Rick Warren: A Public Educator Worthy of Honor

hello i doubt i see this one. i will pray for you . i aknowledge you posted one of my 2 comments .. and chose to post the one where i chided you on your dishonesty and lack of morals for not simplyu alowing me to have my own words which were not offensive but perhaps embarring to organized religion and political people who pretend like you do to do the right thing when they dont.. when you do half the job and not even the part that mattered i don't think you can claim you are having a discussion. sig heill mon comidante' sig heil i will pray that you get both toleerance and wisdom, you seem to be a pathetic empty shell pretending to be gods messenger. gods messengers fear no words of others after all they have God not thier own stupid intilect and judgement

John Mark Reynolds is a windbag living in a complete fantasy world. What is the point of anything he has every written here? He writes ALOT, but says almost nothing that makes any sense. What a waste!

Tbarksdl:

Interesting observations, but I'm not clear on how you are drawing the conclusion that Rick Warren is equivalent to the Grand Dragon of the KKK. What is it in particular that makes the two analogous? I'm tempted to think that the connection you are implying is that they both oppose things, but that is so broad that I am sure I am misinterpreting your argument.

I tend to think that Warren was a reasonable choice given the political and social climate, so here are my responses to your questions:

1. I tried to answer this, but there is not enough information given in your question. To which statement of Warren's are you referring? Could you provide a link?

2. As I stated previously, Warren is (whether we like it or not) easily within the mainstream of American society. Farrakhan is not. There seems to be a pretty big difference between the two.

(laugh. And you know, when I put it *that* way, I actually can't think of anyone *more* fitting to represent 'Evangelical America.' Let's see what he does with it. Or hear. My back will be turned.)

He's also not worthy of honor. That 'saddleback' debate was anything but honorable.

It was meant so that McCain could recite some bumperstickers and suddenly not be the nightmare Evangelicals kept claiming he was when they wanted a Huckabee or a Romney.

Meant to highlight at the same time all the paranoid nonsense about Obama.

Somehow, McCain wasn't in the 'cone of silence' that Warren claimed both candidates were in even after Mccain got the questions from his limo.

Don't say honor.

What Warren *gets* is a chance to show if it's actually a pluralistic America he's interested in, ...now that he cheated and lost.

What a curious argument. Let's see now. Inviting the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan to Lyndon Johnson’s inauguration in 1964 would have helped unite Americans, overcome the divisions created by the civil rights struggle, encouraged white racist bigots to moderate their bigotry, and pointed the way to a better America. The type of people who murdered peaceful civil rights workers, beat the Selma demonstrators to a bloody pulp, set loose the police dogs on black protesters, and bombed black churches would have seen the light and changed for the better if only mainstream America had simply showed them more tolerance.

You truly have to be deaf, blind, and dumb to believe that giving an evangelical preacher like Warren a seat at the table serves the cause of inclusiveness and dialogue. You undermine, not reinforce, the cause of inclusiveness by conveying legitimacy to the voices of exclusiveness. The civil rights battle was not won by inviting racist bigots into the tent. On the contrary. The civil rights battle was won by kicking the racists out of the tent and telling them never to return.

The mentalities of the Rick Warrens of the world are even more set in concrete than the mentalities of the worst of the white racist bigots. God, remember, instructs Rev. Warren what to do and what to say. God cannot be right today and wrong tomorrow. Human dialogue does not change God’s policies. Therefore, Rick Warren cannot be wrong yesterday and right tomorrow. Human dialogue will not change his policies.

That’s the only way to deal with the current crop of religious-inspired bigots who preach discrimination against some classes of our fellow Americans. Relegate them to the margins of this society—just like we did with the once powerful KKK and its ilk.
I ask Barack Obama and all those who support his choice of Warren two questions:

1. What is the difference between Warren's insulting and inflammatory depiction of gays and a white racist bigot's depiction of blacks who led the civil rights movement as "just a bunch of trouble-making N-words?" I don't see it.

2. Using the "big tent" reasoning, tell me why that rationale could not be used to invite Louis Farrakhan to say a prayer at the inauguration?

I would never say that Rick Warren is sensible. But he may indeed represent the center of American Christianity and that saddens me. Rick Warrens hate speech is terrifying, not marginalizing. Is that the true American story we should be tapping into? It is one thing to question morality, but to demonize a whole minority group that is terrifying even though it does represent the center of American Christianity. Is there any wonder that folks on the left feel threatened by the world of bigotry that Warren prophesies?

There is no fear for people who find moral guidance in the Bible. But using the Bible to shied and justify bigotry and misogyny -thats what creeps me out and that God continues to be the excuse for such hatred for so many. You are right, we are not an intellectual nation. Nor are we a nation of lovers, it would seem. The temptation is to go along with the crowd, pick up a rock and toss it at the evil sinners.

you appear not to want to have a discussion on faith... perhaps you consider yuourself the censor or the gatekeeper in america for words that actually are attributed and come out of the mouths of others that you either don't agree with or are to afraid as a spirtual being to actually stand up when it is you .. and let another person actually be heard in thier voice with thier words and yes thier personaal anecdotes and life thing which all poster use.. i trust i will see this and my other post in its unabridged form.. yes people who actually know me know i am dyslexic and if you vilotate my rights under the constitution to be heard and to actually educate people on what dyslexic writing looks like so they wont incorrectly hammer people who are in real life most likely more inteligent and creative than you aor them or who ever i want his to be a learning experience for everyone that is what this forum is for. my name is b. keith vipperman i am a real person no i don't screen my mail or calls i actually want to know want others think and while i don't actually agree with a lot of them i find it help me with my patients and tolenace and this allows me more often than you could image maybe find out things i thought i already knew. ps i alway copy a nd past my word for my recordsa nd can produce them if need to embarress you or maybe to refresh you memory since you are a nice spirtual person aren't you

As members of the United Church of Canada, we are not only disturbed by this appointment,we oppose it.
We support gay marriage .
We also suggest that Obama choose a representative of the First Nations community to give this Invocation, blessing,prayer.
As well, we recognize all faiths and donot believe Christianity should have priority over others.

If Warren represents the "center of American Christianity" where would you put Christ on your scale of Christianity, John Mark Reynolds? What if Christ were to the left of Warren? Would that put Him out of your definition of the true center of American Christianity: intolerant, homophobic white evangelicals?

Perspective1:

Who JMR would consider the extreme right of Christianity is very hard to figure. He is quite right wing politically, and he is a very conservative Christian, but I see no evidence that he supports Christian reconstructionism which, IMHO, is the extreme right of Christianity. The problem with JMR is that I could never imagine him critcizing the reconstructionists even though are consummate evil.

For further info on the true whack jobs, check out Christian Reconstructionism, John Rushdoony, Chris Bahnsen, Ranadall Terry or others. If you read their goals, full implementation of reconstructionism would require the murder of about 50 million people.

Mr. Obama’s choice of Rick Warren reminds me of his association with Jeremiah Wright.
His effort to answer the criticism of his having remained a member of that church over a
period of years was one that has apparently worked for him in politics.

Perhaps Mr. Obama subscribes to what is called civic religion and that people should
readily mix and mingle with others and thus diffuse any issues of differences. In public
association, that usually is acceptable, however, in his choice for key members of his
administration, he has shown admirable discrimination and not for deference to
partisanship.

Mr. Warren is a very astute business man (read ‘The Purpose Driven Church) and is
mainstream in our consumer driven society (what’s in it for me) while his moral base is
an anachronism (the Bible). In this issue about the invocation, Mr. Obama is giving his
tacit approval of regression. In the future Mr. Obama and the nation will be better served
if he restrains himself as to what he inflicts on the citizenry when it comes to matters of
“church.”

If Mr. Warren is in the “center of Christianity”, who would Mr. Reynolds consider to be at the extreme right?

Dear Professor Reynolds

A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2009!

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

Nevermore53:

Actually, I understood that you were quoting Dr. Reynolds. Sorry if I was unclear in what I was saying.

Your definition of centrist seems reasonable (at least to me), but I don't see how Warren is necessarily excluded from it. In terms of Christian doctrine, he does not appear to take an especially conservative or liberal stance (this is a really ambiguous statement and I realize that its highly debatable, sorry). Politically, it does seem safe to say that he leans to the right. However, if Dr. Reynolds can be believed regarding the activities in which Warren's church has engaged, it would appear that the church has an emphasis on social justice and aid to the poor more commonly associated with the left than with the right. The church seems to have (in some areas) contributed in very real ways to the good of society.

Regarding the "majority of people" issue, I don't see specifically how Warren is out of the mainstream of American culture. Whether we like it or not, most polls indicate that America is divided nearly 50/50 on the issues of same-sex marriage, abortion, and evolution. An argument can certainly be made that Warren is unreasonable on certain issues, but it is more difficult to show that he is out of the mainstream in his views.

In any case, I really have a hard time seeing how Warren is equivalent to Falwell, Robertson, and Dobson. They might share many views, but their approaches and organizations are entirely different.

Its been nice corresponding with you!

Eustacio:

I think I see! You are attributing the sentence "Rick Warren is a sensible man who represents the center of American Christianity." to me.

Well, I didn't write it, Dr. Reynolds did. Therefore, you need to ask him what he means by center.

Personally, to me a centrist person is one who does not espouse either too conservative or too liberal viewpoints, but rather a person who tries to look at issues objectively and takes a course of action by which the majority of people can abide.

Thus, Mssrs. Dobson, Warren, Falwell, Patterson, etal. are ruled out.

Nevermore53:

By saying that those people are not part of even a hypothetical "center" you still seem to be asserting that some sort of objective criteria for a "center" can be determined. Are you determining the hypothetical "center" by the number of aderehents belonging to each denomination, how the professed beliefs of denominations match up when compared to the American political spectrum/general social mores of the American people, a mixture of these two, or are you using some other criteria entirely?

Again, I'm just trying to figure out what you mean by the "center", even if it does not exist in reality.

Yaknow. Not to rant, but, really. This is an invitation to the table for you guys.

If the fact is that you *run your own pastors out on a rail if they so much as intimate, 'Maybe hurting gay people isn't really what we ought to be focusing on right now,' well, that's on you.

You got your guy up there. What's he going to do now. What are you going to do now.

Have some rope.

I mean, *Hec,* it was the same thing about McCain before he got nominated, ...*completely* unacceptable to Evangelicals, an utter horror, till he was the nominee and all a sudden he's sent by Jesus himself or something.

Sophisticated?

Exactly how much 'contempt for the audience' you *pushing* here, Mr. Reynolds?

I mean, hey, Mr. Reynolds, maybe I'm wrong here, but you 'evangelicals' seem to have just got done spending well over a year trying to tell everyone that if Obama were elected, white Evangelicals would be completely disenfranchised by an Obama administration... Now one bigot gets to do an invocation, and you're claiming only you represent America again?

What gives?

Actually, Mr. Reynolds, the fact that apparently Rev. Warren has taught you to think so little of your fellow Americans is exactly why he's such a divisive choice.

If you want to be a little 'sophisticated' consider that his placement here is an *olive branch,* not a *concession* to your own Christian 'pure-blood genetics of Christian America' ideas, but rather, an invitation to the table after your all-or-nothing invective could have you by rights completely cut out.

Warren is at the table.

Will he, or you, take it as permission to try and claim dominance over us all yet again and make arses of yourselves?

Well, that's not on Obama, is it?

If you're so 'sophisticated,' maybe you, and Rev warren, ought to be considering how to play this. Very carefully, and with goodwill.

Eustacio :

Well, to be honest, I don't think there is a "center" of American Christianity, therefore I can't define it. But, I can tell you who is not part of the "center" if it existed. That would be the Warrens, Dobsons, Reynoldses, etc. who spew their specific brand of Christianity and come up with crap like "Love the sinner, hate the sin". Whoever coined that phrase is missing a few bolts to go with the nuts.

Yep, Rick is the epitome of Christianity. Homophobic, racist, exclusionary, a total ass. You deserve him.

John Mark Reynolds:

Would you care to comment on this?

From today's LA Times:

But on the signal issues of the religious right he is, as he himself has said, as orthodox as James Dobson.

And as inflammatory. Warren doesn't just oppose gay marriage, he's compared it to incest and pedophilia. He doesn't just want to ban abortion, he's compared women who terminate pregnancies to Nazis and the pro-choice position to Holocaust denial. (Hmmm ... If a fertilized egg is as precious as a born Jewish human being, does that mean a born Jewish human being is only as valuable as a fertilized egg?)

Speaking of Jews, Warren has publicly stated his belief that they will burn in hell, presumably along with everyone else who hasn't accepted his particular brand of Christianity (i.e., the vast majority of people in the world). And forget about evolution -- the existence of homosexuals, he's argued, disproves Darwin. And while we may not know how old the Earth is, the Saddleback website assures us that dinosaurs and humans coexisted.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-pollitt22-2008dec22,0,6597471.story

Hey Nevermore53 and Farnaz2,

Just out of curiosity, what would you define as the center of American Christianity and who would you view as being representative of the center?

Nevermore,

He means it. He really does. He means all the insane things he posts. Still, he doesn't appear to be insane, seems to be a nice guy.

What to do. There are probably a whole lot like him out there. They need to be de-programmed somehow.

"Rick Warren is a sensible man who represents the center of American Christianity."

Bwaaaahahahahahaha....... Surely, you jest!