enough would split.
Then ask those groups to raise money (tithe).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Christianity 1, Common Sense 0
Posted by: Ellen Remore on Mar 21, 2007 1:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's gratifying to hear that so many of the Religious Right's adherents are at long last rejecting Doctrinal Hatemongering as their ticket to the Rapture. But as for joining hands and singing "Kumbaya" with a bunch of biblical literalists, however Christlike their intentions--personally, I'd have to give my head several good whacks with a croquet mallet in order to knock sixty or seventy points off my I.Q.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: HANDLES ARE BULLSHIT Posted by: ISlamIslam
Belief/Faith more strong than Science/Reason. Just as base impulses
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Mar 21, 2007 3:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
are stronger than aesthetic or reasonable pursuits. This is why modern messiahs like Al Gore are using, to quote him directly, phrases like its a challenge to "moral imagination" and uses images/rantings of a global apocalypse. It is not a science-based argument or a matter of technology or economy. It is a 'moral' imperatitive. A new 'crusade'. You are 'bad' if you dare question or actually study the facts. You DO NOT question the fundamental doctrine--in Gore's church or in the Pope's. It is also interesting how so many of the environmentalists use imagery based on the "Gaia" (or is it Giai) model of a "mother" earth. As if the Earth is a sentient being which, like a god, is the "mother" of us all and controls our destiny. Regardless, the environmentalists, like the fundamentalist evangelicals (and the crazy moslems), like to use hyperbole, claims of moral superiority, and claims of armagegddon because it can attract audiences and, like the news, 'if it bleeds it leads'. I'm just waiting for Gore and his ilk, or the fundies, to figure out some way to use sex to attract to their congregations....the mind boggles.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All Feel-Good, No Action
Posted by: Michael LaFlow on Mar 21, 2007 3:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Read the article closely. All talking, no doing. Books, talks, meetings, and feel-good statements. All to promote "her," the church. Nothing has changed from one evangelical flavor to another-- the selfishness continues. No real change because that will disturb the status quo and risk one's social status, which is why people belong to these big do-nothing feel-good groups. Want proof? Follow the money! A tiny amount-- if any-- reaches the poor, compared to what the church collects.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Data? Posted by: Philip Newton
Off topic-
Posted by: Swan on Mar 21, 2007 4:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have some new stuff up on my blog here and here as of today and yesterday.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MANY PROGRESSIVES ARE EGGHEAD BORES
Posted by: drricklippin on Mar 21, 2007 5:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I liked this article and discussion. I consider myself a spiritual progressive (see www.integrativespirituality.org)

I DO think that many progressives are highly intellectual egghead bores and haven't learned how to communicate to the heart.

I personally think this "hyper-rationalism" hurts the progressive movement.

Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton, Pa

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: MANY PROGRESSIVES ARE EGGHEAD BORES Posted by: MartianBachelor
Evangelical movements
Posted by: Jeanne on Mar 21, 2007 7:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
by necessity require their members to suspend critical thinking. No moral dilemmas, their leaders tell them exactly what, when, where, why, and how high. They can achieve a lot because their members act enthusiastically and generously when called upon. What they do may or may not be in the interest of humanity at large, but, hey, it gets them into heaven so it's worth every effort and sacrifice. The remainder of the population still exercising free-will and free-thought have a much more difficult time getting organized and agreeing on which way to go -- no maps, and usually no consensus. So, is it a good idea to become more like fundamentalist religious movements? Personally, I think not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: vangelical movements Posted by: Flossie
What's called "The Social Gospel" has been around for a long time.
Posted by: Sojourner on Mar 21, 2007 8:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's usually contrasted with a religion of personal piety. It is not clear to me which of those the trend described in this article is.

If it's just a matter of let's confess our sins against our fellow human beings so that we can feel relieved (and that's always been enough to attract 10,000 listeners when cloaked in Biblical idioms) and that's all it is, then it is pietism.

If it clothes the naked, heals the sick, visits those in prison, and tries to change a society whose structure keeps us poor, sick and in prison, then it is Social Gospel.

Attracting a crowd means nothing by itself. By their fruits we can know them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Still sanctimonious after all these years
Posted by: Ellen Remore on Mar 21, 2007 9:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You're quite right about the Evangelicals' commitment to being the sex police. My feeling is that if someone identifies him/herself as a Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, etc., they're probably sane regarding religion. However, if anybody claims to be "a Christian," theologically reformed or not, your best bet is to run like hell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What if no one is chasing you? Posted by: Philip Newton
Remember Heaven's Gate? - One Of Its True Believers Still Believes
Posted by: thirdmg on Mar 21, 2007 9:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nothing shakes the true believer. This is eerie:

Heaven's Gate: The Sequel

"Ten years after the 39 suicides, the sole survivor is back – and he has something urgent to tell us."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Re: No Action!?
Posted by: Blade on Mar 21, 2007 11:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suggest that you are the one who needs to re-read the article.

"On this night, Bell barely preached himself, and instead spent the evening, as he often does, interviewing a member of the church about how she was living out the gospel. She and her husband HAD MOVED (!!) to a broken inner-city neighborhood and begun a tutoring and family assistance ministry that is now in the process of expanding out of a church basement to fill an entire renovated warehouse."

Sounds like this couple are having a success. Are you and your local group doing anything close to being this effective?

"He laid out five areas of focus: urban at-risk youth, refugees, poverty, community development and HIV/AIDS."

Sounds like he is urging his congregation to positive action, something outside their own worlds, something more than SELF salvation. Something more than what most church groups or narrow minded one issue progressive groups are concerned with.

"Never in history have we had a Christian theocracy where it wasn't bloody and barbaric. That's why our Constitution wisely put in a separation of church and state. ... I am sorry to tell you, that America is not the light of the world and the hope of the world. The light of the world and the hope of the world is Jesus Christ."

Sounds like he is trying to get his congregation to THINK, and get outside themSELVES. Being an atheist, myself, I translate the word concept, or metaphor, Jesus Christ, as SELFLESSNESS.

"And that is where anti capitalism and anti-imperialism come in. Capitalism doesn't look like Jesus. Empire doesn't look like Jesus."

You don't find this kind of "preaching" in most churches, and I say it is a good thing you find it here.

Again, translate "Jesus" into SELFLESSNESS. AN ARCHETYPE WE NEED TO EMULATE. NOT A PATHWAY TO "HEAVEN". CHRIST ON THE CROSS IS A PARADIGM OF SELFLESSNESS.

"Globalization isn't just an aggressive stage in the history of capitalism. It is a religious movement of previously unheard-of proportions. Progress is its underlying myth, unlimited economic growth its foundational faith, the shopping mall its place of worship, consumerism its overriding image, 'I'll have a Big Mac and fries' its ritual of initiation, and global domination its ultimate goal."

Anyone preaching this kind of sermon is an ALLY, A FRIEND, SIRS, AND MADAMS. OVERLOOK THE DIFFERENCES AMONG US AND CONCENTRATE ON THE COMMONALITIES.

If these people want to oppose abortion, and gay marriages, and "anytime you want" sex, let them pass local laws for that after we kick out the despots. Their views are just as legitimate as yours regarding these issues in our USA. They have a right to them, and can still be revolutionary progressives, you narrow minded so called liberal bunch of Nazis.

Most of you are afraid of these people influencing more sexual ethics back into our society, or taking away your own self-appointed pulpits, or suggesting you give your money to poor people!!!

Remember, BELIEF is the most powerful thing on the planet. If you BELIEVE you can't be allies with these people, then that will be so. As Pirandello named a play, "It is so (if you think so)".

As people involved in the so called "progressive" movement, we need to BELIEVE that we can include divergent views and groups into one mass movement, and stop quibbling and picking one another's lint out of their belly buttons.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why can't we do ethics instead of faith?
Posted by: eridani on Mar 22, 2007 12:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You may ground your ethics in some traditional faith, but if you'll look around you'll see them shared by people of completely different faiths, or no faith at all. I don't give a rat's posterior if you are against pre-emptive war because Jesus told you to turn the other cheek and blessed peacemakers, because the ancient Jewish prophets told you to beat your swords into plowshares, because the Prophet (PBUH) said that God does not like those who commit aggression, because the Wiccan rede advises you that you may do as you will as long as you don't harm others, because the Buddha told you to be compassionate, or because Confucius said that the superior man should never resort to war as the first alternative. Or maybe nobody told you anything--you just think that deliberately causing a lot of human suffering sucks. If we all got to that particular ethical place, why does it matter how we got here?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Faith without ethics is dead Posted by: Philip Newton
Really encouraging
Posted by: Flossie on Mar 22, 2007 8:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for this article - I'm a British evangelical Christian who has spent years bemused by the link between churches and the right in the USA. The article confirms some of the things I have observed and been involved in, but also encourages me to go further. God is changing us (his church) and moving us from complacency and self-congratulation into people who see the world through his eyes - and it's a bit of a shock! But it's well-worth the roller-coaster ride.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

what about women?
Posted by: lindalee on Mar 22, 2007 8:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do these supposed progressives support my rights to control my reproduction? I doubt it. I think this is great in many ways, but you couldn't pay me to worship with people who see me as a vessel to carry babies without actually seeing me as a woman. What women do to their bodies is nobody's business but their own. When churches stay out that 100% then I'd think about participating.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why Not Eliminate Fundamentalists In The Womb?
Posted by: thirdmg on Mar 22, 2007 8:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In a case of "be careful what you ask for," here's a response to the recent suggestion by a fundamentalist minister that gays should be eliminated in the womb.

Mohler's Slippery Slope

"...in Mohler's desire to root out homosexuality, he fails to consider an equally compelling question: If a biological or genetic basis for religious belief is discovered, would it also be morally acceptable to create a hormonal patch to eliminate fundamentalists, such as Mohler himself? Before you dismiss this question as hypothetical or academic, consider that research into the origins of spirituality is a robust field of inquiry. There are currently about a dozen studies that show shared personality traits among religious people, suggesting a genetic or biological basis."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

mrs
Posted by: jjdoggie on Mar 22, 2007 9:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I surprised myself by even clicking onto this story, thinking, "same old thing", but I was heartened by what I read. Though I probably will never be involved with a revolutionary church, it is good to know that people are waking up to what Jesus taught, not what the Evangelicals leaders are telling us he said. This is what Christianity is all about -- serving others.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What GOD Wants?
Posted by: edgar_michel on Mar 22, 2007 1:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the bible is our source of knowledge and inspiration, then how is it that a Christian nation, that the United States has been, has led the world to the unthinkable horror of global warming and the transformation of the planet into a place inhospitable to life as we know it.

The response is to reassert Christianity more poignantly than ever before. But the globalization of Christianity surely will have the effect of propagating the ills that it engenders more prolifically than ever before, only accelerating our demise.

At a juncture in history when we should be pulling together as a world to reverse the causes of global awarming and frenetically searching for alternative to ways of living that nurture the earth instead of depleting it, we are turning again to the Bible in all it’s aberrations.

The biggest flaw in the Bible is it’s assertion that Jesus has gone to prepare a place for us in Heaven and those of us that believe in him shall not perish but will have ever lasting life. This assumption implies that if we fail here on earth and we have taken Jesus as our personal savior, we will regardless rise into heave just as Jesus did before us. This takes away the urgency of survival. If we don’t have a personal savior, then it is up to us to survive or perish forever. But the prospect of perishing forever will also invigorate us, motivate and galvanize our desire to claw, scratch and strain with all our might to reform our world into that which begins to look like a vibrant healthy wonderful place of which we dream. IMHO the Bible short-circuits that motivation.

I’m not propounding that there are no good lessons to be learned in the Bible because there are good lessons. But when we are searching for God, or that which orders of the universe, we can’t really find that in any text because the universe as well as ourselves is forever evolving into new and beautiful forms.

Science doesn’t provide the answers either, because whatever is set down in writing is already lacking the vibrancy of the moment. I said one time in 1993 when the Internet was still young that “the moment is the Cambrian layer” As we all should know, the Cambrian layer in any plant is the living tissue that separates the bark on one side from the wood on the other, Only the Cambrian layer is actually living while the bark and the wood are dead. Now I’m not suggesting that science is an irrelevant pursuit, just that new beginnings come from setting yourself free from all you’ve learned in order to view that which has never been viewed before. Science is the scaffolding; your quest for new knowledge is the bridge. But to find out how the world and the universe is ordered, you only have to immerse yourself in it and its secrets will be revealed. But you have to constantly let go your hold of what you thought it was or believed it was each and every day. With every bit of information you learn you begin to understand what works and what doesn’t. You don’t learn everything in one day or from one book. What you learn form doing is what doesn’t work of the possibilities you learned from reading.

Survival is everything. You claw, scratch and struggle with everything you’ve got to make it, and make it not just within the context of business but in the context of the very earth upon which you walk. When the earth around you begins to become more fertile and it begins to bristle with vibrant health, then you know that you are on to something.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What GOD Wants? Posted by: edgar_michel
» Christian Nation? Posted by: Philip Newton
» And the answer is... Posted by: MartianBachelor
Thank You
Posted by: Philip Newton on Mar 22, 2007 2:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for a good and fair (and from what I've seen as a progressive Christian, accurate) picture of what the progressive evangelical community is doing.

Great article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wash and Wear Christians
Posted by: Jersey Devil on Mar 22, 2007 6:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How is it that the "reborn" Christians believe that after their first baptism failed them that a second, third, or even fourth baptism/rehab stay will make them better Evangelical Christians. They use their Bible like a hammer to beat down other Christians in the name of Jesus. If that is brotherly love, maybe it is time to change Gods. The Evangelical Church today is in business for the money with today's new Jim Baakers "saving souls" for the almighty dollar. They preach hate and oppressive control over their member's lives. It is sad that so many insecure people flock to these snake oil salesmen/women dramatically quoting their Bible with a great waving of arms and screaming of scripture. It all comes down to making money for the "Christian" ministers

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

signpost
Posted by: tom cady on Mar 24, 2007 8:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it looked so easy, our heritage beckoned
the nation was, after all, christian
and so they began their crusade marching toward theocracy
and as they plodded the children wailed “are we there yet?”
and god whispered “you're going the wrong way”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

:)
Posted by: armybrat8 on Mar 24, 2007 4:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This story made me smile. I'm a very committed Christian. I've travelled the road from Catholicism over to Evangelical-Charismatic and I've just in the past year I've finally caught wind of the Revolution. The Revolution is not about the Rapture or a distant heaven when you die. The Revolutions says that the KINGDOM OF GOD is within you and among you. It is already here! So get out there and live like you know it.

We are called to take Jesus at his word. He didn't mention gays or abortion. But he sure spent a lot of time with prostitutes and beggars. Evangelicals have neglected the Gospel. No more. We are called to live out the Kingdom of God in the here and now. It is within our grasp. Feed the hungry, care for the dispossessed, teach some immigrants English, stand up against the system of global injustice. Give up your own selfishness, take up your cross, and follow in the footsteps of Jesus.

I am not imposing my values on anyone. There's an invitation to the ultimate party going around. Only wretches and sinners and prostitutes and lunatics and beggars and orphans need apply. I hope you catch wind of it, too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]