A Weird, Combo Response Post
Bear with me on a strange post. For some reason, now and again, some of the posts to my site go into an “awaiting moderation” file, which means I have to approve them. For some other odd reason, I get no email alerting me to this (I used to), and so if I don’t check, they just accumulate. Such is the case with 3 posts that were replies to posts of mine, and after 2 weeks, my site doesn’t allow any more posts on a given topic, because the site figures it’s yesterday’s news, and anyone trying to post must be a spammer (which is probably true, and my site keeps the spammin’ vermin out). So, without further ado, the three replies, in their entirety, and my responses:
My friend Julie Fidler didn’t like my giving my first “Hypie” Award to the “Thrive” women’s conference, and wrote,
Well hmph.
My friend, Shaunti Feldhahn, is speaking at Thrive. So forgive me if I give you a thumbs down on this post and stick my tongue out at you, while I’m at it.
The thing you overlook is that, for someone out there, this MIGHT be life-changing. Oh, what a concept.
Julie, I hope that it IS life-changing…but that’s not my point. The conference itself might be wonderful; indeed, I hope it is. But my issue is with the over-the-top hype that is used to promote it, and the fact that I think such hyped overpromises (“a conference for women unlike any other!”) is sub-Christian. I’ll forgive you for the thumbs-down and the tongue-sticking, if you’ll agree that over-hype is annoying. Fair enough?
Al responded to my post about the “100 People Who are Screwing Up America” by asking,
Talking about “Religious Right,” what do you think of Christian leaders like James Dobson, Pat Robertson, and Jerry Falwell? I would like to get your insightful thoughts on these people since you are an evangelical pastor. I am an evangelical Christian, too and was a fan of the aforementioned leaders for many years. Then I came to realize that their actions (activism) don’t bring people to God. They also use half-truths and even lies to persude their supporters. Any thoughts?
I don’t agree that these men use “half-truths and even lies”, but I do think that there are some problems with these gentlemen from time to time. I am a graduate of Dr. Falwell’s school, and appreciate so much of what he and it stand for; at the same time, he makes me nuts sometimes. One huge issue that I take with each of them is the issue that Eddie Dobson and Cal Thomas raised in their excellent book, 
Blinded by Might. I think that, for all their good intent, they and some others on the “Religious Right” put way too much stock in political means to try to change America. There is a place for political efforts, but I think that this comes way, way too high in their arsenals. Further, I think that there is way too close an association on the part of some with the Republican party; a guy like myself, who doesn’t like “Kool-Aid drinkers”, sees a lot of Kool-Aid drinking for George W. Bush going on. Further, I think that sometimes the Religious Right jumps on some pretty dumb/inconsequential bandwagons, and almost ignores other issues of greater importance. The so-called “School Prayer Amendment” is a red herring, a monumental waste of time and effort (hey, I’m all for praying in school, by the way!).
I could go further, but I need to respond to Barb, who quoted me,
“The very definition of the word “moralsâ€, as liberals who claim to be so filled with them fail to understand, is that they transcend personal preferences.”
and then wrote,
Funny thing. ha ha. I could find no definition in the many free dictionaries online that include the phrase “transcend personal preferences.”
Your definition is YOUR personal preference.
Funny response, Barb, ha ha. I’ll admit that I didn’t actually consult any dictionaries to find those 3 actual words, but how can “morals” be defined any other way? My definition of “morals” is most certainly NOT my personal preference; I take my moral understanding from a Book I had no part in writing, the Bible. The morality found there often does NOT suit my personal preference; I’d be quite happy if God gave me a moral pass on gluttony, envy, lust, greed, etc. The standards there are absolute, transcending time and place. It’s always wrong to murder, and so even though it’s unpopular to be pro-life, and a lot of hassle sometimes, I take that position—it certainly isn’t my natural preference, though. And so on.
Perhaps this is difficult to understand if your morality IS based upon personal preference, as liberals’ “morality” generally is, but as a Christian, I have no choice in the matter. God has determined what’s right and wrong; He didn’t consult me on the project; I certainly don’t always live by that morality (as C.S. Lewis points out in Mere Christianity, no one lives perfectly consistently by whatever “morality” they claim to hold). But that doesn’t change morals, and it certainly doesn’t make them MY personal preferences…
This phrase comes from the 1978 "Jonestown massacre" in which most members of the Peoples Temple cult, blindly following their leader Jim Jones, committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid.
Osborne: A Contrarian's Guide to Knowing God
Schlossberg: Idols For Destruction
2 Responses to “A Weird, Combo Response Post”
Great posts. I’m in total agreement with 2/3 of your responses…including Jerry Falwell (SURPRISE!). And it’s not that I disagree with you on the one response, as much as I am indifferent. I really don’t have a position on so-called “Christian hype.†In fact, me thinks your hype on “hype†is over-hyped. It’s secular advertising, plain and simple. It’s the result of the modernization in the church. It’s what happens when the church becomes a product to be consumed. It’s hip. It’s trendy. It sells. Whatever draws a crowd, baby. Who cares if it’s accurate? That’s the society we live in. You don’t have to like. But I’m not sure how productive it is to disparage any and all Christian organizations that use it. Thumb your nose at it all you like, but I’m afraid it’s here to stay.
Don ~ Aug 22, 2005 at 10:41 am
It may be “here to stay”, but it’s wrong. Nancy Pearcey’s new book, Total Truth, is a wonderful treatise, and it’s last chapter talks about the application of a Christian worldview to all of life, including how we go about doing things. Aping the world’s methodologies—particularly when it borders on lying—is beyond the pale.
Look, I understand that conferences and the like need to get the word out; fair enough, and I get plenty of ads that most certainly do not cross the line. But this one did, and many do, and I’m going to keep “thumbing my nose”, because it’s a problem. And finally, I don’t mean to disparage, necessarily, the organization, per se, but rather the organization’s methodology in a given situation. I don’t think that PromiseKeepers is a bad outfit, even though their advertising lied to try to induce me to attend their Pastors’ Conference…
Byron ~ Aug 22, 2005 at 10:52 am