https://newrepublic.com/post/174950/christianity-today-editor-evangelicals-call-jesus-liberal-weak
Christianity Today Editor: Evangelicals Call Jesus “Liberal” and “Weak”
A former evangelical leader is sounding the alarm about the direction his religion is headed in.
The editor in chief of Christianity Today is warning that evangelical Christianity is moving too far to the right, to the point that even Jesus’s teachings are considered “weak” now.
Russell Moore resigned from the Southern Baptist Convention in 2021, after years of being at odds with other evangelical leaders. Specifically, Moore openly criticized Donald Trump, whom many evangelical Christians embraced. Moore also criticized the Southern Baptist Convention’s response to a sexual abuse crisis and increasing tolerance for white nationalism in the community.
Moore told NPR in an interview released Tuesday that multiple pastors had told him they would quote the Sermon on the Mount, specifically the part that says to “turn the other cheek,” when preaching. Someone would come up after the service and ask, “Where did you get those liberal talking points?”
“What was alarming to me is that in most of these scenarios, when the pastor would say, ‘I’m literally quoting Jesus Christ,’ the response would not be, ‘I apologize.’ The response would be, ‘Yes, but that doesn’t work anymore. That’s weak,’” Moore said. “When we get to the point where the teachings of Jesus himself are seen as subversive to us, then we’re in a crisis.”
@vivify saidYes, exactly.
[youtube]VpoWKAVDiCA[/youtube]
https://newrepublic.com/post/174950/christianity-today-editor-evangelicals-call-jesus-liberal-weak
Christianity Today Editor: Evangelicals Call Jesus “Liberal” and “Weak”
A former evangelical leader is sounding the alarm about the direction his religion is headed in.
The editor in chief of Christianity Today is warning t ...[text shortened]... where the teachings of Jesus himself are seen as subversive to us, then we’re in a crisis.”
This is how you know things are getting out of control.
21 Aug 23
@josephw saidJust look at Evangelical Christians and how antithetical to Jesus' teachings their politics are.
How so?
“If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven."
“Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven"
“If you have two coats, give one away,” he said. “Do the same with your food.”
Does this sound like the Republican party? The "pull yourself up by your boot straps" party? The "if you're poor it's your fault" party? The party that calls aid to the poor "handouts" and refers to those in need as "moochers"?
Does any of this sound like Jesus?
@vivify saidJesus's advice at the individual level is to be generous to the poor and needy. At the administrative level governments must do what is required to encourage hard work and productivity, while at the same time discourage laziness and scrounging off the state. Laziness is one of the sins hated by God and Jesus also condemned those who were slothful in their duties.
Just look at Evangelical Christians and how antithetical to Jesus' teachings their politics are.
“If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven."
“Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven"
“If you have two coats, give one away,” he said. “Do the same with y ...[text shortened]... e poor "handouts" and refers to those in need as "moochers"?
Does any of this sound like Jesus?
Gluttony and laziness often go hand and hand. The US in particular suffers from these two ailments. They have the fattest population in the world, no doubt fueled by generous government handouts to those who do not work.
@rajk999 saidYou're claiming Jesus wouldn't want the state to take care of the poor. You're also implying poor people are "lazy". You seem to be misrepresenting your own god and projecting your own bias against the less fortunate.
Jesus's advice at the individual level is to be generous to the poor and needy. At the administrative level governments must do what is required to encourage hard work and productivity, while at the same time discourage laziness and scrounging off the state. Laziness is one of the sins hated by God and Jesus also condemned those who were slothful in their duties.
Glut ...[text shortened]... t population in the world, no doubt fueled by generous government handouts to those who do not work.
Acts 4:32-35:
All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.
The collective takes care of the individuals, contrary to your "individual level" claim.
Right-wing/Republican Christians deliberately misquote their own bible in favor of beliefs contrary to Jesus.
@vivify saidBased on your knowledge of Christian teaching, how should Christians determine the line between an [arguably] reasonable social and economic safety net, on one hand, and an [arguably] counterproductively overweening welfare state, on the other?
Just look at Evangelical Christians and how antithetical to Jesus' teachings their politics are.
“If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven."
“Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven"
“If you have two coats, give one away,” he said. “Do the same with y ...[text shortened]... e poor "handouts" and refers to those in need as "moochers"?
Does any of this sound like Jesus?
I think a discussion about the principles and pragmatism that have a bearing on THAT boundary would be more interesting than beating up on people who are clearly at the two extremes with regard to this issue. Just a thought
22 Aug 23
@vivify saidI agree with your sentiment, of course.
The collective takes care of the individuals, contrary to your "individual level" claim. .
But what responsibilities and obligations do the "individuals" [that you are referring to above] have?
How does one define the limits to what they are entitled to from the commonweal?
22 Aug 23
@vivify saidI think you have neither the knowledge nor the intellect to appreciate what the Bible says and make an informed judgment. Your biased political views make you look pretty stupid.
You're claiming Jesus wouldn't want the state to take care of the poor. You're also implying poor people are "lazy". You seem to be misrepresenting your own god and projecting your own bias against the less fortunate.
Acts 4:32-35:
[i]All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything the ...[text shortened]... g/Republican Christians deliberately misquote their own bible in favor of beliefs contrary to Jesus.
The bible said that if a man does not work he should not eat.
Also any man that does not feed his family is worse than an infidel.
People like you should bat in your own crease.
Get your ignorant butt back in debates.
@fmf saidThat's not up to the Christian to decide. Jesus never put conditions on feeding the poor. When he fed the 5,000 he didn't first ask them to prove if they're hard working or not; he saw a need and met it.
Based on your knowledge of Christian teaching, how should Christians determine the line between an [arguably] reasonable social and economic safety net, on one hand, and an [arguably] counterproductively overweening welfare state, on the other?
I think a discussion about the principles and pragmatism that have a bearing on THAT boundary would be more interesting than beating up on people who are clearly at the two extremes with regard to this issue. Just a thought
Matthew 5:39-42:
But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
Jesus makes it clear it's not up to us to judge the character of those in need, even they exhibit poor behavior. Jesus commanded that we show compassion to those in need without exception.
22 Aug 23
@fmf said@vivify
I agree with your sentiment, of course.
But what responsibilities and obligations do the "individuals" [that you are referring to above] have?
How does one define the limits to what they are entitled to from the commonweal?
Following on from me asking you this: "How does one define the limits to what they are entitled to from the commonweal?"
Rajk999 has now reminded us of this from the New Testament: "If a man does not work he should not eat." [2 Thessalonians 3:10]
Do you think, in light of this, that a sound Christian approach [and perhaps for everyone, not just Christians] to those not working [aside from those who are sick in hospital or incapacitated or old and infirm] would be "a welfare system that requires those receiving benefits to perform some work or to participate in job training" a.k.a. a workfare programme?
22 Aug 23
@rajk999 saidWhere you fail is by assuming I'm talking about people who refuse to work. I'm talking about the less fortunate, the impoverished.
I think you have neither the knowledge nor the intellect to appreciate what the Bible says and make an informed judgment. Your biased political views make you look pretty stupid.
The bible said that if a man does not work he should not eat.
Also any man that does not feed his family is worse than an infidel.
People like you should bat in your own crease.
Get your ignorant butt back in debates.
By constantly accusing poor people of being scum who won't feed their family you've proven my point: Republicans are nothing like Jesus. If Jesus had an account on RHP you'd berate him as an idiot who doesn't know the Bible. You and every other Republican would act just like the Pharisees.