“When the church wins the culture wars, it inevitably loses,”

Pretty good statement for a megachurch guru.

 

hmm, who wazzit who said, "My kingdom is not of this world"?

 

Then I am sure Rev. Boyd will also be fed up with these political positions taken by the National Council of Churches:

From the NCC website: "By invitation of the Cuban Council of Churches, a (U.S.) National Council of Churches official delegation, headed by the Rev. Dr. Bob Edgar, NCC General Secretary, visited Cuba Sept. 2-7, 2000. Partners for more than 40 years, the two ecumenical councils helped lay the groundwork for Elian Gonzalez's return to his father."

The NCC's 50th anniversary celebration in Cleveland held a special "prayer breakfast" for its "Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Caucus"?

The NCC continues to urge lifting the U.S. trade embargo on Cuba—the NCC’s Edgar has condemned President Bush’s oposition to the Castro regime, saying that "this president is blind and continues to encourage blindness in others".

A study conducted by the Institute of Religion and Democracy in 2004, found that "of the seven human rights criticisms it (NCC) issued from 2000-2003, Israel received four, the United States two, and Sudan one." And the study noted, "Fully 80 percent of the NCC resolutions targeting foreign nations for human rights abuses were aimed at Israel."

In 2004 the NCC issued a list of 10 "Christian principles in an election year." The first principle held that "war is contrary to the will of God."

The NCC, in May of 2004, issued another letter, which it encouraged member pastors to read to their congregations, urging the U.S. to abdicate authority in Iraq in favor of the United Nations. "We would ask that members of our churches, as they feel appropriate, contact their respective congressional delegations to urge the U.S. to change course in Iraq".

In 1998, the NCC’s General Secretary, Rev. Joan Brown Campbell, stated that an acceptance of the environmentalist movement’s positions on global warming ought to be a "litmus test for the faith community."

The National Council of Churches sent an 11 member delegation to the Middle East last year, led by NCC General Secretary Bob Edgar. The delegation promised to "redouble our efforts for an end of the Israeli Occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, and for an end of the U.S. occupation of Iraq."

"Impeach President Bush!" urged Jim Winkler, head of the DC-based United Methodist Board of Church and Society. Winkler was speaking to an "Ecumenical Advocacy Days" rally for religious activists, organized by the National Council of Churches.


Or maybe not.

 

“When the church wins the culture wars, it inevitably loses,”

But I gotta wonder if this church was not part of the problem that it is laying upon other churches? It sounds like they have given into the culture more than they should have.

 

Well I'm not sure where you're coming from on that post El Guero.

But what I was getting at was that Rev Boyd and the writer of the article disapproved of churches that encourage conservative political viewpoints.

I wonder if they would be equally disapproving of some of the political positions taken by liberal churches and their leadership.

 

I'm sure they are, but it is well established in evangelicalism that the liberal mainlines are in error. We don't need more people beating up on them, especially snc emany may not be saved anyway. On the other hand, the bigger problem that remains not as challenged within our ranks has been allegiance to Republicanism, so there has arisen a more balanced centrist position that focuses more on the Gospel, and not wedding it with either the right or left wing party line.

 

I often wonder how many lost people refuse to walk through the door of a church because they do not want to be bombarded with right wing politics. Personally, while I agree with most of the social positions that are associated with the Republican party, I disagree with most of their philosophy about government and economics. There are good and bad things about both major parties, as well as the smaller ones.

I think the Republicans who fall within what is called the "Religious Right" are not consistent with the party's general philosophy of "getting the government off the backs of the people," which was articulated by Ronald Reagan. The party itself, or at least its current leadership under Bush, hasn't accomplished very much in the way of its social legislation agenda, even with control of both houses of Congress, and that sends a message to me that it is nothing more than lip service to get votes, and that Bush in particular, and most Republican congressmen and women aren't really interested in it. They've clearly been much more active and enthusiastic about other things. How long will those who make up the religious right continue to give their support without getting anything in return? Maybe that's a sign that God isn't blessing that particular approach.

Christianity needs to stand behind the cross. The church isn't empowered to accomplish its mission through politics, it accomplishes its mission through the power of the Holy Spirit. Being salt and light in a dark, lost world doesn't mean influencing the votes of people at the ballot box. It means practicing a living faith in everything you do every day, and building relationships with people through which you can express your faith so that they can see it, understand it, and respond to it when it is shared with them. It is probably easier to try to convert people politically, which is why so many Christians fall into the trap of thinking they are doing God's will by advocating for a particular political system.

We will never win "America" to Christ by legislation. We can win individual Americans to Christ by being bold about the way we live our faith and share it with others.

Zechariah 4:6 "So he said to me, 'This is the Word of the Lord to Zerubbabel: Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, says the Lord Almighty.'"

 

Their theology is not very conservative. IMHO.

Could be why they are concerned about conservative politics.

 

If this is the same Gregory A. Boyd who announced he is an Open Theist several years ago, I would have walked out of his church then.

I do agree with some of what he says here, and I agree with Jack Matthews' post, but I'm surprised (or maybe not, these days) that his church has so many people if he is that Gregory A. Boyd. And I think he is. I find it ironic for him to get upset about the politics when his theology is skewed in a serious way.

 

Gregory Boyd is a vocal Open Theist. People here should know that but no one seemed to.

Why worry about his statement on politics when his views on God are so wrong?

 

Skewed by your standard, perhaps, which is only a human measurement. Can you prove that he is an open theist, and if so, that open theism isn't Biblical?

 

HEY!!! HERE! HERE! :wavey:

Now, I noticed that there were some peculularities - and I don't have a clue who he was - I now do not think he is anyone.



Wayne

 

mmm ...

Kinda hard to prove what is in anyone's heart - but, his stated theology has issues. IMHO. My measurement is the Word. I am just surprised that it took that long for 'conservatives' to walk out.

So he is skewed according to at least humans . . .

 

I missed this post before.

Can I prove it?! It's easy! He wrote a book on it! God of the Possible.

He's very vocal about it and is one of the people who started advocating it along with Clark Pinnock and John Sanders.

See
http://www.gregboyd.org/

and
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/003/3.42.html

As to whether it is or isn't biblical, I don't think saying that God does not know the future and needs man is biblical (of course, they that God knows the future that can be known so it doesn't sound so bad). But I think debating open theism should be another thread on another forum.

 

Fine. But the article was making a hero of Rev Boyd for standing up to the conservatives. I was just saying wait a minute.

 

Well Jack,

Is he still a good poster boy? Or does your standard hold poster boys to a higher standard than this poster boy?

 

Well of course it does, the church is supposed to be different from the world, or culture, not just like it enogh to become it.