All Comments for: Faith Is Not a Freak Show | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2008 > August

Christianity Today, August, 2008 |

Faith Is Not a Freak Show

Let's make sure we learn the right lessons from the primary season.

A Christianity Today editorial | posted 7/31/2008 08:47AM

In the days after George W. Bush's 2004 reelection, political analysts highlighted the Democratic Party's failure to speak the language of faith in a way that resonated with American voters, particularly ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 comments.

Page: 1

Show All

bode maxwell

Posted: August 12, 2008 9:27 AM

The subtle demonization of Barack Obama by the so-called christian right is unwarranted, provocative and in itself down right evil. Anyone who looks at another human being and sees the devil in him because he's different is himself a spawn of the Devil whatever that means. Barack Obama is black and possesses uncommon gifts which he has used to maximum effect in this year's election. But that doesn't make him the anti-christ. Now, the Scripture says no man can say Jesus is Lord except by the Spirit of God. Barack Obama has openly confessed his faith in Jesus Christ. To now still cast aspersions at him by saying he's Satan's spawn is to serve the cause of the enemy of the Cross. There is no gainsaying it: if Barack Obama were a white coloured guy named Jim Stone or Barry Wood he would not have been labeled the anti-christ. He's called Satan's spawn because he'black and blacks are not expected to be as gifted and as charismatic as this guy. So he must be Satan's agent!

mike ross

Posted: August 06, 2008 8:52 PM


Well, some segments of the western protestant religion ARE a freak show in America. Just look at the goings on such as Benny Hinn, and all. This is see by many as 'american as apple pie', but it is just that ...a freak show. Return to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, the one that existed and still exists pre and post schism, and pre/post 'reformation'. mike

Carlos

Posted: August 04, 2008 6:08 PM

BTW, 'The Great Controversy' is just another one of the many books authored by Ellen G. White, of the SDA church, the most prolific Plagiarist and Fraud ever! Re any political candidate, who claims to be a 'Christian' like Hillary Clinton, and then chides those who 'wear' their faith, convictions about Christ on their sleeves, nonsense, as If one truly knows Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord, you will NOT be ashamed to declare 'Him' openly.

DG	Posted: August 02, 2008 3:25 PM

This election cycle has really highlighted a sad reality of Christianity in America. Particularly rightwing religiousity. It turns out, for me at least, that being a Christian in America is really a color thing! How else do one explain why a majority of white Christians are more likely to belive that Obama is a muslim despite all the furor about his association with Rev Wright for 20 year. And Hilary Clinton is a more acceptable Christian despite a predilection to falsehood! And yet the Bible clearly tells us "all liars will go to hell!". By the way, I am not an Obama fan; neither would I vote for him if me vote could count!!!!!

Keith

Posted: August 02, 2008 8:43 AM

Lets face it. Evangelicals are not going to vote Democrat no matter how "religious' the candidatye seems to be. For them Evangelical Religion is simply a mask for a whole lot of other issues such as distain for supporting for those who are jobless and without health, giving tax advantages for the "haves," and the dirty secret that racism exists among Christians. These represent the real litmus test for evangelicals and these issues have nothing to do with faith. When shall we stop using Christianity as a claok for our mean spirited ways?

Matt Ferguson

Posted: August 02, 2008 7:46 AM

The writer of this bit is a fool. Romney and Obama were not helped by their religious beliefs because they are not Christian. Romney is Mormon and Obama belonged to a progressive sect that denies some central doctrinal truths. Huckabee did far better than anyone expected. Far from being hurt, Huckabee received a huge boost from his Christian faith. How a writer for Chrisianity Today or their editoral board would allow such foolishness as this piece is equally as poor as this article itself.

A friend of Jesus

Posted: August 01, 2008 3:51 PM


All I know is that Obama is the spawn of Satan. I hope Christians are not fools by his slick talk. There is no moral candidate in this year's election. I am forced to abstain. I don't believe in voting for the lesser of evils.

Dave	Posted: August 01, 2008 11:20 AM

I'm with Luther, I'd rather have a just pagan govern than an unjust saint. This is why I couldn't support Huckabee's canidacy, he did not represent my values beyond his stand on life and marriage. I have a hard time with some of McCain's issues, but find that he is closer to my political ideals than Obama. Does his faith play a role? Not really. In the end, it is God who "removes kings and sets up kings" (Dan. 2:12). It is my role as a Christian citizen to vote for the candidate that most closely represents Christian standards.

catherine

Posted: August 01, 2008 3:02 AM


It seems to me that everyone is afraid to say the name Jesus, as if they might drop dead or something. Jesus is the only way to escape hell, which noone seems to care about. It boggles the mind to say the least.

Keith Johnson

Posted: July 31, 2008 11:08 PM

You equivocate resistance with religion with our current irritation of particular pastors who are attracted to their own fame and the sound of their voice. I have no problem with a faith that is marked by humility and guarded reverence. But come on! Parsley, Wright, Hagee are all of a type that makes your case as weak as it makes these showmen notorious. I think most americans respect strength, character and belief in God. Resisting special interests (please note the cliche), stating how decisions are animated by and influenced with faith and avoiding inertia (whatever that means) are probably important. But I hope you know that faith in God trends toward far deeper outcomes!

BSDetector

Posted: July 31, 2008 10:42 PM


This statement is supported by no evidence. "Without firm theological convictions, a great leader such as Abraham Lincoln could not have risen above bitterly partisan forces to serve the good of the nation. " Stating something does not make it true. This sounds make-belive. Do I detect a pattern........

Joe R

Posted: July 31, 2008 7:27 PM

This is miss-information, i.e. bull. "From its founding, the United States has been a laboratory for religious pluralism. For over 200 years we've been wrestling with how exactly to relate religious belief to a system of government that prides itself on religious freedom and the separation of church and state. The advice of a French political philosopher seems to have held the day." separation of church and state = Congress will not create a state religion nor hinder religion. The founding fathers tried to guarantee that its citizens be educated in order to determine for themselves their faith and understanding; options to discover for themselves by delving into the Bible and other sources what they would believe. Therefore be able to apply their beliefs to control and limit government interference in their lives.

JAllen

Posted: July 31, 2008 7:22 PM


If you want to find out what's going on, go to Ebay and buy a copy of The Great Controversy.

LeeC	Posted: July 31, 2008 4:54 PM

Am I correct when I say that CT is beginning to publish articles of a more proactive than reactive tone? If so, I am likely to keep on reading. . .In this particular article, I read the term "deeply religious Americans". . .What do such people look like? . . .How do they behave? Are evangelicals recovering from their need for "particular religious connections"? Is their God big enough that they can react with the grace and love of God to the "hot button social issues" that so dominated the political atmosphere of recent years? . . . and will they consider that any candidate is in the midst of his/her own spiritual journey and may not be ready to talk a lot about it?

Graham UK

Posted: July 31, 2008 4:50 PM


Try telling Jesus to keep religion out of politics. It is falling away from Christ's teaching to keep quiet when politics affects humanity for good and evil. God bless us all!

Robert S.

Posted: July 31, 2008 4:49 PM

So we don't know who wrote this 'editorial'. Whoever did needs some help. If that person is a Christ Person, judging any faith issues as a freak show should not be listened to. Oh, I'm sure that whoever it is has already judged any and all statements of faith by anyone in politics...freakish. Just choosing that term makes a mockery of the comments. To be sure I disagree with statements and positions on religion and faith made by many in the current political setting, but the analysis of this piece of writing leaves so much to be desired, beginning with the title, that I will leave it unsaid. Knowing that that leaves me open to ridicule is okay. I think it a waste of time to pursue. Most pieces I find helpful, but this is one that I don't.

Jawjaboy

Posted: July 31, 2008 4:35 PM

"It doesn't really matter whom Americans call God." I find that statement a little strange coming from a Christian Group. How do you handle Jesus' statment: "No one comes to the Father but through Me, I and the Father are one." There are untold numbers of "religlions" out there who worship dead "gods", statues, cows, priest, monkeys, you name it. All of them will lead a person down a dead end path where awaits only questions, dissapointments, confused and lost souls. Yes, there must be a belief in Jehovah God. As this nation turns away from Jehovah, as it is doing at the present time, it will be found on that slippery slope from which there is not return.

Toto	Posted: July 31, 2008 3:06 PM

How can you say that faith is not a freak show, when it so often is exactly that? Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone magazine keeps reporting more freakish details, and he's not about to run out of material. You even have to use the euphemism "faith" instead of "religion" because of all of the crazy preachers and religious entrepreneurs who have given organized religion a bad name. Can you articlulate some positive value for "faith" in national policy, as opposed to a strictly rational look at the facts on the ground?

Raymond Takashi Swenson

Posted: July 31, 2008 2:57 PM

When Romney tried to speak to voters from the common base of New Testament Christianity that his religion shares with traditional Christian denominations, people accused him of lying about being a believer in Christ, even though as unpaid leader of his church in Boston he taught people to have faith in Christ's saving atonement. Only last week, some Evangelicals were quoted saying that Romney could not be trusted to be sincere in opposing abortion and same-sex marriage, because he is a Mormon, even though the LDS Church is actively campaigning to amend the California constitution to reestablish traditional marriage, and counsels its members against abortion. People accuse Romney of being willing to change his positions to be popular, even while he does the most unpopular thing of all by holding strongly to his Mormon faith. Romney's political problem isn't his religion, but some voters' religious ignorance and bias.

John	Posted: July 31, 2008 2:48 PM

It is interesting that CT would choose Lincoln, who often looked to "Providence" for guidance, but who was a member of no organized religion, as the role model for how a candidate should deal with his faith. Another more recent example is Ronald Reagan, who spoke often and warmly about God but rarely darkened the door of any church. I am not sure what the conclusion of the editorial was, should candidates be more specific in their religious affiliations or not, but certainly the lesson of history is, not. We like a President who believes in God and doesn't argue with us on the specifics.

Geoff

Posted: July 31, 2008 2:19 PM

I generally agreed with this editorial, although I find this sentence telling: "For American politicians, the formula requires using the language of faith without communicating much more than "I'm for faith, America, and freedom." This affirmation risks little and invites voters to fill in the blanks with their own meaning." If this is really the extent to which faith can be integrated into our political system, then it seems all the more clear to me that true Christianity looks nothing like the civil religion that is often labeled as "Christianity" in America. Perhaps that civil religion is a necessary aspect of our foundational principles as a culture, but it is no more Christian than the Roman system of government under which the early church began to flourish. Perhaps if we shifted our thinking away from the idea that America is a "Christian nation", then maybe our churches would begin to flourish as well, rather than shrinking and splintering.

Bob	Posted: July 31, 2008 12:57 PM


I am completely satisfied with the separation of church and state in most political issues. There has been a mockery of Christianity in decisions by past politicos when they had stated God was on their side. But let's pray for them!

Leroy

Posted: July 31, 2008 12:53 PM

Here are three better questions: Can church leaders articulate the connections between their faith and the decisions they will need to make? Will faith help church leaders just say no to the corrupting influences of special interests? Will it enable church leaders to break free of political inertia to meet challenges before they become crises? Beyond this, these are questions which Obama has clearly addressed, while McCain is so uncomfortable with the whole topic of faith, he has not, could not and will not.

JohnW

Posted: July 31, 2008 12:21 PM

I agree with your conclusions. For instance when a presidential candidate says Jesus Christ is his favorite philosopher because he changed his heart, the press could ask how this would effect his foreign policy. For example, how would it effect his approach to dealing with terrorism or deciding to go to war. May Jesus would direct him to start a never ending war on "terror", violate the constitution, and invade and occupy every country that has or might have weapons of mass distruction, maybe or maybe not. I'm just saying if a candidate is going to wear his faith on his sleeve and use evangelical code words to get votes, he should be prepared to be specific about how his faith would influence his decisions....

Ted	Posted: July 31, 2008 11:59 AM


Just goes to show why the separation of church and state is critical - keeping religion out of politics is just as important as keeping politics out of religion.

Page: 1

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment