Mike Huckabee Models the Confusion Surrounding Evangelical Beliefs

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” ― C.S. Lewis link

Screen Shot 2015-10-07 at 10.28.53 PM
Imagine them ruling the country

I am back in town and my mother in law began her chemotherapy yesterday. I am hopelessly behind on my emails, etc. If you need to contact me, please write *urgent* in the subject line and I will try to get to you ASAP. In the meantime, some of my posts are being written during my mother in law's (Polly) chemotherapy.  I shall call these posts …Dispatches from Duke.

*******

Mike Huckabee accuses evangelicals of being afraid of him becoming the President. This is not going to be a treatise on Huckabee's political life. I would ask that we stick away from politics and look at the issue before us. It is not that I mind politics. I find it fascinating and sometimes participate in the fray myself. However, this blog is targeted towards the evangelical world and how we present ourselves to the world.

In an article in the National Review, by Jim Geraghty, The Sad End to Mike Huckabee’s Campaign, Huckabee appears to lash out at his supposed base, evangelicals. He was asked the following question by Todd Starnes in an interview.

In an interview with Fox News pundit Todd Starnes on his podcast, the former governor of Arkansas was asked if he felt betrayed by evangelical leaders and organizations that have gravitated towards Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio.

He makes a most unusual claim. he is not being supported by evangelicals because evangelical organizations will not be able to fund raise if he is elected President because he would put Christian policies into place and thereby abolish the need for those organizations.

Mike Huckabee said in an interview on Wednesday that evangelical groups won’t support his presidential campaign out of fear they would no longer be able to fundraise if Christian policies were to actually be put in place. 

Dee is confused. What, exactly, are Christian policies? Huckabee then elaborates. (I added spaces to make reading the quote easier.)

“Well, certainly a sense of disappointment, and yet I do understand because, as I’ve often said, ‘I don’t go to them, I come from them,’ but because of that I do understand them,” Huckabee said. “A lot of them, quite frankly, I think they’re scared to death that if a guy like me got elected, I would actually do what I said I would do, and that is, I would focus on the personhood of every individual. 

We would abolish abortion based on the Fifth and 14th Amendment. We would ignore the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage decision.” Huckabee said that, as a result of his presidency, evangelical organizations would no longer be able to galvanize their supporters and fundraise. “A lot of these organizations wouldn’t have the ability to do urgent fundraising because if we slay the dragon, what dragon do they continue to fight?

And so, for many of them, it could be a real detriment to their organization’s abilities to gin up their supporters and raise the contributions, and I know that sounds cynical but, Todd, it’s just, it is what it is,” Huckabee said.

Geraghty sums this response up nicely.

This is like watching that team that’s been eliminated in the playoffs get into fights with the other team in the last game of the season.

I have several problems with Huckabee's response in regards to the evangelical vote.

  • What constitute Christian politics? Is it only about abortion and same sex marriage? What about poverty, human trafficking, child sex abuse, domestic violence, or inequality in education? 
  • Is it our goal to make this a Christian nation? What does that actually mean?
  • Huckabee says that the majority of evangelicals wouldn't support him because he would abolish abortion and that would hurt antiabortion lobbies? Does he really believe that this truly constitute the actions of the majority of evangelicals who, in his world, would probably only support another evangelical?
  • Why does he think that evangelicals would unilaterally vote on anything? 

For years, Mike Huckabee misrepresented that he was in possession of a theology degree.

There is no question that Huckabee presents himself to the world as a good representative of Christians. In my book this means living out, in our own lives, the fact that we follow Jesus who says He is the Truth.

I am increasingly concerned about a number of pastors and Christian leaders who claim degrees that they do not have. In other words, they lie about it. Some appropriate the title of "Doctor" for unearned degrees, some from second rate colleges.

In 2007, WND posted Huckabee's Theology Degree? Now Says Ain't Necessarily So (subtitled) Campaign admits candidate doesn't have claimed religious credential. The article reports that Huckabee had told a number of media sources as well as voters that he had a theological degree. However, after Huckabee exhibited confusion regarding the beliefs of Mormons, his degree status came into question.

Reporter Zev Chafets wrote: “I asked Huckabee, who describes himself as the only Republican candidate with a degree in theology, if he considered Mormonism a cult or a religion. ‘I think it’s a religion,’ he said. ‘I really don’t know much about it.’

… ‘Don’t Mormons,’ he asked in an innocent voice, ‘believe that Jesus and the devil are brothers?

One reporter confirmed that Huckabee earned a BA degree in 2 years at an small Baptist college and dropped out of seminary after one year.

He preached his first sermon as a teenager, married his high-school sweetheart and went off to Ouachita Baptist University in Arkadelphia. There he majored in speech and communications, worked at a radio station and earned his B.A. in a little more than two years. He spent a year at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Tex., before dropping out to work for the televangelist James Robison,

Here are two comments he reportedly made in 2007 when he ran for President.

Speaking in Iowa in October, Huckabee told a sympathetic crowd, “Anytime you have been a person who was identified as a pastor and you’ve got a seminary education and theology degree, people tend to worry about you.”
 

…Last month, during the CNN YouTube debate, Huckabee responded to a question to the candidates about their belief in the Bible: “Sure. I believe the Bible is exactly what it is. It’s the word of revelation to us from God himself. … And as the only person here on the stage with a theology degree, there are parts of it I don’t fully comprehend and understand, because the Bible is a revelation of an infinite god, and no finite person is ever going to fully understand it. 

Apparently, he continued to claim a seminary degree after the original story broke.

Update II: The Christian Science Monitor (a great newspaper whatever one’s view of the Church of Christ, Scientist!) has been doing a series on presidential candidates’ faith and values.  In their Nov. 7th article on Huckabee, they quoted him at the October Values Voters’ Summit.  There Huckabee said concerning the tensions between being an ordained minister and a presidential candidate (James Garfield was our only minister president), “Anytime you have been a person who was identified as a pastor and you’ve got a seminary education and a theology degree, people tend to worry about you.”

Now that phrasing, while perhaps not technically lying, is certainly misleading–maybe even bearing false witness. Anyone at that meeting or who heard that statement would assume (a) that Huckabee had finished his seminary education rather than dropping out after a year, and (b) that the “theology degree” was a degree earned at an accredited seminary or divinity school–not an undergraduate B.A., whether in religion or “pastoral ministries” as the spokesperson from Ouachita Baptist University described Huckabee’s degree.

Mike Huckabee supported Kim Davis but claims he doesn't want to push religious doctrine in politics.

In May, 2015, Religion New Network published 5 faith facts about Mike Huckabee: Southern Baptist pastor-turned-politician. Huckabee was a pastor for 12 years before going into politics and was the youngest president of the Arkansas Baptist State Convention. He was also a staunch defender of Kim Davis and said he was willing to go to jail for her.

Huckabee was at the side of Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis when she was released from jail in September after refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. And he told the crowd waiting for her that he was willing to take her place. 

“Let Kim go but if you have to put someone in jail I volunteer to go,” he said. “Let me go. Lock me up if you think that’s how freedom is best served. Because, folks, I am willing to spend the next eight years in the White House leading this country. But I want you to know I’m willing to spend the next eight years in jail. But I’m not willing to spend one day under the tyranny of people who believe they can take our freedom and conscience away.” 

However, this comment jumped out at me. He claims he has never wanted to push a particular religious doctrine as a politician.

“It was never my desire to use my position to push a particular religious doctrine through the official channels of government. Spiritual convictions should certainly be reflected in one’s worldview, approaches to problems, and perspective,” he wrote in his 2008 book, “Do the Right Thing.” “An atheist who believes that we are on our own and that our only true God is the natural world might be more protective of bugs, plants, and animals than one who believes that God created all these things for us to manage, care for, and even use in a responsible manner.”

This comment makes little sense to me because, at the beginning of this post, I quoted him as saying that he wanted to put Christian policies into place. So which is it?

Mike Huckabee is a great supporter of the Duggars, saying Josh Duggar's activities were a *mistake.*

The Republic of Gilead reported on Huckabee's statements which might appear to minimize the problem of sexual abuse.

In a March 22nd Facebook post, Huckabee voiced his support for the Duggars in a manner that minimize the situation. I'd like to parse Huckabee's Facebook post, in which he insisted that the abuse was in the past and blasted the "blood-thirsty" media for its attention to the scandal.

First, Huckabee described Josh Duggar's abusive behavior as "inexcusable" but not "unforgivable".

"Janet and I want to affirm our support for the Duggar family. Josh’s actions when he was an underage teen are as he described them himself, 'inexcusable,' but that doesn’t mean 'unforgivable.' He and his family dealt with it and were honest and open about it with the victims and the authorities."

Next, Huckabee chided the "blood-thirsty media" for "sensationalizing" the scandal, insisting that "Good people make mistakes". 

(Quoting Huckabee) "No purpose whatsoever is served by those who are now trying to discredit Josh or his family by sensationalizing the story. Good people make mistakes and do regrettable and even disgusting things. The reason that the law protects disclosure of many actions on the part of a minor is that the society has traditionally understood something that today’s blood-thirsty media does not understand—that being a minor means that one's judgment is not mature. No one needs to defend Josh’s actions as a teenager, but the fact that he confessed his sins to those he harmed, sought help, and has gone forward to live a responsible and circumspect life as an adult is testament to his family’s authenticity and humility."

Mike Huckabee is a long time supporter of Bill Gothard,

Did you know that Mike Huckabee attended Bill Gothard's Basic Life Seminar? He was been so supportive of Gothard's methods that he decided to implement some of these teachings in government programs but in a stealth sort of way while he was governor. These teachings would be stripped of overt religious  references.

According to the Daily Kos, 

The Cincinnati Beacon described Huckabee as a "long-time admirer" of Gothard. The former Arkansas governor wrote a letter used by Gothard to promote a program aimed at infiltrating city governments with core principles of the ministry stripped of overt religious references.

"As a person who has actually been through the Basic Seminar, I am confident that these are some of the best programs available for instilling character into the lives of people," Huckabee wrote in a letter promoting Gothard's prison ministry. Arkansas prisons had been using Gothard seminars and materials since 1996.

Huckabee also endorsed Gothard's "Character Cities" program. Gothard described a meeting in Little Rock as laying groundwork for "the most exciting opportunity I can imagine" to merge his institute's teachings with government programs.

Gothard was reportedly excited about this opportunity since it also afforded him the opportunity to expand his juvenile programs in Arkansas.

Just this year, Gothard’s advocacy for teaching public school children character qualities such as obedience, gratefulness and attentiveness brought him to a southern state capitol. But Little Rock, Ark., had already been established as friendly terrain for Gothard. Two of his long-time admirers—Republican Gov. Mike Huckabee and Little Rock Mayor Jim Dailey, a Democrat—are loyal advocates of Gothard’s agenda and have encouraged him to expand juvenile rehabilitation programs there.

Gothard has described his meeting in Little Rock as the start of something big. He said it laid the groundwork for "the most exciting opportunity I can imagine" to merge the institute’s teachings with government programs. In a letter published on the institute’s Internet site, Gothard said his organization has been asked to "present a plan and contract to restructure ( Arkansas’ ) welfare program, their educational system and their juvenile justice methods." He also claims that Gov. Huckabee’s aides "have already begun taking steps" to put the proposal into action.

Gothard announced his program's endorsement by Governor Mike Huckabee on his IBLP website.

Governor Mike Huckabee of Arkansas stated, “As a person who has actually been through the Basic Seminar, I am confident that these are some of the best programs available for instilling character into the lives of people.” A warden testified, “I would certainly recommend these seminars to any correctional or jail facility.”

The Arkansas Times ties Bill Gothard to Mike Huckabee and to the Duggar family.

Gothard’s Institute in Basic Life Principles was once a popular gathering spot for thousands of Christian families, including the Duggar family from TLC’s “19 Kids and Counting.” Gothard’s Advanced Training Institute conferences were also popular among devotees of the Quiverfull movement, who promote large families and eschew birth control.

He’s also rubbed shoulders with Republican luminaries. He and former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee were photographed at a campaign lunch together;

Thoughts:

In the interest of full disclosure, I once had a chance to meet Mike Huckabee and speak with him. He is an engaging man who makes you think that you are the only person in the room with whom he wishes to converse. He seems like a nice guy. 

On the other hand, Mike Huckabee, just like a number of his BFFs, is a flawed individual who believes he understands his fellow evangelicals and their theology because he studied for 2 years at a small Baptist university and 1 year at a seminary. 

1. Why did he feel the need to lie about his degree?

He became a governor after being a pastor. Did he really think a theology degree mattered in his attempt to become President? Does he think that a theology degree makes him a more attractive candidate? It doesn't for me.

2. Does Huckabee like and/or support the Christian celebrity culture?

Mike Huckabee is into the celebrity Christian culture just like any other person who believes that their celebrity pastor must be incredible if he has a big church. It is deeply concerning to me that he wanted to bring Bill Gothard and his programs into the government and into prisons. This would have exposed many people to the flawed theology of Bill Gothard. It could also have brought innocent people into contact with molesters. Oh yeah, that's what our prison culture needs-one more predator…

3. Huckabee, along with the people he admires, appears clueless about the dangers of child sex abuse

Mike Huckabee has a lot to learn about child sex abuse, molestation, etc. It is not a mistake. It is a crime-a horrible crime that will affect the victims for the rest of their lives. I believe that it would be in Huckabee's best interests to apologize for his comments on the Josh Duggar matter.

4. Mike Huckabee doesn't understand that evangelicals are not monolithic in their political persuasion.

He seems to think evangelicals should vote for him because he is an evangelical. Why?

5. Would Huckabee say that he was guided by God in his support of Bill Gothard and the Duggars?

6. Do we really want a Christian country?

Have we ever really had a Christian country? Would it even make any difference? Take a look at the theocracy of the Old Testament. The people of God were just as messed up under God's rule as they were under any other rule. Even Adam and Eve rebelled and that was in spite of having a one on one, close daily walk with the God of the Universe. 

Think about the leaders we cover here. Here are some discussion questions o get you all starter (as if we need to!!)

  • Would you really want culture ruled by men who believe that women should not open their mouths in a church service? 
  • Would you want the country to be led by men who believe women should not be police officers or should not work outside the home?
  • Could there be attempts at laws to make women stay married their abusive husbands(or vice versa)?
  • Do you think women would be allowed to serve in significant ways in the government or would they be relegated to monitoring preschools?
  • What about those who believe they hold all sorts of keys to authority and then abuse people with their leadership? Would they take advantage of their position?
  • Would the leaders remain pals with ministry leaders who have been accused of covering up child sex abuse? Would they pass laws to give such ministries protection from being prosecuted?
  • Can you imagine the gag orders on gossip or speaking ill of the country's leaders?
  • Are Christians any better equipped than________ (fill in the blank) to handle the day to day governance of our society? If so, why and give examples.

Comments

Mike Huckabee Models the Confusion Surrounding Evangelical Beliefs — 180 Comments

  1. Huckabee worries me less than Cruz. Cruz is a dominionist. A dominionist is one who believes we should be living under OT law with Christians in charge and all others excluded from government.

  2. So what Huckabee is saying is that the people who used to support him and now go for Cruz never really cared about the issues beyond using the as fundraising props.
    Wait, did he realize that he said that out loud?
    All the hand-ringing, prayer rallies, umpteen man marches and pastoral round tables were just to Jin up anxiety and fear and then turn it into a fund raising campaign for another top-heavy political action comittee?
    I am shocked, just shocked.
    Welcome to a peak behind the evangelical political celebrity curtain…

  3. So, Huckabee has finally discovered what Cal Thomas and Ed Dobson discovered over 15 years ago (and what Cal has seemingly forgotten since) – that fundraising based on fearmongering is at the heart of the evangelical political machine.

    In the immortal words of Officer John McClane, “WELCOME TO THE PARTY, PAL!”

  4. Pingback: Huckabee: His election would undermine evangelical fundraising | Civil Commotion

  5. Here is my post. I attended Covenant Life Church on Sunday and listened to P.J. Smyth’s first sermon as the Senior Pastor. I wrote him an open letter on what Covenant Life needs to do:

    1. Repent for covering up child sex abuse, allegations of criminal activity, spiritual abuse and for the way some people made CJ Mahaney God.
    2. Bring back other people who were on staff and repent. (Kenneth Maresco, Grant Layman, etc…)
    3. What PJ should have learned from South Africa dismantling apartheid.
    4. Other recommendations: 1. Divorce itself from 9 Marks, membership covenants, etc…

    https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2016/01/13/an-open-letter-to-p-j-smyth-senior-pastor-covenant-life-church/

  6. @ Eeyore:

    I like the other words John McClane says..Yippe Kiye…

    I was joking around on Twitter about how Die Hard is my favorite Christmas movie. And whether or not I am the theological version of John McClane. The guy always showing up in the ointment. You know..wrong place, wrong time….

  7. Loren Haas wrote:

    So what Huckabee is saying is that the people who used to support him and now go for Cruz never really cared about the issues beyond using the as fundraising props.
    Wait, did he realize that he said that out loud?
    All the hand-ringing, prayer rallies, umpteen man marches and pastoral round tables were just to Jin up anxiety and fear and then turn it into a fund raising campaign for another top-heavy political action comittee?
    I am shocked, just shocked.
    Welcome to a peak behind the evangelical political celebrity curtain…

    I still remember the day I left the Republican party. We got a fundraising letter in the mail, with a 3×5 card in it and a heartfelt appeal, something to the effect, “I have (personally) taken your card out of our file and want you to return it with your pledge of support”…

    Did they really think we were that stupid? That gullible?

    A 3×5 card? In the 1990s? Really?

    Even we, struggling as we were financially, had a desktop computer.

    The Republican Party machine was running on 3×5 cards? (I highly doubt it… it’s problematic whatever way you look at it. If they were running things using 3×5 cards, they had a host of problems. If they weren’t, but said they were, then at the very least they were clearly lying to us, their “loyal” supporters. My spouse had sent them a $25 check some months earlier. Guess they thought we were their new cash cow.)

  8. “Is it our goal to make this a Christian nation? What does that actually mean?”

    Yup. It was our goal, when we were deep in the koolade. (or however you spell that word)

    Thankful to have awakened from the evangelical glamour. (“spell,” for those of you not familiar with Celtic fairy tales)

  9. He would ignore the SC ruling on same-sex marriage? Regardless of what people believe about this issue, it’s now legal. So Huckabee thinks he’s above the law and can pick and choose what laws to obey?

  10. I’m pretty sure most of the Christian groups could find new issues to fear-monger about…always a good method for fundraising.

  11. A qualifier, I too left the Republic party, and frankly have become more liberal as my walk has progressed

    Huckabee…I didn’t care for him much anyway, but when I saw him playing bass on “Cat Scratch Fever” with Ted Nugent, I lost any iota of respect (I was a late teen when “The Nuge” had his peak popularity and I found him disgusting then, not so much on religious grounds, but because I found him to be a misogynistic pig), and then Huck had the audacity to criticize the Obama’s for letting their girls listen to Beyonce. Jon Stewart called him out on it – and Huck said “well that is ‘adult’ music. Truly pathetic

    His dealing with Kim Davis seemed like pandering and trying to take advantage of what I think was a very misguided and ignorant person. Seeing Ted Cruz trying to weasel in on the action was pretty entertaining too. Huckabee later in an interview – admitted that whole deal was his event because his campaign paid for it, and Cruz had no business being there…

    My problem however is not political – because no way would I want an Evangelical like that to put “Christian Policies” in place

    I have a problem with the whole abortion tactics of the Right, here is why, if abortion is as high a priority as they say it is to them, then more available contraception and education other than “abstinence only” should be utilized and it would reduce abortions- but the Right is against those things. So much of the rhetoric from the Right during the ACA (Obamacare) contraception debate came across to me like this – Single women if you choose to have sex in an immoral manner – you need to face the real consequences of giving birth and caring for a baby(which really came across as punishment to me). The moral issue of abortion aside – to me it seems just like the male control of the patriarchs, er, I mean complementarians

  12. Eagle wrote:

    Here is my post. I attended Covenant Life Church on Sunday and listened to P.J. Smyth’s first sermon as the Senior Pastor. I wrote him an open letter on what Covenant Life needs to do:
    1. Repent for covering up child sex abuse, allegations of criminal activity, spiritual abuse and for the way some people made CJ Mahaney God.
    2. Bring back other people who were on staff and repent. (Kenneth Maresco, Grant Layman, etc…)
    3. What PJ should have learned from South Africa dismantling apartheid.
    4. Other recommendations: 1. Divorce itself from 9 Marks, membership covenants, etc…

    Eagle, the name summarizes the situation. Covenant Life…. A life that is defined by contractual obligation.

    Outside the city of New Jerusalem will be found several types of people, one is the fearful. They will not believe, they are are too fearful and instead choose covenant, instead of forgiveness.

  13. I wouldn’t be comfortable with a Christian theocracy type of political situation, because whose brand of Christianity would we be getting?

    As Dee’s concluding questions point to, if certain types of Christians (that is, gender complementarian to patriarchal) had their way, it would probably have detrimental affects on women in the nation.

    On a tangential note:
    Prison Chaplain Charged With Rape Studied Minister Accused of Sex Abuse
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/21/prison-chaplain-charged-with-rape-studied-minister-accused-of-sex-abuse.html

    Snippet:

    Bill Gothard’s evangelical teachings found fans in Mike Huckabee and the Duggars, but he and another pastor allegedly used them to take advantage of women.

    Arkansas prison chaplain Kenneth L. Dewitt was charged last week with 50 counts of third-degree sexual assault for allegedly pressuring three inmates at a women’s state prison into providing him sexual favors.

    Dewitt based his prison classes on the teachings of Bill Gothard…

  14. Mike wrote:

    Single women if you choose to have sex in an immoral manner – you need to face the real consequences of giving birth and caring for a baby(which really came across as punishment to me).

    I don’t totally have a problem with that. I’m a single woman, and one reason of several I’ve remained a virgin this long is precisely to avoid stuff like STIs, out of wedlock pregnancy, etc.

  15. “I am increasingly concerned about a number of pastors and Christian leaders who claim degrees that they do not have. In other words, they lie about it. Some appropriate the title of “Doctor” for unearned degrees, some from second rate colleges.”

    The Apostolic movement is completely infected by this. C Peter Wagner’s WLI hands out doctoral degrees like jellybeans. It becomes even more absurd when someone’s title is Apostle Dr Grand Poobah. Poobah is probably the only one of the lot with any actual merit.

  16. “Mike Huckabee said in an interview on Wednesday that evangelical groups won’t support his presidential campaign out of fear they would no longer be able to fundraise if Christian policies were to actually be put in place. “
    Hmmmm. I guess JFK should have passed laws requiring all US citizens to go to confession and say Rosary prayers?
    “Do you think women would be allowed to serve in significant ways in the government or would they be relegated to monitoring preschools?”
    I’m sure Huckabee would let older women work in school cafeterias, with our husbands’ permission, of course. But, we might lose our voting privileges.

  17. @ Daisy:
    All good reasons, and the fact you are on here, probably moral ones too – which I respect and laud you.

    What I was trying to convey was that the rhetoric came across to me as babies as punishment for “unChristian or immoral behavior,as opposed to the sanctity of life – so again to me (a guy) it comes across as men trying to control women.

    I happen to not believe that we as Christians should not push laws prohibiting pre or extra-marital sex that apply to non-believers? Where does it end? I think the Evangelical Right really picks and chooses which “Christian Policies” they want to make laws…..usually the things of a sexual manner that “others” do.

    Interestingly, even though Jesus said “Store not your treasures on earth…..” I have never heard a sermon, seen a Christian book or article condemning 401Ks or other investments – which is pretty clearly….storing up treasures on earth.

    Open carry in churches (or anywhere for that matter) – if we are supposed to be like Christ…..well, I just don’t see him packing the .44 Magnum a la Dirty Harry

    I don’t want to sound like I have the answers…..I sure don’t, just things I have noticed that don’t seem in line with the Jesus I follow. I think that too many evangelicals have chosen politics over following Christ. Easy to get caught up in the legalism and the laws we like

    A favorite passage of mine (well at least the internal 14 year old boy)is Galatians 5, talking about the Jews who wanted the new Gentile Christians (the men) be circumcised – to which Paul says:

    6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.
    …….. 12 As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!….

    14 For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

  18. Jenn Grover wrote:

    “Imagine them ruling the country.”

    Calvin in Geneva, or Khomeini in Iran.
    “GOD HATH SAID! GOD HATH SAID! GOD HATH SAID!”

  19. Mike wrote:

    Open carry in churches (or anywhere for that matter) – if we are supposed to be like Christ…..well, I just don’t see him packing the .44 Magnum a la Dirty Harry

    “FOR ZARDOZ YOUR GOD GAVE YOU THE GIFT OF THE GUN.
    THE GUN IS GOOD!”

  20. Patriciamc wrote:

    He would ignore the SC ruling on same-sex marriage? Regardless of what people believe about this issue, it’s now legal. So Huckabee thinks he’s above the law and can pick and choose what laws to obey?

    It’s a LAW of GOD or rules of Man situation.

  21. refugee wrote:

    “Is it our goal to make this a Christian nation? What does that actually mean?”

    Remember The Handmaid’s Tale?
    “Just like an Islamic Republic, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!”

  22. Loren Haas wrote:

    So what Huckabee is saying is that the people who used to support him and now go for Cruz never really cared about the issues beyond using the as fundraising props.

    And must be PUNISHED for it.
    With all the Power of the Christian State.

  23. Huckabee does have a point in saying that many of these “christian” organisations and their leaders can only survive in the style that they have become accustomed to by whipping their followers into frenzy after frenzy to milk them for their money. And the Huck(ster) used to be one of them.

  24. I recall the first time Huckabee got my full attention. There was a town with a Christian Church that invited Muslims to worship in their building until their mosque had been built. But Huckabee couldn’t understand that the kindness involved was a Christian act of love for the ‘strangers in their midst’.

    He didn’t ‘get it’. Not at all.
    I remembered that. It said more about him than anything else I’ve heard since. It was enough for me to get an insight into his character.

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mike-huckabee-infuriated-by-christian-church-allowing-muslims-to-pray-there/

  25. Gus wrote:

    Huckabee does have a point in saying that many of these “christian” organisations and their leaders can only survive in the style that they have become accustomed to by whipping their followers into frenzy after frenzy to milk them for their money. And the Huck(ster) used to be one of them.

    Used to be?
    Cruz is just way better at it – and I find it ironic because he comes across to me as a sleazy panderer

  26. @ Arce:
    Hogwash. I thought politics was to be kept out? No? Ok, then we find out Huckabee is as big if liars as the Clintons.

  27. One thing that this former governor of Arkansas said seems to me to be quite correct-that he understands the religious base that he came from. I think there have been and are quite a few like him, except in my day and at my location they were not SBC but rather IFB.

    Wait a minute, did I say ‘former governor of Arkansas?” That sounds familiar. Where have I run into that sort of situation before? Is there something about Arkansas? Surely not.

  28. Nancy2 wrote:

    I guess JFK should have passed laws requiring all US citizens to go to confession and say Rosary prayers?

    He knew better.
    JFK on the Supreme Court decision re: school prayer: “It is important that we support the Supreme Court decisions even when we may not agree with them. We have in this case a very easy remedy and that is to pray ourselves. We can pray a good deal more at home, we can attend our churches with a good deal more fidelity, and we can make the true meaning of prayer much more important in the lives of all of our children. That power is very much open to us.”

  29. @ Daisy:

    Yes to linking behavior and consequences, but the thing is that once you are pregnant it is inescapable that there are consequences of one kind or the other. There is no walking away from it as if it never happened. You either continue the pregnancy (a consequence) or you abort the pregnancy (a consequence). People do not need to be preaching consequences to women, we already know that.

    Now the problem of STDs may be a good thing to preach, but hetero women catch STDs from hetero (mostly) men so if we are going to preach STDs as a consequence the sermons must be directed at the men also.

    In our sex saturated culture women are held responsible either way since it is ‘d’ if you do and ‘d’ if you don’t. We have to get beyond that to something more realistic.

  30. @Dee

    We see what you are doing for your family and we continue to keep you in our prayers. God bless you.

  31. Good eye opening subject. So Huckabee is not exactly telling the truth. When I saw him associating with Kenneth Copeland that was enough for me. Actually l think he is only trying to cash in with his celebrity status.

  32. Is it our goal to make this a Christian nation? What does that actually mean?

    Replicating the DNA of Gothard and Josh Duggar via nationwide implementation of Gothard’s prison and school character curriculum? We’d have an entire nation of people making “mistakes” and doing “disgusting things” that the government could forgive.

  33. I lost any respect I had for Huckabee when he defended Josh Duggar. I believe all sins are forgivable (except for whatever the “unpardonable sin” is, and I believe that means a deliberate turning away from God and a hardening of heart towards Him . . . and even there, there’s always opportunity for repentance until death), but there are consequences for sin, and simply calling sin “a mistake” minimizes it. Especially in the case of sexual abuse.

    One way in which I may lean a bit Libertarian is that I don’t believe that private, consensual sex should be against the law, mainly because that law would be impossible to enforce. You’d have to put a camera in every bedroom in America in order to enforce that law. I do think sex in public places should be illegal just because of health and decency reasons, and I have moral problems with sex that isn’t between a man and a woman who are married to each other. As a Christian, I understand the Bible to teach that sex is *only* for a man and a woman who are married to each other. But do I want to make that against secular law? I’m not so sure. (The problem with my position on consensual sex is that it opens the door to prostitution, which I find abhorrent. One could make the argument, “Well, if they both agree to it, why shouldn’t he/she get paid?”)

    Sometimes I think that the Christian celebrity culture has gotten out of hand. Steven Curtis Chapman has a song that talks about the T-Shirt, the bumper sticker, the fish magnet, etc. but asks the question, “What about the change / What about the difference?” I’m bothered by the Christian kitsch (aka “Jesus Junk”), and even though I use Bible software and Bible apps, I wonder what I would do if all I had was a Bible.

    There are days that I’m convinced that if ISIS were to invade and we Christians had to meet in secret, we’d be so busy squabbling about the “right” way to do things that we would get nothing done!

  34. Patriciamc wrote:

    I never read the book,

    I just finished reading the book. It was quite depressing. It reminded me of some churches that I have written about.

    Let me recommend another book along the same line with a bit of the supernatural thrown in. It’s called Broken Angel. I really liked it and wrote a review of it in 2009.

    http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Angel-Novel-Sigmund-Brouwer/dp/0307457192/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1452783734&sr=8-2&keywords=Broken+Angel

  35. Christiane wrote:

    But Huckabee couldn’t understand that the kindness involved was a Christian act of love for the ‘strangers in their midst’.
    He didn’t ‘get it’. Not at all.

    I don’t get it. The building is not the church. The people are the church.

  36. @ Daisy:
    So we are not always disagreeing, I agree with your sentiments here and good for you.

    The abortion slogan over here is ‘a woman’s right to choose’, but by the time she is pregnant she has already made her choice. My better half in particular argues along these lines.

  37. To be fair, I have yet to see any political campaign that didn’t rely to some extent on fear mongering, anywhere on the spectrum.

  38. NJ wrote:

    To be fair, I have yet to see any political campaign that didn’t rely to some extent on fear mongering, anywhere on the spectrum.

    I agree.

  39. Dee, I understand your point about the building not being the Church. I still could not support what they did on the grounds of stewardship, and public witness. Do we really want to give the impression that it’s okay to facilitate the worship of a false god?

  40. Gus wrote:

    christian” organisations and their leaders can only survive in the style that they have become accustomed to by whipping their followers into frenzy after frenzy to milk them for their money. And the Huck(ster) used to be one of them.

    You are correct.

  41. Bill wrote:

    When I saw him associating with Kenneth Copeland that was enough for me.

    Now this one gives me nightmares. Did you know that Ken Copeland once described God as a physical being.

    “e describes God as someone “very much like you and me … A being that stands around six foot two inches or six foot three inches, that weighs around a couple of hundred pounds, and has a [hand] span nine inches across.”

    http://www.cprf.co.uk/articles/copeland.htm#.Vpe8GIvfaa4

  42. K.D. wrote:

    As my late grandfather would say…” Preachers…politicians, what’s the difference?”

    A wise man, indeed!

  43. dee wrote:

    I don’t get it. The building is not the church. The people are the church.

    The buildings seem to have taken on a sacred role in Evangelicalism. Maybe it is because of the amount of believers’ money that is appropriated toward the site and fixtures?? It is all very hypocritical given the amount of bashing I have heard in the Evangelical world toward cathedrals and fancy buildings . . .

  44. Politically speaking, Huckabee is a nonentity. He has no chance of ever getting the R nomination.

    Ted Cruz on the other hand…well, I never thought I’d say this, but I actually hope the liberal media go to town on this guy for his NAR connections.

  45. Eagle wrote:

    I was joking around on Twitter about how Die Hard is my favorite Christmas movie.

    Sad news about the death of Alan Rickman.

  46. Mike wrote:

    I think the Evangelical Right really picks and chooses which “Christian Policies” they want to make laws…..usually the things of a sexual manner that “others” do.

    I wonder how much support a candidate would get for implementing policies designed to curtail the immorality of greed. To clip the wings of the ‘free market’ so that the interests of those who already have more than they know what to do with trump (sorry!) those of ordinary, decent working people.

    I’m not happy with trying to make the bible line up with any particular party political program or economic system.

    As an observation, religion still plays a much more important role in political debate in the States than it does in Europe.

  47. @ Daisy:

    You do you. But I don’t think it would be right to say to ALL women, including non believers, that they must refrain from sex altogether in order to not get pregnant (with BC out of the picture because that’s how these people tend to think it). No way should abortion and BC be wiped out for the whole population, or I guarantee America will turn into Ceausescu’s Romania.

    Also, many women who get accidents/unwanted pregnancies and go for abortions are a) married and/or b) already have children. They simply can’t financially afford to have that baby. That this fact tends to avoid fundies like Huckabee boggles the mind – I highly doubt he’d support a notion that says married couples can’t have sex unless they’re trying for a baby. Would he support sterilisation, I wonder?

  48. Anne wrote:

    I highly doubt he’d support a notion that says married couples can’t have sex unless they’re trying for a baby.

    He might! Think Duggars, Phillips, etc.

  49. @ NJ:
    Muslims claim to worship the God of Abraham, who is also the God of the Jews, and the one Christians refer to as God the Father. They do not believe in the Trinity, which is generally accepted and misunderstood by Christians, although there are non-Trinitarian Christians, who believe that there is one God, and that Jesus was that one God. BTW, translating English ‘God’, German ‘Gott’, French ‘Dieu’, etc., into Arabic results in ‘Allah’. It was the Arabic word for God before Mohammed. Many Arabic Christians address their prayers to Allah. It is not inherently a different entity than ‘God’ as we understand that word.

  50. Anne wrote:

    Also, many women who get accidents/unwanted pregnancies and go for abortions are a) married and/or b) already have children. They simply can’t financially afford to have that baby.

    Uh huh. So they have to choose between putting the baby up for adoption or ‘eliminating’ it. That sounds somewhat similar to the famous parental rights case that Solomon tried.

  51. Yes, Muslims do claim to worship the God of Abraham, the one who nearly sacrificed his son Ishmael, not Isaac, according to them. And yes, the Arabic word for God does predate Islam, and some Christian Arabs use it, much to the annoyance to certain Muslim governments.

    “It is not inherently a different entity than ‘God’ as we understand that word.”

    Yes it is if…

    “They do not believe in the Trinity,”

    Correct.

    “… which is generally accepted and misunderstood by Christians,” ???

    “although there are non-Trinitarian Christians, who believe that there is one God, and that Jesus was that one God.”

    I am going with Scripture as interpreted by the overwhelming majority of the Church (including the ecumenical councils) for two millenia when I say that technically, those are not Christians but heretics. I realize that is an incredibly weighty conclusion, but there are certain doctrines that are nonnegotiable to the faith, and this is one of them.

  52. NJ wrote:

    I am going with Scripture as interpreted by the overwhelming majority of the Church (including the ecumenical councils) for two millenia when I say that technically, those are not Christians but heretics. I realize that is an incredibly weighty conclusion, but there are certain doctrines that are nonnegotiable to the faith, and this is one of them.

    I agree.

  53. @ okrapod:

    I don’t think I understand what you mean? I know the Solomon story but I’m just not sure how it links with my comment. I’m a very hungry Anne right now so I’m probably not thinking straight.

  54. @ Bridget:

    Wait what? Oh right, the Quiverfull mindset. I take it Huckabee is sympathetic at least, if he is pals with the Duggars.

  55. @ NJ:

    I am going with Scripture as interpreted by the overwhelming majority of the Church (including the ecumenical councils) for two millenia when I say that technically, those are not Christians but heretics.

    Funny how so many evangelicals fall all over themselves in support of Kim Davis who is Oneness.

  56. @ dee: I think I'll give Broken Angel a read. For post apocalyptic fiction though, I still think David Mitchell's Cloud Atlas is the best of the bunch. I thought the Wachowskis did a da#m (ed.) good screen adaptation too.

  57. BeenThereDoneThat wrote:

    Funny how so many evangelicals fall all over themselves in support of Kim Davis who is Oneness.

    Does that make her a heretic? Do the Oneness folks not believe in the Trinity. (I honestly don’t know.)

  58. There seems to be an idea out there that what the church teaches and what the law recognizes have to be the same thing. So if the church teaches a certain sexual ethic for example then that must be the law of the land. Conversely if the law permits something then the church must bring itself to agree with the law. I am not good with that.

    I am thinking that when the times comes that christian ethics on certain things clash with sharia at the supreme court level we may all be uncomfortable with the idea of the necessity of church and state agreement as a necessity.

  59. NJ wrote:

    I am going with Scripture as interpreted by the overwhelming majority of the Church (including the ecumenical councils) for two millenia when I say that technically, those are not Christians but heretics. I realize that is an incredibly weighty conclusion, but there are certain doctrines that are nonnegotiable to the faith, and this is one of them.

    They are in good company. Luther was considered a heretic as well.

  60. NJ wrote:

    Ted Cruz on the other hand…well, I never thought I’d say this, but I actually hope the liberal media go to town on this guy for his NAR connections.

    I know one news network that’ll stay mum (although they’d never be called ‘liberal’), but the others would be remiss not to bring up not only Cruz’s NAR connections, but his fringe fundamentalist / dominionist connections.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/post_10496_b_8544540.html

    I’ll also point out that Huckabee spoke at the same conference, and I recall seeing even less being made of his appearance there than was said of Cruz’s presence.

  61. Bridget wrote:

    Luther was considered a heretic as well.

    And Calvin. I am thinking that probably every group has been said to be heretical based on one idea or the other. That does not mean that there is no such thing as heresy. It only means that christians do not agree on what the criteria are for determining that some belief is beyond the limits.

    From my position I think that the creeds and the early ecumenical councils are a bottom line in the discussion. But then I am a member of a group that is ‘schismatic’ so there you go.

  62. Here is a new today – from Dave Brat the rep who beat Eric Cantor in the primary last year

    “He’s (Obama) using the Christian tradition and he’s trying to bring about compassion by bonking Republicans over the head with the Bible,”It’s almost a comedy routine on what compassion and love is.””

    “Our side, the conservative side, needs to reeducate its people that we own the entire tradition…”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dave-brat-conservatives-own-the-bible_5697536fe4b0ce4964234b53

    I find this both scary, appalling, and offensive as someone who now leans left politically

  63. Spoiler alert: As far as most politically motivated conservative evangelicals are concerned, it IS only about abortion and same-sex marriage.

  64. The thing that bothers me MOST, no matter which side is doing it, is this kind of thing: Huckabee runs for the Office of the President, which has as its sole oath the upholding of the Constitution; and as part of the campaign to win that office, talks about how he will *ignore* the law.

    He can get congress to introduce a bill, to make a law, but he can’t ignore the law. I know there is some fuzziness on the same-sex marriage business, because I’m not sure that the Supreme Court itself acted within its separated and stated powers…

    I’ve had it up to here with Executive Orders outside the separated and stated powers of the Office of the President. And with the law-by-fiat of the Supreme Court. So far, we still have a democratic republic, with representative government, of, by and for the People, and my back is up on this kind of power grab, whether or not I agree with the intended result.

    And a nation can’t be Christian. Only people can.

  65. On the topic of degrees….a self-proclaimed “End Times” expert spoke on a Sunday night at my parents church a few years back…..The guy used Dr. in his title, as well as the title of “Publisher” of some bogus Jerusalem newspaper. I was curious so I checked him out, he had a PhD from Louisiana Baptist University a non-accredited school…..which is considered a diploma mill, where several graduates have started their own schools.

    Anyway, this guy’s gig was speaking at churches as an opportunity to hawk his books and DVDs in the lobby before and after the service (with travel paid for), and many Evangelicals love conjecturing on the End Times

    My brother and I brought this up to my dad, who was concerned and emailed the head pastor…..and herein is the problem – no vetting was done at all…..because he had the PhD from a seminary…..he must good and biblical – it took me all of 10 minutes to see what he was about

  66. Ethan wrote:

    Spoiler alert: As far as most politically motivated conservative evangelicals are concerned, it IS only about abortion and same-sex marriage.

    Wait, what else is there?

  67. I have never been a Huckabee fan in the Presidential contest.

    He has done incredible things with his life, given where he started and his opportunities. He was able to become Governor of his home state, and he landed a TV show and made fame there. He lost a bunch of weight at one time.

    He has promoted good things in the public arena, generally.

    But all of the things that you have identified in this post are the things that made me feel that he was not my candidate back when he emerged in 2008.

    His statements about his degrees are not untrue, but they are not clear, and thus, can mislead. I knew that he did not graduate from seminary back in 2012. That came out back then.

    He has a tendency to be unclear about a lot of things, and he has a “used car salesman” type approach and appeal. That causes me to have distrust.

    His rise as a candidate was not due to his own doing. He was helped by the DNC and their adjunct promotional arm – ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN.

    Back in 2008, it was fairly well admitted that the order in the DNC was “Do not touch Huckabee.” They saw him as easily beatable in the general election, but his real value was to siphoned off votes from electable moderates and other conservatives in the race at that time, which kept a more electable Republican from winning the nomination in 2008. Thompson, Guliani and others (can’t remember who all ran) would have made much more formidable candidates, but there was Huckabee, a nobody, with nothing but laudatory press coverage. This was all part of a psy-ops strategy that the Dems do so well. Getting Perot into the 1992 Race was classic, with star roles played by Mario Cuomo and Larry King. Perot must have been on King’s show 100 times in 1991, with guys like King and Cuomo praising Perot, that’s all it took.

    So it was with Huckabee in 2008. You run nothing but positive stories about him, no negative stories, and Huckabee’s life and values easily outmatched guys like Thompson, Guiliani and others. Huckabee won the Iowa caucus that year, if I remember correctly.

    And of course the GOP ended up with a guy that looked like he was 80 years old who had conservative draw or base and thus, no enthusiasm.

    But the minute Huckabee filled his purpose, he was done. He got a show on Fox, but that 2008 campaign was as high as he got.

    The next cycle, 2012, he did not poll nearly as well because he was not treated with a “hands off” policy by the DNC and the media.

    I believe that Huckabee is a sincere Christian. But I have never been impressed with his governing philosophy or sense of things.

    I know Christians in Arkansas who were not impressed with his performance as Governor. He was really cozy with the teachers unions. He economic policy is a mish-mash. He is not a free market kind of guy. He is for economic central planning on issues that he cares about. He did an awful thing in connection with the release or granting of parole of serial rapist in his state. SBC conservatives did not even support him as their candidate (e.g. Paul Pressler, Richard Land and others).

    Just incoherence, if you ask me.

  68. Huckabee in my view feels able to bash evangelicals because he is in fact a fundamentalist…He was done when he minimized Josh Duggar’s abusive behavior because it was only towards young girls. I don’t recall him saying so much about the Ashley Madison thing. His idea of Christianity is skewy and many evangelicals see through his doublespeak. And honestly, although Christianity is a big deal in the US, there are a lot of different religions and beliefs here. It’s really quite narcissistic of him to insist he would be able to implement certain policies that contradict freedom of religion and conscience, and it’s hypocrisy when he supports abusers over victims. People are smarter than that. He is responsible for his own demise, and maybe he could more humbly acknowledge God as sovereign. I sense much fear in him-and his party. There really isn’t a good center-right option in the US right now. It’s very polarized.

  69. I actually liked Huckabee for a while until the whole Duggar debacle broke. Then I lost serious respect for him in how he handled that. It goes even further downhill the more I learn like the whole dishonesty regarding his theological credentials. Disappointing. And too bad that he didn’t say something in solidarity with victims re:Duggar situations.

  70. In my view, this man, a Nobel prize winning economist, who was Jewish, understood far more about what it means “to do unto others …” than Mr. Huckabee.

    Despite the Christian trappings, Huckabee, it seems to me, would be much quicker to use force on people to achieve his ultimate objective.

    https://youtu.be/DYeYPcougmA

  71. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    It’s a LAW of GOD or rules of Man situation.

    Yeah, and if the law Ken wrote:

    As an observation, religion still plays a much more important role in political debate in the States than it does in Europe.

    Some of the first groups of white people to settle the US were religious groups, so religion is still part of our national DNA.

  72. Huckabee, schmuckabee…
    Hillary, Billary…

    “If elections were that effective, they’d be illegal.”
    ~ Emma Goldman ~

  73. @ NJ:
    I am Catholic and I accept the ‘Abrahamic Faiths’ as believing in the Creator God, being monotheistic (one God), and acknowledging Abraham as their patriarch . . .

    this is not to say there are not differences, which of course there are,
    but the people of my faith are taught to RESPECT the faith of others and not to have contempt for them . . . my take on the response of Huckabee was to evaluate his contempt for what it was in the light of his absence of charity towards those Muslim people and his lack of understanding about the INTENSELY Christian witness of helping those who are the strangers in our midst . . .

    those Muslims can remember two things:
    1. the generous kindness of those Christian ministers who helped them when they first came to town
    2. the mean-spirited self-righteous response of a politician speaking to his like-minded base

    Which memory serves as a witness to Our Lord?
    Which memory brings honor to the faith that is commanded to help those who sojourn as strangers in our land?
    Which memory would be the one that ISIS could use for recruiting?

    we know the answers, don’t we?

  74. Which organizations is Huckabee is trying to rescue? Family Research Council? The American Family Association? How nice of him.

    Hey, Mike, we don’t think hate groups accurately represent Christianity, so don’t do us any more favors.

  75. @ Mike:

    I attended an evangelical Baptist church years ago. The community I lived in, in the rural South, had the highest teen pregnancy rate in the state, and also had a burgeoning problem with sexually transmitted diseases among the young, including HIV. The culturally correct view that in a public school there should be no education about sexually transmitted diseases or oral contraception. Youth should be taught abstinence only. I also remember it was a politically correct view that we boycott Hillstreet Blues. I liked this show. My nice friends who were handing out petitions in church thought it was a sinful show. There were women teaching men in the church. The pastor felt he had to do the politically correct thing and ban women from teaching men. The women were great teachers in my view. i was in a bastion of the religious right and didn’t have a clue. They were doing what they thought was culturally correct, at the expense of what was well reasoned or relevant.
    For example, if I had a teenager, I would want my child to be abstinent, but if they chose to be sexually active, I wouldn’t wish them to have a child out of wedlock because they didn’t have access to contraception, nor develop HIV because they didn’t know about protected sex. Politically or culturally correct is not only the domain of the left.

  76. I think Franklin Graham said it best for me.

    We are electing a Commander in Chief…

    Not a Pastor in Chief.

    I have no idea why Christian leaders can not come clean and be upfront about a simple thing as their education. To me one shift of the truth just leads to another. It just doesn’t stop there. I literately doubt everyone in a church leadership position that claims to have a doctorate as being suspect. I have seen husband and wives pastoral teams BOTH have PhD’s AND never mention where they obtained them.

    My son who is getting his PhD in a science, after nine years of his life and 1000’s of hours of research and defense of his published papers knows where his professor went to school and probably his professor’s name. Those folks track their professor tree like something from ancestry.com.

  77. @ Mark:
    I was brought up in similar Baptist church albeit in the SF Bay Area, and went to Christian School – so I have seen it 1st hand (and 2 of my 3 siblings hold those views). Even in a Christian school it was going on, and we were only taught abstinence (70s). In Christian circles this leads to kids getting married too young and not mature enough, and is very difficult (from my own experience), and marrying young MAY be why Evangelicals have high divorce rates too.

    While I still find those views very short-sighted and not the best approach – I understand there is the fear of appearing to condone it. I taught my grown boys that it is best to wait, but to be safe (and they were very aware of the pitfalls of their parents marrying young – we are divorced, and while I have great kids out of -the marriage was not only “doing the right thing” it was also based on lies and never really healthy – a lot to do with lack of maturity

  78. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    refugee wrote:

    “Is it our goal to make this a Christian nation? What does that actually mean?”

    Remember The Handmaid’s Tale?
    “Just like an Islamic Republic, Except CHRISTIAN(TM)!”

    I was thinking about The Handmaid’s Tale as I read the responces here.

  79. Ken wrote:

    Eagle wrote:

    I was joking around on Twitter about how Die Hard is my favorite Christmas movie.

    Sad news about the death of Alan Rickman.

    Indeed. He was a superb actor. The arts are poorer for his loss.

  80. okrapod wrote:

    There seems to be an idea out there that what the church teaches and what the law recognizes have to be the same thing. So if the church teaches a certain sexual ethic for example then that must be the law of the land. Conversely if the law permits something then the church must bring itself to agree with the law. I am not good with that.
    Agreed.

    I am thinking that when the times comes that christian ethics on certain things clash with sharia at the supreme court level we may all be uncomfortable with the idea of the necessity of church and state agreement as a necessity.

  81. One of the reasons I became a Done is because of the proliferation of politics in the church. I’m not enamored of either party and it infuriates me to be told God wants us to be Republicans. I’m appalled at the GOP cast of characters this time, not because of political beliefs per se, but because there are so many dominionists on the ticket. I don’t want someone else’s theology running the country. And whose version of Christianity will it be: pentecostal? Patriarchal? Shepherding? Liturgical? Ted Cruz’ father believes wealth should be redistributed from non believers to Christians. Marco Rubio, Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee are all dominionists. I’ve even heard the incredible statement that the constitution only applies to Christians.

    As to Mike Huckabee, he is not only a liar but a first class sheister selling “cancer curing” pills and potions on the internet. Perhaps that makes him a better politician, but not a better Christian.

  82. Muff Potter wrote:

    For post apocalyptic fiction though, I still think David Mitchell’s Cloud Atlas is the best of the bunch. I thought the Wachowskis did a da#m (ed.) good screen adaptation too.

    ^^ That!

  83. As to the issue of ‘dissecting christian trends’ you all might be interested in following what is going on right now in the anglican communion. The episcopal church has been demoted to observer status for a suspension period of three years to give it time to repent of its accommodation of gay marriage by instituting modified rites to allow for gay marriage. The canadians have only been put on notice so to speak since they have not yet voted to allow gay marriage, but apparently they do have some blessing of gay couples.

    It is interesting to hear the position of the African churches on this issue, at least partially impacted by the fact that they live in muslim dominated areas. Enough said about that, but you all may find it interesting.

    This issue will be dealt with in the US by individuals (to stay or leave) and by congregations (to stay or leave) and by dioceses (to stay or leave.) Quite a bit of leaving has been done already as we all know. The catholic church has offered leaving options for episcopal churches and clergy, but there has not been a huge wave of people to take them up on the offer. We will see. But this is a good way to watch the issues play out of liberal vs conservative and of church vs state.

  84. Niteowl wrote:

    I’ve even heard the incredible statement that the constitution only applies to Christians.

    One source of that idea is David Barton. If you see any politician align themselves with him (*cough* Ted Cruz *cough*), run away.
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2011/04/18/david-barton-pluralism-not-the-goal-of-the-first-amendment/

    okrapod wrote:

    As to the issue of ‘dissecting christian trends’ you all might be interested in following what is going on right now in the anglican communion. The episcopal church has been demoted to observer status for a suspension period of three years to give it time to repent of its accommodation of gay marriage by instituting modified rites to allow for gay marriage. The canadians have only been put on notice so to speak since they have not yet voted to allow gay marriage, but apparently they do have some blessing of gay couples.
    It is interesting to hear the position of the African churches on this issue, at least partially impacted by the fact that they live in muslim dominated areas. Enough said about that, but you all may find it interesting.

    Some of the bishops on the conservative side have called for the death of LGBT people, so even if TECUSA were to shift to a position that were conservative by American standards, I’m not sure it’d do much good to repair relations with certain other parts of the Anglican communion. But I digress…

  85. Did you know that Mike Huckabee attended Bill Gothard’s Basic Life Seminar? He was been so supportive of Gothard’s methods that he decided to implement some of these teachings in government programs but in a stealth sort of way while he was governor. These teachings would be stripped of overt religious references.

    This sounds almost exactly like Narconon, which is Scientology’s drug treatment program/front group. It claims to have no religious elements, but its “counselling” is nothing more than Scientology training routines, hardly altered at all. And since it carries Hubbard’s DNA, its history is filled with lies, abuses and utter incompetence. (I’ve read recently, though, that Narconon is restructuring to be more “religious” in nature, in order to shield its abuses from criminal and civil law.)

    I shudder to think what abuses Huckabee’s “secularized Gothardism” would lead to… and all in Jesus’ name…

  86. Arce wrote:

    Huckabee worries me less than Cruz. Cruz is a dominionist. A dominionist is one who believes we should be living under OT law with Christians in charge and all others excluded from government.

    I saw a piece on him on the Japanese news just a few mornings ago. He was speaking at some church (in Iowa, I think) and talking about how he wanted to restore that “shining city on a hill”. And he pointed to the American flag. In a church.

    I felt a little nauseous.

  87. Serving Kids In Japan wrote:

    And he pointed to the American flag. In a church.

    It used to be fairly common in smaller baptist churches to have two flags, one american flag and one christian flag, commonly one to the right and one to the left of the rear row of the choir, the choir itself being situated in the front of the church. I am not too sure of the politics behind that or if it was just patriotism or perhaps a reminder that living out christianity extended beyond Sunday morning, but it was not outright dominionism as far as I know. Now I am thinking that such a thing might well be dominionism; times change.

  88. I just counted 9 books on the Internet by the so called preacher but I’m sure there are more. It’s all about the money folks.Its just as simple as that.These so called holy joe’s have turned religion into a big business and I personally think about 95 percent of these guys and gals are in it for the almighty dollar.We gullible sheep cut off the cash flow and then we will see who are the wolves and who aren’t.

  89. okrapod wrote:

    Serving Kids In Japan wrote:
    And he pointed to the American flag. In a church.
    It used to be fairly common in smaller baptist churches to have two flags, one american flag and one christian flag, commonly one to the right and one to the left of the rear row of the choir, the choir itself being situated in the front of the church. I am not too sure of the politics behind that or if it was just patriotism or perhaps a reminder that living out christianity extended beyond Sunday morning, but it was not outright dominionism as far as I know. Now I am thinking that such a thing might well be dominionism; times change.

    Every SBC Church I know of in Texas has an American and a Christian flag on the podium..Makes you wonder what they are worshiping?

  90. K.D. wrote:

    Every SBC Church I know of in Texas has an American and a Christian flag on the podium.?

    Kentucky, too.

  91. okrapod wrote:

    The episcopal church has been demoted to observer status for a suspension period of three years to give it time to repent of its accommodation of gay marriage

    But, if a pastor, the elders, or the deacons are pedophiles or adulterers, all is forgiven or ignored …. and life goes on.

  92. Nancy2 wrote:

    But, if a pastor, the elders, or the deacons are pedophiles or adulterers, all is forgiven or ignored …. and life goes on.

    Well, not exactly, when it comes to sexual abuse of minors or adultery. They told us in confirmation class that sexual immorality is one of the few things that will bring down a priest and get him removed from his post.

    The thing about TEC, however, is the ongoing issue of just what exactly constitutes sexual immorality. Being an american I have to say that this sounds very familiar and very american.

  93. K.D. wrote:

    Every SBC Church I know of in Texas has an American and a Christian flag on the podium..Makes you wonder what they are worshiping?

    Sounds like it is more common and they have moved the flags forward. That may be indicative of something.

  94. @ Josh:

    I have read that the bishops of six african countries came to the table indicating that they planned to walk out if their concerns were not addressed. Somebody at my house saw in some article (which I cannot find) that the africans said that they lived in predominately muslim countries and that for their churches to waver one bit on homosexuality would be a matter of actual life or death for them. So, I suspect that you may be correct and american conservative standards would not suffice for their needs.

    And it is also true that the US has been the spear point in the liberal charge in sexual and gender matters in the anglican communion. Only a few of the provinces in the communion have taken similar positions in this. We are the ‘bad boys’ in this dust up. It seems to me (and I am no insider but just from what I read) that TEC may want to stick with the anglican communion but perhaps they do not want it bad enough to shift to a more conservative stance. Perhaps the africans would be safer if either they left or we left. Bishop Curry, the current presiding bishop was formerly bishop of our diocese, and he is very pro-gay marriage. I foresee further disruptions without a miracle or two.

    And Josh, it will impact my extended family since we are split on the issue, and I personally do not know what I will do if I have to choose sides over something that our local congregation does. Deja vu the civil war and what it did to families.

  95. I am most disturbed that Huckabee’s political aspirations appear to be a bid to be KING. He doesn’t seem to grasp the balance and limitation of powers in the US government. He seems to be under the impression that the president gets to wave his magic wand and change huge swaths of our society overnight. That isn’t, thankfully, how the government works. His ignorance and presumption both are very troubling.

  96. Patriciamc wrote:

    Another issue is his son’s killing a dog and whether or not Huckabee interfered in the investigation.

    That’s all water under the bridge, the kid is after all just a ‘poor sinner’. If on the other hand he gets caught having sex with his girlfriend, the poo-poo will hit the fan.

  97. Muff Potter wrote:

    That’s all water under the bridge, the kid is after all just a ‘poor sinner’. If on the other hand he gets caught having sex with his girlfriend, the poo-poo will hit the fan.

    There may be a slight smattering of poo on the fan, but that’s a momentary indiscretion. Now, if he gets caught with his boyfriend, it’s all over (duck for cover and hold your nose, we’re going to be cleaning that poo out of the furniture for ages!).

  98. @ Josh:

    HA! Forgot about that one, that’s a big true true. His hash will be settled, his goose cooked, and he’ll never again be allowed full enfranchisement in whatever fundagelical sect he’s in.

  99. @ okrapod:
    Good to see you, okrapod. Just felt prompted to say that while reading your comments, can’t say why. Thanks for the way you have of distilling and clarifying.

    Dee, am praying for you and your family.

  100. Deebs –

    Anyone know how Gram3 is doing? Haven’t seen her voice for awhile. I hope all is well with her and her household.

  101. dee wrote:

    Bill wrote:

    When I saw him associating with Kenneth Copeland that was enough for me.

    Now this one gives me nightmares. Did you know that Ken Copeland once described God as a physical being.

    “e describes God as someone “very much like you and me … A being that stands around six foot two inches or six foot three inches, that weighs around a couple of hundred pounds, and has a [hand] span nine inches across.”

    http://www.cprf.co.uk/articles/copeland.htm#.Vpe8GIvfaa4

    Very Mormon of him.

  102. okrapod wrote:

    There seems to be an idea out there that what the church teaches and what the law recognizes have to be the same thing. So if the church teaches a certain sexual ethic for example then that must be the law of the land. Conversely if the law permits something then the church must bring itself to agree with the law. I am not good with that.

    I am thinking that when the times comes that christian ethics on certain things clash with sharia at the supreme court level we may all be uncomfortable with the idea of the necessity of church and state agreement as a necessity.

    Isn’t that sort of what Calvin enforced in Geneva? The leaders in our former church idolized Calvin and his take on “biblical” doctrine.

  103. refugee wrote:

    Isn’t that sort of what Calvin enforced in Geneva?

    I don’t know much about Calvin outside of some Wiki article, but from some comments here in the past I think your are probably correct.

  104. Ken wrote:

    The abortion slogan over here is ‘a woman’s right to choose’, but by the time she is pregnant she has already made her choice. My better half in particular argues along these lines.

    Really? Really? She chose? REALLY?

    There are women in Africa who have HIV today because they were told by their church leaders not to deny sex to their husbands and not to tell their husbands to use condoms. Why, and their husbands weren’t paying attention or just didn’t care when they were having sex with other women or other men who were infected with HIV.

    Now think very, very hard and ask yourself if there aren’t some circumstances where women get pregnant where they didn’t want to be pregnant but had no choice to turn their husbands down for sex. I can think of a few.

    It is not as black and white as you make it. And it infuriates me to hear this kind of flat-out nonsense of “choice” when we know darn good and well that more than a few women have been deprived of choice in the name of submission to their husbands.

  105. @ mirele:

    Yep, and again I say yep. In fact, either nature or the creator or both seem to have taken enough ‘choice’ out of the whole sex and reproduction picture to ensure that there are pregnancies sometimes even under the worst of circumstances. I can see where this lack of ‘choice’ has survival value for threatened populations, but it can also cause a lot of problems if not managed well.

  106. @ okrapod:
    Those African churches have only become upset about this in recent years. It is a new thing, and largely fueled by … Americand.

    It is also explicitly counter to the position of Desmond Tutu and other gormer bishops from various parts of Africa.

  107. @ okrapod:
    That biz about Muslims is them making things up. I am not joking or meaning to be provocative. They’re throwing non-starters out there as supposed facts. Especially the Nigerians. +Peter Akinola used to hint around that is was fine for xtians to kill Muslims, snd a brew of fundy-Pentecostalism has bern a major thing in Nigetia for 20+ years now. Which sayd, among other things, that LGBT people are bad news.

  108. @ okrapod:
    Canada has had same-sex marriage for 10+ years now. Their Supreme Court put it in place, as here.

    It’s not about the US per sd, and if these people sanctioned TEC, they should have sanctioned Canada ages ago. But they didn’t, because it really wouldn’t be the blow that this is.

    Would have bern better for their countries to politely leave the AC, I’m thinking. This is *the* moment of the decisive split in the AC, and i wonder if they speak for the people in the pews (sll of them).

    The not-so-secret “secret” is that there have bern obviously gay men in the CofE and TEC (and ptobably everywhere else) for a LONG time. But they weren’t singled out on the basis of their sexual orientation. The Oxford Movement was verymuch a part of that; true also of many fervent Anglo-Catholics outside of the UK as well.

  109. @ okrapod:
    Nigeria, Uganda et. al. are NOT “predominantly Muslim countries.” I don’t get the claims. If anything, charismatic fervor is quite intense in both places, and a lot of US $$$ and influence, from the NAR, from people like Holocaust revisionist Scott Lively, the Fellowship (aka the Family), etc., has been going on for a long time now. Some of what I’m saying is specific to Uganda, but not solely there (sadly).

  110. @ numo:
    Forgot to say tha Lively wrote a book called The Pink Swastika. He claims that the leading members of the German fascist political party were gay; also that gay people planned and carried out the Holocaust. Lively used to be part of Exodus Internationsl, snd i 1st came across excerpts from his book on the Ecodus US web site in yhe late 1990s. They were removed a couple of years later. I actually knew people who believed in his views. They ran an Exodus affiliate gor many years and are both deceased.

  111. Ken wrote:

    The abortion slogan over here is ‘a woman’s right to choose’, but by the time she is pregnant she has already made her choice.

    Especially if the pregnancy is life threatening for the woman, or if the pregnancy is a result of rape.
    Right?

  112. Copeland represents everything that can be bad about said about ministers. The guy and his lovely wife are absolutely the most nauseating celebrity types around as far as I am concerned.I forget now why Huckabee appeared but it was probably to promote one of his books.I would not trust this guy as far as I could throw him.

  113. nmgirl wrote:

    I wonder what the United Methodist Church in the USA is going to do about this same issue.

    The last I heard it was on the 2016 agenda to be again discussed.

  114. Huckabee also had this to say about Historical Revisionist and Theocrat David Barton, “I just wish that every single young person in America would be able to be under his tutelage and understand something about who we really are as a nation. I almost wish that there would be something like a simultaneous telecast and all Americans would be forced, forced — at gun point no less — to listen to every David Barton message. And I think our country would be better for it. I wish it’d happen.”
    .
    Niteowl was also right on the Dominionist front. Although James Robison was very supportive of Huckabee in the past,at the moment, Gateway’s Robison and Robert Morris are supporting Ted Cruz. Cruz claims to be SBC but he was raised a full blown Dominionist Pentecostal and his Presidential Candidacy logo is a Pentecostal flame with the stars and stripes superimposed on it. It doesn’t get much more Theocratic/Dominionist than that.
    .
    Robison emceed the big secret Wilks Bros two day rally in Cisco, TX the last week of December. the Wilks brothers are billionaire frackers who are funding all kinds of right wing causes. As Josh pointed out, Barton is inextricably linked to Cruz. As the head of Ted Cruz’ Wilks Bros funded super PAC, David Barton co-hosted that secret meeting. Over 200 Evangelical leaders came out for that with 100 more Christian governmental leaders. Dominionism and turning America into a Theocracy isn’t some fringe theory. It is happening right before our eyes. Getting rid of Huckabee only makes it easier for Cruz to stand out with his hard-line Theocratic statements. James Dobson and John Hagee have thrown their considerable endorsements behind Ted Cruz.
    .
    And as for the more neutral sounding Franklin Graham that Stacy mentioned – Gateway has their fingers in that pie as well. Graham was a last minute add on to the GW Pastors conference in Oct 2015 and now Gateway has given Graham unrestricted use of their Media Chief and his department to run his “Decision America Tour”. Although Graham is claiming not to represent a candidate nor a party, he is partnering with a Cruz backing mega. Gateway is seeking to be a major player in this election. And if they succeed it could be the worst thing that could happen to the RNC.
    .
    BTW, The Wilks are members of The Assembly of Yahwey 7th Day Church. They keep the Jewish traditions and holidays (including keeping the Sabbath on Saturdays) and support the OT teachings. Like David Barton they want the Bible taught in every single public school in America. They’ll have to argue over whether it’s the Wilks’ Restoration Bible or Barton and Gateway’s The Message, but it is coming. Please check out The Black Robe Regiment video on the bottom of the first page of their website https://www.halleluyah.org/about/ Barton and Glenn Beck are also huge supporters of this. Supporters of this movement want preachers and congregants to take up arms against their governments in order to effect a Theocracy. This isn’t a joke folks. Scary times.

  115. Bill wrote:

    I would not trust this guy as far as I could throw him.

    Not as far as I could kick a Huey helicopter with one foot.

  116. @ Q:
    Wow! What a comment (question?)!! Reminds of the classic question–“Have you stopped beating your wife–yes or no?”

  117. Bill wrote:

    Copeland represents everything that can be bad about said about ministers. The guy and his lovely wife are absolutely the most nauseating celebrity types around as far as I am concerned.I forget now why Huckabee appeared but it was probably to promote one of his books.I would not trust this guy as far as I could throw him.

    Copeland’s the kind of guy who would have a version of the New Testament published with a facsimile of his own hand-written notes on the pages. I am not lying–just search for “Kenneth Copeland Personal Notes New Testament.”

  118. K.D. wrote:

    Every SBC Church I know of in Texas has an American and a Christian flag on the podium..Makes you wonder what they are worshiping?

    This was a controversy here some years ago and one person from the church I had attended surveyed upwards of 50 churches in the area and all but five displayed the flag and this is a college town with politics well to the left of average.

    There is a strict protocol to follow when the flag is displayed and the back of the room is not fitting, it has to be up front to the audience left. If that can’t be done then don’t display it. I would be more troubled by my reference to those in the church as an audience than whether there is a flag present. I recall from some research back then that there was an odd history behind a “Christian flag” and I would recommend removing it instead. If the Christian flag is displayed it would by protocol be subservient to the US flag which would be a problem. On the other hand the cross in a typical church is displayed high above any flag which nicely represents the two are separate ideas as you cannot display any flag higher than the US flag.

    So I would ask that people don’t get too bent out of shape over display of the flag. I’m no flag waver, I didn’t serve in the military, luckily a high draft number in the waning years of the Vietnam war, but I respect those who served and thought it was unnecessary the grief that was caused when the staff at the church I have since left removed it by fiat. Those upset were not worshiping the US flag, they weren’t placing it as more important, they were simply dedicated believers with a respect for their country.

    If you start a new church you can decide whether or not to display the flag but if it is already there please seriously consider if it is important to stir up a hornets nest by removing it. Even if you disagree with it in principle, take into account how many will treat it as a sign of deep disrespect.

  119. @ mirele:
    I believe you. The ego involved is staggering. Imo, it’s about as close to the idolatry described in the OT/NT as it gets these days.

  120. nmgirl wrote:

    @ okrapod:
    I wonder what the United Methodist Church in the USA is going to do about this same issue.

    I just hope we don’t have a big split…..

  121. @ Bill M:
    When I was young and really more fundamentalist the American flag in church used to bother me, now it doesn’t. i am patriotic and I don’t believe patriotism collides with Christianity. And this is the basic question I have whether or not there should be an American flag in church.

  122. Bill M wrote:

    If you start a new church you can decide whether or not to display the flag but if it is already there please seriously consider if it is important to stir up a hornets nest by removing it. Even if you disagree with it in principle, take into account how many will treat it as a sign of deep disrespect.

    Yes this! Truth be told? I get sooo tired of the poor ‘offended’, world revolves around me trendy types who get their boxers and panties in a dither over old glory displayed in a church. Live and let live is a lost art these days. I think we need to relearn it.

  123. Muff Potter wrote:

    Yes this! Truth be told? I get sooo tired of the poor ‘offended’, world revolves around me trendy types who get their boxers and panties in a dither over old glory displayed in a church. Live and let live is a lost art these days. I think we need to relearn it.

    If the church is not of this world, then why are you displaying the symbols of worldly power in the sanctuary? I’d be curious to find out if this is the case in other countries (i.e., national flags displayed in British, French, Canadian, etc. churches) or if it’s a peculiar outgrowth of American patriotism, which has settled on to a flag fetish.

  124. mirele wrote:

    If the church is not of this world,

    I was with you till the last remark. The “flag fetish” reference is needlessly crass and divisive, dial down the righteousness.

  125. Bill M wrote:

    dial down the righteousness.

    Sorry, I should have said dial up the care and concern. A gentleman I once knew, since passed away, was a professor at the local university. In France in the winter of ’44 he was out on patrol with his unit and was the only one that came back alive. He was reassigned to another company of men that later liberated one of the death camps. I don’t understand all that went into his attitude towards the flag and didn’t agree with some of it, but it would be a huge disservice to make a cartoon out of people by referring to their values as a fetish.

  126. Arce wrote:

    Cruz is a dominionist. A dominionist is one who believes we should be living under OT law with Christians in charge and all others excluded from government.

    No, he isn’t.

  127. @ Nicholas:

    Cruz and Rubio both have ties to the dominionists. And Barton in the Cruz camp?? All the republicans candidates are scary to me.

  128. My apologies to all for not being more clear.

    When @ I commented earlier about Cruz stumping in a church, what bewildered me wasn’t so much the presence of the U.S. flag there. It was the way Cruz talked about America being the “great city on the hill”. Acting as though the U.S. is the only hope for world, instead of Jesus.

    I have no problem with a little patriotism, in the right measure. I remember once when Canada Day (July 1st) fell on a Sunday, and we sang the national anthem in church. It was included in the hymnal, and the 4th verse takes the form of a prayer, so it didn’t feel so much out of place. But Cruz’s behaviour in that speech… something just felt so wrong. Like idolatry masquerading as patriotism. If he is a Dominionist, it sure wouldn’t surprise me.

  129. @ mirele:
    I looked into this a year or so ago, and… in some regions of the US, German immigrant congregations began displaying the flag during WWI, because they were being targeted by a lot of not-so-nice people. I’ve seen the same with US flag pins being worn by Arab and Iranian immigrants in the D.C. area, post-9/11.

    I don’t like seeing flags in sanctuaries myself, but I’m not sure that the ruckus that would be stirred up over removing flags that hsve bern in sanctuaries since the ‘teens or 1940s would be worth going through. Otoh, when coupled with nativist sentiments – yikes!!!

  130. @ Bill M:

    Ditto here. My father survived the air war over Germany in 1944. I doubt very seriously that the God who stretched out the heavens like a cloak and hung the Earth on nothing is all that concerned with a tribal talisman or two in places of worship. In my opinion, a God with that kind of power is far removed from petty jealousy. But on the other hand, and as one commenter has pointed out, there were nativist nitwits in the past and even some now who have used the flag to fuel a pathological zenophobia. Not so with the vast majority of us who revere the stars and stripes as a symbol of what we stand for.

  131. Bridget wrote:

    Cruz and Rubio both have ties to the dominionists. And Barton in the Cruz camp?? All the republicans candidates are scary to me.

    All the Democratic candidates are scary to me.

  132. Muff Potter wrote:

    I doubt very seriously that the God who stretched out the heavens like a cloak and hung the Earth on nothing is all that concerned with a tribal talisman or two in places of worship. In my opinion, a God with that kind of power is far removed from petty jealousy.

    Thanks for the corroboration. I felt I was over reacting myself as I was reliving an incident from some years ago where some people’s concerns were being pushed aside and their motives mis-characterized. Recently Tim Fall posted a something reminding me we are not called to tolerate each other but to love each other.

    I like how you characterized it as a tribal talisman. I would take the flip side as you did and wonder how some missionaries treat such things as a talisman, would they overlook the flag here and would forbid the talisman there? Similarly there are those here who would allow the talisman there but not here. It all sounds tribal.

  133. @ Muff Potter:
    I will be honest; I have never felt comfortable with the flag as anything other than a historical relic of both the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. It’s a combination of being young at the height of “escalation” during Vietnam, plus noticing on my own how the Pledge of Allegiance was manifestly untrue for a whole lot of people – this before and after Dr. King was murdered. (Also Medgar Evers and many other Civil Rights activists.)

    Personally, I feel uncomfortable when people start a lot of flag-waving. During the Vietnam era, there was a lot of anger behind some displays of the flag, and Falwell’s “Old Time Gospel Hour” (after he and others started the so-called Moral Majority in the 70s) was just absolutely wallpapered with US flags, from the opening credits forward. That was the beginning of obvious conflation of certain kinds of fundy/evangelical religion with politics in a way that became obvious during the early-mid 80s.

    In other words, I don’t mind it in a color guard, or on Memorial Day, or Veterans Day (though I wish we would use the term Remembrance Day, as in Canada and the UK, since I think it is more fitting… am just old enough to recall when it was still called Armistice Day, actually). I do not mind it at all in cemeteries, in funerals for people who were in the military, and even in classrooms, so long as it’s not huge and a big symbol of whatever. (Which it is in some kinds of schools and in certain circles.) Would I rather see it in places where the stars and bars flies now? You betcha.

    Equally, do I think we go overboard with it at times? Yes. Our practically continuous involvement in conflicts since WWII comes to mind, and with that, what our flags and flag-waving might mean to people whose countries have been invaded, or who have suffered at our hands.

    Just my .02; I don’t expect anyone else to accept or agree with what I have just said.

    As an aside: I remember reading, back in the 70s, a short book by a German woman who had grown up during WWII and married a G.I. afterwards. She was here, at a church service, when the choir and congregation burst into “Glorious things of Thee are spoken; Zion, city of our God.” She didn’t speak much English, but she certainly knew the tune, and was horrified and basically in shock – because, as most of you folks probably know, it is the same tune used for “Deutschland, Deutschland über alles.” She did not go to church here in the US for a good while after that incident. I’m not implying that the hymn shouldn’t be sung, but maybe a different tune could have been used, back then? (I like the tune myself, but I don’t have the direct associations that this woman did.)

  134. numo wrote:

    She didn’t speak much English, but she certainly knew the tune, and was horrified and basically in shock – because, as most of you folks probably know, it is the same tune used for “Deutschland, Deutschland über alles.”

    The music was originally written by Joseph Haydn in the 1790 as an anthem for the then German Emperor, the Habsburg Francis II, later emperor of Austria only. The original text was “Gott erhalte Franz den Kaiser” (God protect our Emperor Francis), which doesn’t make it very strange as the tune of a church hymn, but maybe a little less so.

    As an aside: if anybody knows the 60ies comedians, Swann and Flanders, who said about varios national songs: “And the Germans, whatever you say about the Germans – and who doesn’t -, what a marvellous song that was: ‘German, German overalls’!”

  135. @ numo:

    Not a problem numes, you’re the best!
    You’re astute, urbane, and have a heart for the abused and dispossessed.
    The points we disagree on are minuscule.

  136. Josh wrote:

    Nicholas wrote:

    Arce wrote:

    Cruz is a dominionist.

    No, he isn’t.

    How do you explain his cozy relations with some wacko nutjobs, and his refusal to repudiate their beliefs?
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2015/11/09/ted-cruz-bobby-jindal-and-mike-huckabee-and-the-alternative-reality-conference/

    If he has confirmed that he is a dominionist, he is.

    If not, he’s probably a politicos looking for supporters.

    Same thing was true of Obama and his relationship with Ayers and his wife.

  137. @ Anonymous:
    His dad reportedly has ties to the dominionist crowd. I have been thinking about writing a post about a number of articles that I have read on the subject.

  138. @ Anonymous:
    If he’s just a politico, he could at least do the not-bat-guano-insane section of the population a favor and let us know that he really doesn’t believe that all gay people should be stoned to death. But he hasn’t.

  139. Gus wrote:

    As an aside: if anybody knows the 60ies comedians, Swann and Flanders, who said about varios national songs: “And the Germans, whatever you say about the Germans – and who doesn’t -, what a marvellous song that was: ‘German, German overalls’!”

    Great minds think alike – you beat me to it!! 🙂

    You might have added Flanders’ complaint about #the Amercans forecasting our long range weather being hard to forgive’!

  140. numo wrote:

    In other words, I don’t mind it in a color guard, or on Memorial Day, or Veterans Day (though I wish we would use the term Remembrance Day, as in Canada and the UK, since I think it is more fitting… am just old enough to recall when it was still called Armistice Day, actually).

    I don’t want us alway to seem to be disagreeing numo!

    I can relate to your post here. The British istm are stuck in 1945 and the reflected glory of the wartime generation. It’s not that the sacrifice of that generation should ever be forgotten, but living in the past and not engaging with the present and future is unhealthy. So once again Britain intends to vote on whether to be part of the European project or not.

    The image of Germany still harks back to Hitler all too often. WW1 is also 100 years ago, and all the various battles being commemorated. The horror of this (for Britain worse than WW2) should not be forgotten either (especially by a materially pampered generation who don’t really know what austerity means), but living in Germany brings home this unfortunate aspect of British society.

    Decent Germans have asked me why the British seem so unable to let go of this. It’s not easy to give an answer.

  141. I am going to write something nice about the late Jerry Falwell: I understand he was opposed to Dominionism and considered Rushdoony a ________ . It’s possible there is much I would probably disagree with Falwell on, but I would agree with him regarding theonomy. I do understand from friends who attended Liberty Mr. Falwell was a nice man in person. So I have two nice things to express about Mr. Falwell.

  142. @ Mark:
    I also understand Jerry Falwell was known as a big tipper. Said he didn’t like Christians’ reputation as bad tippers and went out of his way to tip big.

    And he apparently did not like Falwell fanboys. It’s said that when someone tried to fanboy him, he’d slug the fanboy in the gut.

  143. Niteowl wrote:

    I’ve even heard the incredible statement that the constitution only applies to Christians.

    Define “Christian(TM)”.
    Especially when In Power or Out of Power.

  144. Ethan wrote:

    Spoiler alert: As far as most politically motivated conservative evangelicals are concerned, it IS only about abortion and same-sex marriage.

    “Politically motivated conservative evangelicals” come across as Fred Phelps with a new coat of paint.

  145. Let’s not forget that it was Huckabee who pardoned Maurice Clemmons, for no discernable reason. Clemmons later gunned down 4 police officers who were eating lunch in a restaurant. Huckabee never took responsibility for that mistake or apologized. I think it revealed a lot about him. Lack of discernment, inability to see his own mistakes, inability to apologize for said mistakes.