I think conservative and liberal Christians are both convinced that the other side is facing some strong internal cognitive dissonance when in fact both sides feel secure and consistent deep down.
Liberal Christians think the religious right is denying its own core beliefs by not helping undocumented immigrants or supporting welfare or feminism or LGBT - or by endorsing Trump, or a Muslim ban, or not wanting refugees in America, or only opposing abortion but not caring about kids once they actually are born, etc.
And conservative Christians think the religious left lives in inner self-contradiction by supporting homosexuality, abortion, evolution, an erosion of religious liberty, denying a lot of traditional tenets of Christianity, feminism, thinking there are more paths to Heaven than just one, etc.
And it turns out that neither one of them is actually interested in Christianity. They both just pick and choose and interpret their religion to fit their circumstances and their own political beliefs. They’re all liars and hypocrites, and they reveal that Christianity itself is broken and contradictory.
Of course, this implies that you know what ‘real’ Christianity is and that everyone has fallen away from this ‘real’ version that you know of. Of course, the two types of people that make this claim are crazy fundamentalists and crazy non-Christians, so you at least have some company.
Christianity is a related set of beliefs that hinge on the works of at least scores and likely hundreds of authors over the course of at least a thousand years and possibly longer combined with 2000 years of interpretation and study. To come to differing conclusions upon the meaning of the work and the best way to apply the ideas that it espouses is hardly a flaw with anything. It’s to be expected. The US Bill of Rights is a work written 200 years ago by essentially one guy and we still argue over whether we can have guns or not. I don’t think that this implies that gun-control advocates are liars and hypocrites and that the Constitution is broken and contradictory (although the NRA might disagree with that assessment.) It’s simply an honest difference of opinion.
Shoot, half of the New Testament is just letters written to other people that we attempt to glean enough information from to see how God related to the authors of those letters in an attempt to understand the beliefs of the time and how they conceived of God. I guess a fundamentalist might claim that God himself was holding Paul’s pen, but a theologically leftward leaning Christian might not even claim that Paul wrote them at all. It doesn’t make them somehow non-Christian or contradictory. It’s simply acknowledging that our quest to connect to the divine is by its nature relayed to us through subjective lenses.
On a related response to velocity. All I really want to add is that you are slightly confusing theological lean with political lean. It’s entirely possible to be conservative theologically and liberal politically and vice versa. For instance, you could believe in a single path to heaven, a literal creation, sola scriptura and still support gay rights and abortion. Similarly, you could believe in universal salvation, a pluralistic God, a fallible, incomplete Bible and still think that gay people shouldn’t marry. Otherwise, I think that you’re right in that religious left and right both find each other to be flawed in their thinking.
Back to the religious left in politics. I’m a member of several progressive organizations and I would describe the attitude they have toward religious leftists as ‘tolerant’ and that’s about it. Within those organizations, it is very common for religion to be conflated with conservatism. Black Christian groups are sometimes given a pass, but largely Christians are not painted with a pleasant brush in casual conversation. If you bring it to their attention that “Hey, I’m a Christian.” You get a ‘You’re one of the good ones.’ type of response. I wouldn’t say that the Democratic party is hostile towards Christians, but I don’t think they celebrate Christianity the way they celebrate other interest groups.
Perhaps they don’t think Christianity, as an ‘interest group’, needs the help.
And as a belief system, there’s really no reason for anyone who’s not a christian to celebrate christianity. If they celebrated christianity’s beliefs they’d be a christian.
I think that if people would actually go to the trouble of meeting Christians, they might have a different view.
When I say Christian, I mean born-again, Bible-reading, regularly-attending, evangelical-church-going Follower of Christ. People who only go to church on Easter and Christmas don’t count. Neither do those who follow blab-it-and-grab-it prosperity gospel preachers. Nor do people who call themselves Christian but don’t know what the Bible says or want to follow culture instead of Scripture. I also don’t mean the people who stand on street corners and yell at passers-by, condemning them without ever talking to them. Westboro Baptists are NOT Christians.
I have known many Christians in my lifetime. And every single one was politically Libertarian. This doesn’t mean we support the potheads in the Libertarian Party, but we want the government to be much, much smaller. I go to church with many farmers and ranchers, and the last thing they would want is a theocracy. They want the government to leave them alone. We certainly don’t want the government to dictate our beliefs and way of life. We know that we do a far better job of caring for the poor than the state ever could. We remember our history and know what happens when the government meddles in religion. We remember this nation fought a revolution to get away from that.
That’s the Puritans, not every other colonist. And you might have noticed that the Puritans didn’t hold their power very long, because even their own people eventually realized it didn’t work.
We know he didn’t; within the so-called Pauline letters there are several different authors. You can hear that there are different voices without being any kind of Biblic scholar, just from having some experience grading essays or reviewing technical documents. For example, the way the writer refers to himself changes: that’s not something you’d get as an artifact of translation.
But as you point out that “we” is the same Christians who think Flat Earthers have a non-theological problem.
And clearly we’re not considered Christian by, for example, CelticKnot.
Which nation are you from? Because the US certainly didn’t fight a revolution “to get away from” government meddling in religion. Virtually all of the Founding Fathers were Anglicans or Presbyterians - people for whom government was an intrinsic part of religion.
The idea that electing anticlericals to government would cause religious schools to be shut down without a replacement was declared alarmist bullshit in Spain, twice. Guess what happened - twice.
Your analogy from Spain is irrelevant to America.
Pence or no Pence,the resident of the White House can’t defy the US constitution. The concept of a theocracy in America is nonsense.
There is, and always has been, discussion about government funding of certain organizations (private religious schools, Planned Parenthood contraception clinics, etc), and there are religious undertones to those discussions.
But prepping for the coming theocracy is as crazy and alarmist as the preppers who build bomb shelters under their house.
Remember,the biggest point of debate so far has been a fight over decorating a wedding cake. Chill out, folks.
Not, say, a fight over being forced to pray in school? Or a fight over whether slavery was just? (Hint: the biblical case in favour of slavery is MUCH stronger than the biblical case against homosexuality. If the “Bible-believing” Christians had won the US civil war, things would be very different today.)
Normally I’d agree, but I’m from Indiana where Pence was governor.
The governmental checks and balances largely kept him under control but he really did try to impose his religious beliefs on the rest of us. He feels compelled to do so. If he was PotUS he would attempt it. I’d like to think he wouldn’t succeed, but he would try.
Nor has there ever been a group whose traditional practices were banned, nor whose children were removed from their families in order to, among other things, bring them to the Lord. Nor has it ever been perfectly normal to ban certain people from spending the night in town on religious grounds.