Rick Warren

Edit: Shit. Not five minutes after I wrote this did I see that Tink has already spoken on the topic and, being far more deep, intellectual, and insightful than myself, his write up is pretty amazing. If you don’t want to read a lot, just read his. Don’t even read mine. Seriously. Link.

PS: Tell me if that link doesn’t work and I’ll copy/paste the contents in here.

—————————————————–

Edit2: On the topic, I just came across this little piece of awesome.

 

Open mouth. Insert foot.

 

 

—————————————————–

Dammit. My keyboard is in French again.éèÉ^çà Okay. So there’s a lot of controversy surrounding this Rick Warren guy. The conservatives tend bash him because he won’t be ignorant and the liberals bash him because they’re confused about how a person can be Christian and still be tolerant or how a person can disagree with another group’s viewpoints and still respect them (specifically the pro-homosexual movement, a part of which Mr. Warren decidedly is not).

I think it’s funny. Mostly because after researching Mr. Warren from a skeptical perspective (the guy is the author of the book “Purpose Driven Life”, which is embraced by many “Christians” in my area and that is generally enough to make me skeptical; then add to that the fact that he’s the pastor of a super church and I become even more skeptical), I came to realize that he seems to be more tolerant and open-minded than most liberals and that confuses them a lot. And he’s also more fundamental (in the sense that he does what Jesus did) than most conservative “Fundamentalists”. (Actually, in my experience, conservative Fundamentalists have always been opposed to the real person of Jesus just like the religious people in Jesus’ time were opposed to Him). So to me, the fact that the conservatives are against him is no surprise but the fact that the liberals are against him is amusing.

Probably my favorite thing about Mr. Warren is that he actually does what he preaches. Look here:

Warren survives the pounding partly because of his personal integrity. He donates 90 percent of his many millions in book royalties back to the church. He says he stopped taking a salary from Saddleback six years ago. No scandals have tainted his ministry.

Also, Warren is doing his part to fight AIDS in the most destitute places in the world. And more than that, he has enough faith in God that he is secure in partnering with non-Christian organizations who also want to be Jesus-like (even though they may not know it) to the poorest people in the world.

Moreover, the fact that he is mature and confident in his political views enough to host an unbiased bi-partisan conference is pretty amazing to me (given my stigma against wealthy pastors). It seems like both He and Obama are actually interested in the causes in which they claim to be interested (as opposed to just wanting to be seen as right or correct) enough to partner with eachother to overcome partisan ignorance. I feel like anyone who hates politics for all of its two-faced-ness and blame-game-playing-ness should love both of these guys. As the above article points out:

It is no surprise that he and Obama have become friendly. Each tries to operate outside a strict liberal-conservative divide, and has risked angering his supporters to do so.

So I’m going to give you some vids to watch and chew on because I’ve found that I respect this guy a lot, even though I don’t necessarily agree perfectly with his views of homosexuality–he genuinely is seeking the truth and not using the Bible as an excuse to hate a group of people.

And watch the video at the top of this page. It’s good. I specifically like what he thinks about Fundamentalism.

PS: “We believe in the separation of Church and state, but we do not believe in the separation of faith and politics.” – Rick Warren at the 2008 Presidential Forum at Saddleback Church. Now I’m going to post this before I watch the rest of that damn video or I’ll end up regurgitating it to you verbatim.

Peace!

In Need: Can government help its helpless citizens?

I consider myself politically neutral these days, despite having been both liberal and conservative in the past. Something that always attracted me to the Democratic camp is how they seem to genuinely feel for the poor among us–something that seems to be a very Christian idea. Unfortunately, I soon realized that a big portion of their solution to the problem seems to be throwing money at the less-fortunate.

First of all, I don’t believe that’s a viable solution because I don’t believe money improves anyone’s lives. I really think we need other people who believe in us and who can encourage us genuinely–something I don’t believe a government is capable of providing (because a government can’t tell people to go love people in need of love). No amount of money can do that. This goes to show just how powerless a government can be when it comes to actually making a positive difference in the world.

Secondly, the Republican solution seems to rely on giving tax breaks to the rich and relying on complicated economic trickle-down effects to get money and resources to the poor (which, again, I don’t believe solves the problem). It honestly appears as if many in this camp are using this solution as an excuse to be greedy and cling to their moneys (which is interesting because that makes it seem that Jesus would side with the “godless liberals” over the Religious Right–although Jesus never seemed to fit in well with the religious folks). However, I do agree with the conservatives in that [I believe] it isn’t the government’s job to take care of the needy–it’s the Church’s.

So I love the passion for humanitarianism (a very Christ-like quality that doesn’t seem to occur too often in the Religious Right) but I also feel like their methodology is wrong. But to their credit, (and realize I’m not saying this is true of all liberals) if I didn’t believe in God, I wouldn’t trust the Chruch for much anyways–the next viable option would appear to be the government.

On the flip side, I believe the conservative side has the right intellectual idea, but they seem to lack the compassion to actually care about the needy in the ways that their God does (so it’s kind of funny to me the godless liberals seem to follow God better than the Religious Right–which leads me to believe that perhaps the “godless liberals” have a confused idea about God because of how us “Christians” represent Him).

So to awkwardly tie-together this loose, airy post… Basically I don’t believe it is the government’s responsibility, I admire the liberals’ passion, I am disappointed in the conservative camp for not feeling more emphatically on the issue (especially those who believe God would only ever vote Republican), and I think it would be ephing sweet if we all would stop arguing and handle this without going through the ever-complicated middle-management that is our government. That is to say, if the religious and non-religious, liberal and conservative, etc would take care of the problem through private organizations (who would be focused on the actual problem) and unaffiliated with any church or political movement or some other means. The end.

So I’m writing this on 10/08/08: It seems to me lately that the welfare system may only be 10% effective and the rest may be “wasteful”, but if you think about it, that 10% is still getting used and it’s not like the rest of us need that additional money anyways. I mean, if you have a car you’re among 8% of the world’s most elite population anyways. Moreover, if we were really interested in efficiency, we could always take a little more time and ensure that that money gets used effectively by buying necessities for the needy. So I guess I’m now okay with the Democrats’ passion and their methodology on this issue.