My post yesterday saying that this is not a Christian nation triggered some interesting responses. Anne wrote very politely saying she felt my article was divisive. She said many of my blogs divide Christians, instead of calling them together. She said that while she personally believed the Bible condemns homosexuality, that she also believes in full civil rights for GLBT citizens. I wrote back that while we disagreed on scripture, that my article was not meant to criticize Christians who didn’t impose their religion on others.
Craig said that I was being a coward. He quoted my response to Anne:
“I never put you in any category and I certainly don’t assume you are evil.”
And then he responded:
“No, Jim, you didn’t. You simply impugned an entire group of people that may have _included_ Anne and then hid behind the “I didn’t say that about _YOU_” defense. It’s pretty shameful and cowardly (not to mention obvious). If you’re going to have the false-courage to call an entire group names at least have the intellectual honesty to claim it when you’re called on the carpet.”
He then quoted from my post: “Example: if I wrote, say (emphasis mine), “When people say the US should be a “Christian nation,” they _never_ mean that we should feed the poor, clothe the naked or, God forbid, turn the other cheek. What people usually mean by the term “Christian nation” is that their own _primitive ideas_ of creation should be _imposed_ upon science classes and that their almost perfect _ignorance_ of human biology should become law. Unlike Peter, many Christians only lay down the sword so they can take up the gun.”
Then he continued with his comment: “I would be intellectually dishonest if I then claimed that a specific member of that group did not have “primitive ideas”, was “ignorant”, or “imposed” their ideas upon other people, as you have quite clearly done. Or don’t you get that?
Words, Jim. Words have meaning. You cannot use them to tear down a group and then claim “oh! I didn’t mean it about YOU, stranger” when someone raises an objection. That kind of sloppy thinking is very indicative of the sort of common intellectual dishonesty that wants to have their opinion without any repercussions.
Either stand up for what you say or don’t say it. Coward.”
Here is my response to Craig:
“Craig,
When you say that criticizing a group necessarily includes every single member of that group, you miss the fact that I consider myself a Christian, too. The group I was criticizing was not Christians in general, but only Christians who bully. Groups can be do bad things without all of the members of that group participating.
If you can find an example of any place in any of my writings where I have actually called someone a name please point it out to me and I will apologize. But what I actually did was describe a type of bullying behavior and you took it personally. I will say what I said to Anne, as long as a you aren’t trying to impose your religion my neighbors, we don’t have a problem. If you are not cramming your version of Christianity down other people’s throats I wasn’t talking about you. But if you are, I need to stand in defense of the people you are attacking using the name of Christ.
You illustrated the difference in criticizing and name calling in your comment. When you said my actions were “cowardly” that was not name calling. When you called me a “coward” that was name calling.
I agree that words are important, but so are people. This is a nation of Jews, Muslims, and atheists as well as Christians. Lots and lots of Americans are not Christian. This is their country too. When anyone says this should be a Christian nation they are saying that non-Christians are second class citizens.
And calling this a “Christian nation” is a dangerous lie for another reason. If God gave this land to anyone, it was the indigenous people. The “Christian” founders of this nation robbed that land and committed genocide on the inhabitants. When the “Christian” founders built this nation, they did it with people kidnapped from Africa and enslaved for that purpose. What does it mean when we call these things “Christian?” To say God gave us this land and leave out these atrocities muffles the voices of our victims and masks one of the most heinous crimes in history.
If we ever meet in person I will be happy to take you to coffee and have a Christian to Christian fellowship. But if you attack my GLBT or my non-Christian neighbors, you will find out that “coward” isn’t a very good description of me.”
Jim is definitely not a coward. A coward would not have the courage to express unpopular views. The Bible, as I read it, says men that lay with other men as women ( i.e. that would be penile penetration), not simply loving same sex partners), as sinners.
No, it says that said act is an abonimation, the way lobsters are an abomination, or sowing two types of seed in the same field, or women menstrating.
The definition of “Coward’ by Webster’s: A person with tail between legs, someone who shrinks in fear from danger. Please you could not have used a word less true than coward. Jim’s very words and thoughts put him in danger on a daily basis. Would a coward even have written this note in the first place. His words are choosen very carefully and meant to make people think not to accuse anyone person of anything. I happen to agree with Jim and you do not. This is okay. I would like to hear your opinion as to why you disagree. But lets keep our discussion less emotional and more intellectual this way we can always learn something from each other.
To all those who attacked Jim for his post, I would call on you to read it with an open mind. To say that Jim was attacking All Christians is to miss the point. We are a nation of many people of faiths and no faith. If Jesus were to appear today in America, their are many he would praise, Christian or not. There are also some who call themselves Christians we would call out for their hateful words and deeds. Non-Christians too.
I am not a person of faith. But I was raised by a Roman Catholic mother, and a father which was educated in Catholic schools. While my mother went to church my father did not. And I was not forced to go. I learned more from my mother, TV preachers like Pat Robertson and my own reading than the Catholic Church. I was turned off faith from what I heard because there was little love for others.
Jim also has given me a new view of Christians since I read his writing about Rick Perry’s gathering during his campaign. This opinion posting convinced me to watch his sermons online. And while I remain outside any faith I am open to the message he presents.
Jim has given me a view of Christians I can respect and even agree with. He was clearly only attacking those which want to impose their faith on others including me. Adults are all free to believe as they chose.
Children should not because they must be allowed to mature and decide for themselves. Adults for example, can decide to rely on faith to cure them. But society must protect children and require medical care.
We need more pastors of courage like Jim.Courage to speak truth to power even within the church.
Thank you, David.