tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18950992.post754356241008618225..comments2024-02-13T08:45:20.455-05:00Comments on The Schooley Files: Ben Witherington Throws Down the Political GauntletKeith Edwin Schooleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06328169815024415532noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18950992.post-57164235462460202182006-11-15T22:12:00.000-05:002006-11-15T22:12:00.000-05:00thanks for the tip on the articlethanks for the tip on the articleMissional Jerryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03496760677134661370noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18950992.post-9596717566349206202006-11-14T00:20:00.000-05:002006-11-14T00:20:00.000-05:00Keith: I do my best to be informed, but it's getti...Keith: I do my best to be informed, but it's getting harder and harder to tell the good guys from the bad guys. And like you say, often we must choose between the lesser of two evils.<br /> As far as Dobson being on talk shows and so forth, I rather like having a true Christian perspective amid the debates. I saw the head of the Atheists for America (or some such group) on Bill O'Reilly tonite. She says we ought to get religion totally out of politics. Elton John is calling for something similar. Only he says we ought to abolish religion entirely.<br /> I wish we could effectively make a difference in our political system. But I have to agree that the system is not our real problem. It's the people within and without the system. And the ruler of this world has his own agenda when it comes to world powers. MY Ruler on the other hand, rules my heart and I take Him with me into the voting booth. There's no law against that. selahVSelahVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00581346499853712256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18950992.post-76324083925356893602006-11-12T16:03:00.000-05:002006-11-12T16:03:00.000-05:00I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to affect gov...I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to affect government policy with our vote. I just find Machiavellian manipulations of Dobson and the CC distasteful at best. (BTW, I realized my faux pax on CC/MM after I posted. Ooops) It just seems to me the quest for political influence by these folks has had little impact on policy and given the church a black eye. Besides, if Dobson et al think they're "delivering" my vote anywhere, they're severely deluded. If they simply want to inform believers about issues and candidates and encourage them to be informed and involved, then I have no problem with them.<br /><br />However, I'm not sure that's what they're doing. When Dobson and others are on Larry King or Meet the Press, they're not mobilizing Christians, they're sermonizing to the unconverted. I'm not sure blending the pulpit with the soapbox works today like it did for abolitionists. We're in a post-Christian society now, and the church has lost its moral authority. There are no voices like Wilberforce, etc. anymore.<br /><br />Bono has been successful precisely because he's not connected with a specific church or a specific party. He's completely issue-based. I think he's provided a pretty good model for Christians influencing policy for the future. I think political influence today is better accomplished by lay people, rather than clergy. In that respect, you're probably right about RTL. I probably shouldn't have painted them with the same brush.<br /><br />On voting, my point is that believers have a duty to vote and therefore have a responsibility to be informed and to form a coherent viewpoint. I certainly agree that uninformed voters are a plague on the process. Believers shouldn't be part of that problem.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18950992.post-80699661977476389382006-11-12T02:41:00.000-05:002006-11-12T02:41:00.000-05:00Bob -
I agree with you with regard to political ...Bob - <br /><br />I agree with you with regard to political change not being the ultimate solution to social problems. That having been said, I do think the 13th amendment is a pretty good thing, much more efficient than waiting until every last slaveholder changes his heart. The abolitionists of the 1850s and the civil rights activists of the 1950s <i>did</i> have an influence on government policy.<br /><br />I actually don't buy into the "voting as a duty" idea. I think there are plenty of people who have no coherent political philosophy, no clue on the issues, and who have no business voting. Don't get me wrong--I think that everyone of voting age should have the <i>right</i> to vote. I just don't see it as a duty. (Although I suppose the more informed and coherent your position is, the more "duty" you have to vote--if only to offset the kooks.)<br /><br />You've actually only listed two organizations, not three--Christian Coalition replaced Moral Majority (I think basically to make obsolete all the "The Moral Majority is Neither" bumper stickers.) Although I have no ties to or communication from CC or RTL, I have no problem with their existence--especially RTL, which to my knowledge focuses on a particular issue and lobbies for change on that issue. My problem with the CC appears to be a bit different from yours; my point is not that it attempts to get unbelievers to accept biblical policy positions and vote that way (which I'm not sure it does anyway; I think it just tries to deliver the Evangelical voting bloc to the Republicans). My point is that I'm not sure all its positions are biblical or that it represents the full range of biblical positions.Keith Schooleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04078256877683382439noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18950992.post-87746834570043440232006-11-11T16:05:00.000-05:002006-11-11T16:05:00.000-05:00My political thinking has been changing a lot over...My political thinking has been changing a lot over the past few years. Not my opinions on issues, mind you, as much as my faith in the process. While we are not under a Roman-style dominance, I do think a NT attitude toward government is still warranted. Especially in our two-party system, we cannot and should not expect anything remotely approaching righteous governance. No matter which side wins, we have a fatally flawed oligarchy. So, I think we're still in a position of not really being able to influence governmental policy. I think we've simply been manipulated into thinking we do. That sounds more conspiratorial than I mean it to be, but I think you get my point.<br /><br />I do believe in our responsibility to be a part of the process by voting, but I no longer consider my vote as something that will affect society as much as it is an act of obedience. If all believers voted with a Godly agenda, we may affect society at large but I no longer believe that to be the goal of my vote. It is merely a pleasant side effect of my personal obedience.<br /><br />What this means to me on a broader scale is that I no longer believe that it is the job of the church to attempt to convince the unbelieving world of the rightness of biblical positions on the traditional family, the rights of the unborn, etc. and to get them to vote our way. That's a losing proposition. I will vote my biblically-informed conscience on those issues and encourage other Christians to do so as well, but I don't believe in the usefulness of organizations like the Christian Coalition, the Moral Majority, Right to Life, etc.<br /><br />I'll shut up now. :-)<br /><br />P.S. I do find it interesting that many of the Democrats elected in this cycle are much more socially conservative than the leadership of the party. It will be interesting to see how this affects the tone of the Democrats going forward.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com