Why isn't there a separate discussion for religion?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Pastor Larry L. Long on September 25, 2009 at 6:26pm

If you're asking because you are looking for religious dialog, then look no further: go to www.mywesttexas.com/life/faith (you'll expecially want to check out my blog "Is God a Republican?"). If you're asking because you think religion and politics don't mix (or shouldn't mix), then you apparently understand little about most people of religion: their religion cannot be compartmentalized, it is the guiding principle that informs their opinion about everything else. Religion is worldview--politics applies worldview to the polis.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by West Texas Left on September 25, 2009 at 9:04pm

Shouldn't mix would be my answer. I understand much about religious zealots which is why I unapologetically say "shouldn't".

While religion and personal beliefs do play a role in moral issues as pertaining to political views, the discussions in the forum thread aren't political at all.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Pastor Larry L. Long on September 25, 2009 at 9:37pm

So (do I understand your concern?), on the one hand, the problem is that, while religion and personal beliefs do play a role in issues that pertain to politics, they still "shouldn't" be found on the Political page, and, on the other hand, the posts found there aren't political at all.

Regarding the latter problem, I would agree with you. If someone is going to post to the Political forum, they should do so with a political agenda. But regarding the first problem, I would say that you are undermining your argument. I'm not sure you can say that "religion and personal beliefs do play in moral issues as pertaining to political view" but then say that such statements "shouldn't" be made.

I suspect where your real problem lies is with the "religious zealots." They sometimes embarrass me too. But I would be less inclined to exclude them from the forum unless you were also willing to exclude the nonreligious zealots, in which case you might have to exclude yourself?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by West Texas Left on September 25, 2009 at 10:57pm

Isn't non-religious zealot an oxymoron?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Pastor Larry L. Long on September 26, 2009 at 12:24am

If you are referring to the Zealots of Jesus' day, then yes, a non-religious Zealot would be an oxymoron. But a zealot can be a person who has an excessive zeal for any cause, which may or may not be religious. So, no, it is not an oxymoron.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by West Texas Left on September 26, 2009 at 2:48am

As a pastor, wouldn't your initial response be that of a savior rathor than an abolishinor?

Further, who's to say I am not a Christian?

Moreover, who's to say I am not for what I believe to be the word of Christ as pertaining to how I interpret it to be?

The separation of church and state is important on many a moral standing.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Pastor Larry L. Long on September 26, 2009 at 9:05am

I'm not exactly sure what your first question means and how it pertains to our discussion, but since you asked, let me say that, to be a Savior, one must be an abolisher--the two are not mutually exclusive (see Eph. 2:14-17 for example).

Further, who's to say that I said you are not a Christian? (Oops, never mind, you said I said that.) The closest I have come to assuming anything about your spirituality was in my question that read: "But I would be less inclined to exclude them from the forum unless you were also willing to exclude the nonreligious zealots, in which case you might have to exclude yourself?" Now, in the minds of many, it is altogether possible to be a non-religious Christian (which sounds clever but lacks substance--I'll have more to say on that in a future blog at www.mywesttexas.com/life/faith). But I would remind you of several things: first, regarding the inclusion of religious topics on the political forum, you've clearly established yourself to be on the side of "no-religion" (which is another way of saying "non-religion"); second, the question was a question--not a statement of fact. Did I overstep my boudaries? Perhaps. If I offended you by casting aspersions, please forgive me.

As for you interpreting the Word of Christ as you please, I suppose that is okay for now, but what then is your interpretation? So far you have not even pretended to introduce anything even remotely resembling an interpretation of the Word, so I'm not really even sure what you're talking about.

And as for the separation of church and state...huh? How did we get from separating zealous religion from a forum on politics to that?

So far, I've essentially agreed with your primary concern--that religious statements that have little or nothing to do with politics should not be posted on a political forum. We've certainly gone far afield from there, eh? Not that I'm complaining, mind you, but it certainly makes me wonder if there isn't something else stuck in your craw. C'mon man, get it out!

▶ Reply to This