There's No Such Thing as a "Christian" Way to Vote

Desperate times call for desperate measures.  And the Republicans are clearly desperate.  

With the disapproval of the President's job performance extending above the 60% level in the controlled and intimidated media, the Republicans have abandoned running on the issues, and are doing their dead level best to distract voters by focusing on matters irrelevant to the government and to election issues.  Of course, the determination of which party is more "Christian" has once again reared its ugly head.  

It has worked in the past for Republicans, convincing the conservative, Evangelical branch of American Christianity--which is based on a false interpretation of the Bible and on practice stemming from that pseudo-Christian perspective--to support them.  This gave them just enough of an edge to break deadlocks in some elections, opening the door to a flood of Christian nationalists which completely changed the platform and direction of the GOP, abandoning its former values and principles for what can only be accurately defined as fascist.  

These same white supremacist, Christian nationalists also became stealth intruders into Christian churches, hijacking the pursuit of truth with a brand of fundamentalist heresy I label as the Darby-Scofield intrusion, a literalist perspective that completely alters the church's historical theological and doctrinal views, changing churches into cults and political groups seeking what Christians once called "worldly" power and influence, abandoning their spiritual lifeline.  

But that seems to have come to an abrupt conclusion.  

As conservative Evangelical churches lose members like a sieve, a slide that directly correlates to the beginning of movements like the Christian Coalition and the Moral Majority, the accusations that Republicans make against Democrats, that they are Communists, Muslims, baby-killers and Atheists, all at the same time, don't have the audience appeal they once did, A significant portion of the American population, according to multiple surveys, rejects the religious-political blending of conservative Evangelicalism with right wing political extremism, including the influence of white supremacy and Christian nationalism.  There are a couple of reasons for this.  

Hypocrisy Knows No Bounds, But People Can Figure It Out For Themselves

The current political leader of the GOP is Trump.  If there is a more notorious, and obviously morally bankrupt individual anywhere in this country, we'd know about them by now.  The argument made by Republicans, especially conservative Evangelical Republicans, about Democrats being "godless" and having thrown God out of the party, which is a lie of course, is totally and completely nullified by their unqualified support for a man who has openly denied the very core Christian doctrine of salvation by openly stating, directly to Franklin Graham of all people, that he has done nothing requiring God's forgiveness.  

That is, in the fundamentalist, conservative Evangelical doctrine, what is known as the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, and it is the only unforgivable sin in the Bible.  Graham, who continues to support Trump, has gone to great length and expense to attempt to cover this statement up, made on camera during an interview in which Trump didn't have enough knowledge about Christian faith to avoid saying so directly, in so many words.  

But how is it possible to claim that one can't be Christian and support abortion rights, or any of the dozen things on the list of Republican moral no-no's, when the party's own leader is a proud serial adulterer, a convicted rapist, a treasonous rebel against the United States constitution, a pathological liar who slept with a porn star while his third wife was pregnant with their son?  How can you clam the Democrats are "Communists" when the party's leader lays out the red carpet and falls all over himself with tissues and toilet paper for the world's most notorious Communist to wipe his butt and blow his nose?  Being a mendacious suck-up to Xi Jinpeng doesn't support the weak claims of the campaign arm of the RNC that the Democrats are the communists.  

Nor does Trump's long standing political love affair with Kim Jong Un, the other notorious communist leader of the world, and enemy of the United States. 

The number of ignorant and-sorry but I have to say it--stupid Americans who still support him and live under rocks where they have no clue about what is true has dropped below the point where this ignorance can help the GOP.  It does not appear to be working and, in fact, it is having the effect of convincing a growing number of voters that electing Trump and the GOP was a huge mistake.  

The Intrusion of Trump's Version of Right Wing Extremism Into Conservative Evangelicalism is Causing a Mass Exodus of Both Individual Members and Entire Church Congregations

Trump counts on his belief that most of his followers are too stupid, ignorant and weak-willed to understand and know the truth.  When the statement is made, that if you're Christian, there are certain issues that cannot be supported, implying that one is not Christian at that point, or at least, is not as good of a Christian as the one making the accusation, it might be a good idea to make sure that there is no fault found in the one making the accusation.  It completely undermines the argument, that Christians can't vote for something perceived as immoral or "unchristlike," when the accuser is a full throated supporter of Trump, whose lifestyle is an example of the kind of licentious debauchery that the Bible condemns in no uncertain terms.  

If "those" Christians who support Democrats are wrong, and aren't Christian for supporting what conservatives say they can't support, then those Republican Christians who support Trump are at least equally unchristlike and wrong.  And frankly, if correct theology and Biblical interpretation is applied, Trump does indeed measure far worse, because he is actually engaged in blatant immorality, while the accusations against Democrats are that they support certain immoral practices.  

And what warms my heart is that I am seeing multiple posts on the social media sites spreading this Republican tripe that are answering back, and in some cases, are so overwhelming in numbers that whoever originated the post is forced to take it down.  

Jesus Didn't Put Conditions on the Christian Salvation Experience.  It's a Grace Gift, Not Conditioned on a Set of Theological or Political Beliefs

One of the major interpretation errors the Scofield-Darby Fundamentalists make in their interpretation of the Bible is making the words of Jesus, who Christians accept as a divine part of a triune God, equal with those of Paul and the apostles, or the Old Testament prophets.  But it's a grave theological error to attribute a divine nature to Jesus and then not make his words the criterion by which all other written works are measured. 

And that completely distorts their interpretation of the Bible.  It also leads to a salvation experience that is based on specific personal works to earn it, and a set of doctrinal and theological affirmations to maintain it.  Both of those ideas are contrary to the gospel of Jesus Christ. 

What Jesus actually said about what we now refer to as Christian salvation, or becoming a Christian, was simple: 

"Everyone therefore who acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven; but whoever denies me before others, I will also deny before my Father in heaven."  Matthew 10:32-33, NRSV

"...what must I do to inherit eternal life?  He [Jesus] said to him [the lawyer asking the question] 'What is written in the law? What do you read there?'  

He answered, 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself."  And he [Jesus] said to him, "You have given the right answer; do this and you will live."  Luke 10:25b-28, NRSV.  

Selective interpretation and application of a few disjointed parts of the Bible have led this fundamentalist Scofield-Darby cult to come up with a list of requirements for their version of the Christian salvation experience, which is based on praying a specific prayer that leads a person to cross into salvation when it is uttered from their lips.  But the Bible's writers, including major apostles like Paul and John, do not support this list of requirements to be saved, and then requirements to maintain it or lose it.  

According to Jesus, the simple acknowledgement of the greatest commandment, the second being like the first, is the gateway to salvation and eternal life.  Paul repeats it when his words to the Philippian jailer, recorded by Luke in the Book of Acts, are simply spoken.  The jailer asked, "What must I do to be saved?"  And Paul replied with the simple grace statement, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you and your household, collectively, will be saved.  

This is a work of grace, which means that once it has been done, it cannot be undone.  Otherwise, its not grace, its works.  There is absolutely no other requirement, including a requirement that one cannot support a particular political position or party.  

Let's Think This Through, and Come to the Only Possible Conclusion

But if we take this Scofield-Darby Fundamentalism and its logic seriously for a minute, we can see why their view is the wrong view.  

If it is wrong for Christians to vote for Democrats because "they support abortion," which is a simplistic statement, but I'll use this as an example, then it would be at least equally wrong for Christians to support a political party which refuses to acknowledge the crimes, moral bankruptcy, unrepentant adultery and alleged child rape of their leader, Trump.  That includes his attempt to overturn a legitimate election and the continued silence, the equivalent of a lie, in refusing to acknowledge that Joe Biden won the election in 2020.  And that makes them guilty of sedition.  

They can argue the finer points of Christian doctrine all they want, but the Constitution allows no religious test for holding office and the Christian doctrine of any individual candidate for office is irrelevant to their qualifications.  But their character, moral values and public example are important, and Republicans refusing to acknowledge Trump's failures makes them the worse kind of lying hypocrites.  

Democrats don't "believe in" abortion.  That's not the correct term to use.  What they believe is that the government has no place in determining a woman's health care choices.  The belief that abortion is murder is not supported by either American law, or the Bible.  So laws which restrict access to it are not only an invasion of personal privacy, they are also a violation of conscience to anyone who does not share or accept the conservative, right wing extremist view.  

If Democrats are to be held accountable for abortion, then Republicans are to be held accountable for adultery, rape, child molestation, treasonous insurrection and all of the criminal acts of Trump while in office.  

Christianity Was Originally a Socialist Organization

In the middle of all of the caterwauling from Republicans about Democrats being communists, I am enjoying the amusement of seeing their hypocrisy pour out while the Communist dictator of China is entertained in the White House by Trump, with a welcome and red carpet rolled out that few visiting foreign leaders have received from this administration.  Being the mendacious suck-up that he is, Trump is making every MAGA Republican who is screaming and hollering about Democrats being communists look like stupid idiots.  While they are making completely false and totally ignorant statements trying to distract voters from the fact that they have completely and totally failed the working people of this country, their inamorata [and I chose that word deliberately] is entertaining the world's most notorious Communist leader, heaping praise on his leadership, bobbing and scurrying after him to blow his nose and wipe his rear, and making his followers look like the idiots he thinks they are.  

This has had the effect of moving my mind back to memories from my Southern Baptist upbringing, and the descriptions of the formation of the early Christian church in Jerusalem, following the crucifixion of Christ.  The distorted and false religion that MAGA identifies as "Christian" doesn't exist in the Bible at all, not anywhere.  What does exist is a narrative, in the early chapters of the book of Acts, which describe the Christian church that formed as a purely socialist organization.  

Don't take my word for it, it's right there in the text, the clearest narrative describing this is found in Acts 2:43-47 and Acts 4:37-37.  In Acts 5, there is an illustration that indicates just how serious the early church took this socialist atmosphere, when a couple, Ananias and Sapphira, failed to turn over all of the money from the sale of a property,  and were struck dead on the spot when they lied to the Apostles about it.  

In Acts 6, the narrative deals with a problem involving the unequal distribution of goods, primarily food, because the widows who were native to Jerusalem and Judaea seemed to be getting a bigger share, while those from the outlying provinces, and who spoke Greek, were sometimes left out.  Seven men were appointed to ensure that the distribution was done equally and one of those men, Stephen, was eventually martyred for his faith.  It seems like the political leadership of Jerusalem and Judea were not happy with the wholesome and enthusiastic atmosphere of this communal faith, not just because it redistributed wealth but because it didn't seem to recognize their religious authority, either.  

Combined with some other narratives in the New Testament, such as when Jesus overturned the tables of the profiteers and money changers in the Temple who were exploiting people's religious convictions by overcharging for animals needed for ritual sacrifices and unfairly shortchanging them when they tried to exchange their Roman currency for the coins that the Temple would accept as an offering, and  you kind of get the picture that early Christianity found itself in opposition to the kind of capitalism that promoted greed and made the rich even richer.  

There's also a narrative about a man from Jericho named Zacchaeus, who served as a tax collector, overcharging those who owed money and then skimming his own share off the top.  After being spiritually convicted by Jesus, and converted, he made the choice to return the amount he had cheated people fourfold.  

So it is pretty clear that Christianity, in principle and practice, stands against the commercialism, profiteering, and outright greedy cheating of capitalism.  There are still branches of the church which practice various forms of socialism, elevating the value of humanity and making sure that the needs of everyone in the community are considered equally.  No one becomes a millionaire or a billionaire out of their own labor.  It takes a community that includes laborers who work on their behalf to make it work.  In the United States, there are laws which protect everyone from harm equally, and which provide infrastructure to which everyone contributes, that makes it possible for billionaires to be billionaires.  Socialism puts value on the human community.  

The entire message of the Christian gospel is based on the belief that Christian faith involves selflessness, reflected in Jesus' crucifixion on behalf of all humanity's sin, while the opposite of that is selfishness, ignoring the sanctity of every human life and living in such a way as to exploit the resources of others for one's own benefit.  Socialism, as an economic system, is the ultimate control on unbridled and uncontrolled capitalism, and it is what balances out the use of resources which benefit everyone in the community.  Otherwise, poverty, decay and the breaking down of social values is the result.  

Why I Am a Democratic Socialist, Part 2

Yesterday my wife of 39 years passed away during a physical therapy activity in a skilled nursing/rehab facility.  She had been suffering for over a year with leg and lower back pain that was keeping her up at night, and causing her to drift between her recliner and the bed to find a way to get comfortable.  It took months to get medical care that would lead to a resolution, long waits for appointments with orthopedic and pain management physicians, sometimes more than a three month wait, because many of the doctors are either past retirement age or semi-retired, and there aren't many new physicians coming into the field. 

And why is this the case?  It's because corporations are buying up what not-for-profit competition remains, and taking the practice of medicine out of the hands of the experts who know what they are doing.  Insurance companies dictate treatment, and if they want to get paid, doctors have no choice in the diagnosis or treatment.   

During the long wait between appointments, her knee gave out and she fell, face first, on the kitchen floor.  This put her in the emergency room and subsequently in the hospital for a week.  What developed during her hospital stay was an inability to walk, because of the weakness in her right leg.  So the recommendation was an extended stay in a skilled nursing center for physical and occupational therapy rehabilitation.  

Medicare's rules and limitations on this, a development that happened during the first Trump administration, provide one hour of physical and occupational therapy five times a week in an in-patient skilled nursing facility while the patient basically sits around or lays around the other 23 hours.  The name "skilled nursing" is a joke.  Most of these facilities, including the one where my wife was admitted, are understaffed, and it is difficult to discern the qualifications of nurses, CNA's and physical therapy staffers.  

On my wife's unit, with 20 patients, sometimes more, there was one nurse and two CNA's on duty every shift.  So of course, the quality of care is questionable.  They barely have time to help patients get to the bathroom and get their food, much less do any kind of physical activity to supplement their therapy.  Yet that's what "skilled nursing" implies.  It's what I expected, and what the social worker who sold us on the place hinted would happen.  But that is not the case at all.  

What actually occurred was that she was left lying in bed for long periods of time, sometimes as long as 20 hours, the response time to a buzzer for help, which the brochure said was 5 minutes or less, turned out to be as long as two hours, with not getting a response half the time she pressed the buzzer.  "Use the diaper," was the response to many of her requests to be helped out of bed and to the toilet, a short five to ten minute break if that.  And she would wait, sometimes up to three hours to get changed.  

The reason patients are put in this kind of facility is that the cost of operation, because of the reduced staff, is less than a day in the hospital.  Because medical care in this country now is not about a basic human right to health care, but about money, and how to make it off people's pain, suffering and indignity.  The profits come off the top of the revenue in both corporate operated health insurance and corporate owned health care.  What's left over is all that's left for operations, and if there's a shortage, too bad.  

My wife's death was due to neglect.  She was left in bed for over 24 hours from Saturday evening to Monday morning.  During that time, it is very likely that she developed a blood clot, which came loose during her therapy exercise, and went to her heart. causing cardiac arrest and her death, in about 20 minutes.  Neglect caused by the cost cutting measures so that a skilled nursing rehab facility's owner can make a profit.  

And I will now become an activist and work for the complete overhaul of American health care and insurance.  I will do it, motivated by the memory of my dear wife, a victim of the profiteering and the lack of consideration for basic human rights by this presidential administration.  

 

People Are Leaving MAGA Run Churches, and Discovering Authentic Christianity

Alter Net: Women Are Running Away From Church to Escape MAGA 

"The version of faith that has so successfully branded itself as American Christianity is very authoritarian.  There's one right way of doing things.  When the face of Christianity is aligned with abuse, with Christian nationalism, and a thirst for power, then that does become a big problem."  Sarah Stankorb, author of Damned if She Does:  Why Women Quit the Church and What it Means for the Future of Religion.  

The trend that author Sarah Stankorb references in her book [see links above] is a new thing for American Evangelicalism.  In spite of the fact that they are frequently denied leadership roles in churches, as pastors or in any kind of clerical capacity, because of faulty interpretations of a couple of sentences found in the works of the Apostle Paul, most of the membership and a significant amount of the volunteer work done in churches involves women.  But Stankorb notes a trend that has been occurring as a result of the influence of MAGA politics among conservative Evangelicals.  Women are leaving these churches in large numbers.  

Frankly, the truth is that large numbers of members of Evangelical churches are finding their way out the door, in a rapidly increasing exodus, most of them people whose understanding of the Christian gospel runs deeper than the average pew sitter, and who are unable to reconcile the stark philosophical and moral differences between authentic Christianity defined by accurately interpreting the New Testament, and the pseudo-Christian cult beliefs which are used solely to justify the licentiousness of MAGA.  

"Christian nationalism teaches that there is just one kind of truth, and any other form is dangerous," says Stankorb.  "It says you have to follow certain leaders.  And when you look at the political leaders with whom they are aligned, you see one in particular who is very fond of telling lies, or you see cover-ups of abuse.  You see people who claim to have a hold on truth operating in falsehood."  

That, she says, makes it untenable to be part of the church that accepts this.  Trump has become the figurehead of a religion even though he is a serial philanderer, adulterer and pathological liar, all things that the Christian gospel defines as licentiousness.  

The early Christian apostle Jude warned about pseudo-Christian influences intruding into the Christian church, sometime during the first century.  It's a very short epistle, but his identification of intruders and the licentiousness they bring is a very accurate description of exactly what is happening now, with the MAGA cult and its white, Christian nationalism taking over many conservative Evangelical congregations and denominations.  

For certain intruders have stolen in among you, people who long ago were designated for this condemnation as ungodly, who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Lord and Master Jesus Christ.  Jude, v. 4  

It's almost as if Jude could look ahead into the future and see what would be happening in American Evangelicalism when he wrote that two thousand years ago.  Although the literalist, authoritarian fundamentalism of most conservative Evangelicals is not consistent with the gospel that Jesus preached and taught, and the appalling arrogance that they exhibit in claiming their own correctness has led to a perception of holiness in conduct, who'd have ever thought they would openly embrace unrepentant, and even defiant, adulterers, pathological liars and rapists because of their politics?  

And the significance of women leaving the church in such large numbers has some historical implications that do not bode well for its future.  With more women than men among the church membership of both the Millennials and Gen Z, Evangelicalism is facing a decline not only in the membership and attendance and the financial shortages that come with that, but also in its ability to maintain its own structure, because women do 80% of the work in Evangelical churches and institutions.

The MAGA Effect on Evangelicalism Has Caused Significant Membership Loss

What Stankorb is documenting with regard to women has been a common experience for American Evangelicalism since 2016, and even before that.  The blending of conservative, right wing politics with the strange quirks of fundamentalist and Pentecostal/Charismatic Evangelical practice has driven a significant percentage of church membership out the back door.   And, in fact, it has caused some entire churches to distance themselves from the heresy and pseudo-Christian cult that this mixture has produced. 

The largest Evangelical denomination in the United States, the Southern Baptist Convention, has reported staggering membership and attendance losses since it peaked at 16.2 million in 2006.  Over 90% of the losses have come since 2016, the beginning of Trump's first term.  Membership has fallen from 16 million to just under 13 million, a loss of more than 3 million in a decade, while attendance has fallen from 6 million to 4 million.  

The manner in which this denomination tracks its membership indicates that there are entire churches that are disaffiliating, in addition to members leaving churches that have become overtly political.  Churches that are affiliated with the denomination file what is called an "annual church profile," ACP, each year that includes their membership and attendance, along with making a contribution to the denomination's budget.  The number of churches which have stopped sending in an ACP, and which no longer contribute financially to the denomination since 2016 is somewhere around 8,000.  It takes five years for a church to drop off the statistical record kept by the denomination after it stops receiving contributions, so the membership and attendance loss is likely larger than what is currently reported.

Other denominations, including the largest Pentecostal denomination, the Assemblies of God, keep cumulative membership records, but both they and the Southern Baptists report a much larger membership than weekly attendance.  The number of people showing up on any given Sunday to an Assembly of God church in the US is down almost 12% since 2016, more than half of this in the last five years.  And in fact, there are no longer any Evangelical denominations now reporting any kind of attendance or membership increase.  The fact is, people are leaving, and that supports Sarah Stankorb's research that when women leave in larger numbers than men, it makes a difference. 

Overall, the attendance and membership in churches and groups that identify as "Evangelical" in the US is down almost 18% since 2015, according to census bureau reports and their own membership statistics. And that can be directly attributed to the fact that MAGA has taken control of most of them, and the Christians are leaving the non-Christian MAGA cultists behind. They aren't necessarily leaving Christianity, they are leaving the pseudo-Christian MAGA influenced cult.  And there is a growing recognition and awareness of churches and church leaders who are standing up to this apostasy, along with endorsing candidates politically opposed to Trump and MAGA Republicans.

Christian Nationalism bears no resemblance to the gospel of Jesus Christ.  It exhibits none of its values or principles, it distorts, misinterprets or ignores its theology and doctrine, and the churches that follow it have become political action committees instead of genuine "ecclesia."  And the declines in membership, which are growing larger with each passing year, 2025 being the largest single membership loss ever experienced by American Evangelicals, will lead to their eventual extinction.  

Yes, I'm a Democratic Socialist: Here's Why

Democratic Socialism and Marxist Communism are diametrically opposite of each other.  To be a Democratic Socialist is to be as far away from being a Marxist Communist as being a Christian is from being an Atheist.  

And I think that's a good comparison.  I majored in American history and government in college in order to teach it to high school students, and I've accumulated more than another Master's degree in continuing education since then.  I have also taught civics, American History and government at the AP and honors level, also taking multiple hours of coursework in order to do this.  Using these terms politically requires either being educated and informed, or being ignorant and stupid. So I have a difficult time maintaining my composure when I see ignorant and stupid people equate Democrats with Communists, and Democratic Socialism with Marxist Communism.  

And of course, I know that these are used as political buzzwords, to try and convince voters who don't really know the difference, not to vote for Democrats.  I will say this much.  If this argument has the ability to convince enough voters not to vote for Democrats, then there are far too many ignorant and stupid people in this country for its own good.  

Democratic Socialism Allows "We The People" to Determine How to Use Government to Serve Its People

Capitalism is about profit.  The free market, running on the law of supply and demand, follows the money wherever it goes.  It doesn't make judgements about the benefits provided by the money, and it doesn't direct resources to needs, because demand isn't always about people's needs.  

Capitalism is easily derailed by greed.  And left unregulated, it collapses in upon itself because money makes it possible to cheat, get outside the law of supply and demand, corner the market, create monopolies and ignore suffering.  We have a political party that is doing its dead level best to create a 
Christian nationalist oligarchy, based on faulty theories of racial inequality and on an economic version of Darwin's survival of the fittest theories, without a single principle of the actual Christian gospel being included.  

So it is that we have arrived at a point where a mere 1% of the population of the United States has acquired and accumulated 99% of the nation's financial wealth.  And trying to sustain life for the other 99%, on just 1% of the resources, as miraculous as that is, requires the application of the principles of humanity.  We did not get here because capitalism works so well, we got here because wealth was able to beat back as much humanitarian principle, and Christian principle for that matter, as it possibly could. 

My personal beliefs, including my theology, were admittedly influenced by being raised in a conservative, Evangelical denomination, Southern Baptist as a matter of fact.  The irony of that experience is that I attended a denominationally related university and graduate school where the theology classes I took contradicted much of the Southern folk religion that formed the basis of what most of the people in the pews believed.  They taught me how to think critically, and to use experience and knowledge together to make wise choices.  

At the top of the list of principles that are revealed in the words in the New Testament that Christians claim are those of Jesus himself, is "love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and love your neighbor as you love yourself."  And "neighbor" was defined by Jesus using the example of a member of the most hated and despised ethnic group of his day and culture, a Samaritan.  The idea of treating a Samaritan with any kind of human dignity, much less as an  equal, would have been anathema to virtually every individual of the same ethnicity and religion that was practiced in the Jewish provinces of the Roman Empire.  Samaria lay between Judaea and Galilee, and Jewish people travelling between the two took a much longer road around it, rather than cross through and have to deal with its people. 

And for those Evangelicals who want to literally transition the principles of the Bible to the current time and ignore historical and cultural contexts in interpreting it, their ability to explain away the way they despise and hate those who do not believe the way they do, and who don't look like them, is incredibly hypocritical.  

But I don't want to digress too far.  

I am a Democratic Socialist because Democratic Socialism is the primary means by which a reasonable measure of humanity is introduced into American society, and into its government. It is the effective counterweight to unbridled, unrestrained and corrupted capitalism.  It is a moral force for good.  And for those who want to consider the influence of Christianity on American history and development, it is more consistent with the genuine principles of the Christian gospel that Jesus revealed. 

Practical Aspects of Democratic Socialism

I am writing this from the waiting room of a Chicago hospital, where my wife is undergoing an MRI.  We are working class Americans, we have never earned a six figure salary, even with both of our incomes together, and we followed the advice of those we respected in planning for our retirement.  Of course, we depended on the thousands of dollars deducted, over more than 50 years of working, to provide us with Social Security and Medicare, and we are now benefitting from both of those socialist programs.  In fact, with the various ups and downs of the financial markets, and other issues that have come up, the majority of our retirement income is dependent on Social Security.  

We paid down almost all of our personal debt prior to retiring, purchased a reliable, new vehicle three years ago, and double paid to get it paid off in three years.  We are relocating to a state that is more tax friendly to seniors, with lower housing costs, in order to preserve savings, live in austere comfort, and enjoy retirement years.  All of that is possible because of the benefits of Democratic Socialism. 

We've had some unanticipated medical issues come up, and navigating through those has been a lesson in exactly why Democratic Socialism is a necessary part of our politics.  In no other field in this country have the abuses of profiteering and greed made a bigger mess of things than in our medical care.  This, and education, are the only two fields where those who have the experience, knowledge and ability to operate are not permitted to have much say over operations.   Insurance companies control every single aspect of health care, down to how many needles a lab tech can use while taking blood from a patient.  

And that's to save money of course, but not for actual health care.  It's to guarantee profitability.  American health care is based on how much profit can be made out of the pain and suffering of people who are sick.  The religious-based, not-for-profit hospitals which once dominated American health care are rapidly being bought up by health care corporations to eliminate the competition and to make more money.  And it's no surprise that we have reached a point where health insurance corporations are buying up hospitals and medical practices, to do just like old fashioned monopolies once did, owning every stage of the production.  

As a result, American medical research and practice no longer leads the world in research and development, nor in quality of patient care, though our rising mortality rates put us in the company of some third world countries.  

It is time for this country to socialize its health care provision and finance systems, take the profit out of all of it, drive the costs down, and let a single-payer health coverage plan take care of the expense, and of making sure that every American has equal access to the best quality health care.  That kind of equality stands on a basic American value.  About half of every dollar Americans spend on health care and health insurance doesn't go to their health care, but to profit margins and dividend payouts.  That's a lot of money, either to be saved, or to be applied to a higher level of quality healthcare. 

Being able to reform our health care system is one good reason why I am a Democratic Socialist.  This is the wealthiest nation on earth and while the wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, virtually everyone in the whole society helped contribute to it.  So government, breaking down the practices that have created the inequity, and doing a better job of helping people use what their labor has earned, is one of its functions.  I'm all in favor of letting it do its job.  

But the attractiveness of Democratic Socialism is found in the word "democratic."  The Quakers speak of a concept they call "that of God within," the idea that humanity is capable of rising above the level of instinct, and can enhance the quality of their lives with values that defeat selfishness.  This is rooted in their value of human equality, a principle derived from the influence of the Christian gospel.  Democratic Socialism is based on the value of human equality, and the belief that a government of, by and for the people must be subject to the will of the people.  The result, when values are applied, is something that elevates the collective quality of life.  

And that's exactly why I'm a Democratic Socialist.

 

The Difference Between the Theology of James Talarico and Robert Jeffress

There have been multiple social media posts recently featuring Dr. Robert Jeffress, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas, openly declaring that the Democratic party candidate for Senate from Texas, James Talarico, is not qualified because his Christian beliefs are too liberal, and therefore wrong.  Since no religious test is the constitutional requirement for any office holder in Congress, Talarico's religious beliefs, including his theology and his doctrinal position within the Christian faith is completely irrelevant to his qualifications for office, but of course, in a state full of right wing conservative Evangelicals, most of whom arrogantly think their interpretation of the Bible, which is a modern invention completely separated from thousands of years of Christian tradition and practice, is the correct one.  

This is a tactic designed to distract voters from the real issues in this election, and focus them on irrelevance so that Paxton's moral bankruptcy and criminal activity will not be noticed.  In any comparison of the character, truthfulness and integrity of the two men, Paxton, a serial adulterer, divorced from his wife due to marital infidelity, and impeached by the state legislature for criminal acts, exhibits none of those qualities while Talarico's character is unblemished and his word is as good as gold.  And it's not being judgmental to declare that any Christian who wants to turn this into a moral competition, and would support Paxton, is apostate, and is guilty of licentiousness (see Jude v 4) because that makes them an intruder in the Christian church, not a faithful member of it. 

Robert Jeffress is in Error in His Theology and Doctrine

Jeffress is a Southern Baptist, a denomination that has actually split over the theological error made by most conservative Evangelicals.  The evangelical Doctrine of Inerrancy claims that the sixty-six books of the Protestant Bible were verbally inspired by God, that the words chosen by forty different authors over the thousand or so years during which it was written are without error in their original autographs.  Of course, the original autographs have long since crumbled into dust, so many Evangelicals apply the Doctrine of Preservation, which states that the translations of the Bible, particularly the King James English translation, have "preserved" the inerrant and perfect nature of the scripture.  

There is zero evidence to support this.  The Bible's writers, especially those in the New Testament, make no claim that what they were writing was equal with what they called "The Scriptures."  Any examination of the earliest manuscripts, which date back to about 700 or 800 CE, shows that there are variants in the transmission of the text, many of which are associated with different theological groups that were part of the church during those decades and centuries.  

The primary error of this belief is that it distorts interpretation of the Bible itself.  The New Testament contains the four accounts known as the "gospels," which claim to be eyewitness records of the life and teachings of Jesus.  If Jesus was, as is the claim, the Son of God whose purpose was to reveal the nature of God to humankind, then the record of his words would be the high point of all Biblical literature, both Old and New Testament.  His words, coming from the very mind of God himself, would carry a level of inspiration that is superior to all other scripture, including the prophets, the law, and the Apostolic books of the New Testament.  

The Baptist Faith and Message, the doctrinal guidelines for cooperation within the Southern Baptist denomination, once declared that Jesus was the criterion by which the rest of scripture is to be interpreted.  But the 2000 edition of that document, heavily edited by fundamentalists of Jeffress' ilk, removed Jesus as the criterion for interpreting scripture.  That leads to the errors in Biblical interpretation which constitute the vast majority of Evangelical theology, including everything that Jeffress preaches from the pulpit.  

But there is another aspect to Jeffress' approach to the Christian faith that causes me not to trust his claims to being Christian, or his calling as a pastor, at all.  

Jeffress is one of the highest profile pastors in the country who spends an inordinate amount of time defending a man who is a pathological liar, a serial adulterer who cheated on his third, and pregnant, wife with a prostitute and porn actress, a convicted rapist, and with pending criminal indictments for inciting sedition and pedophilia.  A man who has openly blasphemed the Holy Spirit by declaring that he has not committed sin that requires God's forgiveness.  Jeffress has become one of Trump's favorite pastors.  Well, birds of a feather.  

Trump has, for some reason, decided his spiritual advisor wouldn't be Jeffress, who bobbed and scurried along behind him blowing his nose and wiping is rear end to gain his favor, and chose an even bigger apostate heretic, Paula White, for this job.  That had to be a difficult pill for Jeffress to swallow without comment, as a member of the inner circle of Southern Baptist leaders who think that calling a woman a "pastor," or a "prophetess" as is the case with White, is heresy.  But there is no open criticism from these hypocrites about White, whose doctrine actually makes her church into a cult, according to any Southern Baptist pastor who could be asked.  They hypocritically give him a pass on that issue.  

So Jeffress can be critical of Talarico's theology from his pulpit every single Sunday he preaches, it does not change the fact that he is the one who is promoting doctrinal and theological error, not Talarico. 

James Talarico is Right On Target When it Comes to His Interpretation of Biblical Truth

Just then a lawyer stood up to test Jesus. 

"Teacher," he said, "What must I do to inherit eternal life?"

He said to him, "What is written in the Law? What do you read there?" 

He answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."  

And he said to him, "You have given the right answer; do this and and you will live."  

I've never heard Jeffress quote this scripture or interpreted it as Talarico does frequently.  These are the words of Jesus himself, and he is saying that eternal life depends upon obedience to the two greatest commandments, which Jesus actually equated.  Love God and love your neighbor.  This is an unqualified statement which Talarico interprets correctly.  Jeffress preaches that eternal life depends upon getting doctrine correct, meaning in agreement with what he has been taught to believe.  Talarico preaches that eternal life depends upon loving God and loving one's neighbor, a belief that is demonstrated by actions.  

And loving your neighbor doesn't translate into deporting them or their family members, denying them access to health care, or to food, or taking their money and turning a profit for the rich.  Remember, Jesus told the rich young ruler that his path to eternal life required him to show his love for God by selling all his possessions and giving the money to his neighbors, the poor.  

Talarico's Christian faith is obvious and evident, not just in what he advocates as a member of the Texas legislature, or in his church ministry, but in his politics.  

So Who Should Texas Christians Trust? 

How can Robert Jeffress be trusted to tell the truth when it comes to his political bias?  That's a simple question to answer.  He's not trustworthy.  

If he were, then he would not defend either Trump or Paxton, who have rejected Christianity.  Jude, verse 4 is a very accurate description of how both of these politicians are using Christianity for their own profit and could care less about doctrine or faith.  If he cared, he wouldn't support either man, morally bankrupt and licentious intruders into Evangelicalism.  It's been easy to see how they could do this, since Evangelicalism does not stand on truth, or on love of God and love of neighbors, but on wealth, power and influence.  Immorality is an inconsequential issue, when money and power get in the way.  

So if those who want to make a religious test take that seriously, they cannot cast a ballot for Paxton without labelling themselves as apostate. 

 

What Did We Expect From a Right Wing Personality Cult?

 The Guardian: Grief, Fury, Conspiracy Inside Turning Point USA After Charlie Kirk's Killing

It was a movement built on pushing for what they defined and called "traditional values of womanhood" that turned into a political movement to provide a stage for its founder to debate political liberals.  I use the term "debate" generally, since an actual debate implies that fairness is applied to both sides and facts must be used.  Kirk was a distorter of facts, and most of the debates in which he engaged were conducted under his ground rules, making sure those who disagreed with him were at a distinct disadvantage.  

Turning Point USA had a strong connection to the more extreme right wing side of Evangelicalism, the political element more aligned with its Charismatic/Pentecostal side.  It had a set of values that it claimed, but because Kirk's primary objective was to have Trump's back, and protect him from any kind of criticism as a result of his gross moral bankruptcy and the mounting evidence of his sex and political crimes, Turning Point USA could not actually stand on its values all of the time.  And that made it hypocritical.  

A personality cult is identified as a group which demonstrates excessive public admiration for or devotion to a famous person or a political leader.  The article I posted from The Guardian is lengthy, gives a rundown of the history of Turning Point USA and Kirk's leadership, and then gives examples of how it was nothing more than a personality cult by showing what appears to be a rapid decline in interest and participation since Kirk's death.  His funeral was apparently the high point of the organization's existence.  It's been downhill since then.  

A Very Typical Pattern for Evangelical Para-Church and Political Organizations

American Evangelical Christianity is full of personality cults.  The values and principles that they preach, and claim to be promoting, derived from their own interpretation of the Bible and of what they think defines the "Christian gospel" are basically the same.  It's a very legalistic system of doctrinal conformity based on a literal interpretation of the Biblical text that ignores two thousand years of Christian history, tradition, and especially the cultural and linguistic nuances and influences on the writing of the text itself.  

American Evangelicalism's growth over the past fifty years has depended on a small cluster of personalities who turn themselves into religious celebrities with the following they gather from their media outreach.  That more or less reached a peak with Billy Graham, whose radio and then television preaching made him the single most recognizable American Evangelical in the world. Most of the others who have come along afterward, in the current megachurch movement, are imitators of his success.  

They observed that he built a media empire around his crusade meetings, and that he made a lot of money. They observed that he had the potential to use his influence with politicians, and to move his followers in a direction that potentially gave him political power.  They also observed that when he stepped down, his son used the name Graham to build his own multi-million dollar evangelistic ministry off of his father's reputation, and turned the emphasis on evangelistic ministry into right wing political influence.  Franklin Graham lost the ability to be an evangelistic influence, but he has expanded his wealth and has used his name to become a major Christian nationalist influence in the Republican party. 

Almost all of the large, Evangelical media ministries have para-church organizations they've set up to use their influence in extremist right wing politics.  There's Falwell and the Moral Majority, Pat Robertson and the Christian Coalition, along with his "700 Club" that looks like a legitimate news provider.  Turning Point USA was just another one of those same kind of Evangelical religious-political organizations built, not on promoting truth, or even preaching an evangelistic Christian message, but around the personality of its founder.  

And now that its founder is gone, the organization is fracturing, fragmenting, and falling apart, because there was nothing beyond Charlie Kirk's personality to hold it together.  It's impossible to reconcile any core values claimed to be based on the Christian gospel with unqualified and unquestioned support for Donald Trump.  

And that's the hard reality Turning Point USA must now face.