This year, as we know, it’s the Denver Broncos’ unconventional quarterback Tim Tebow whose faith in Christ is making our conformist left-wing press corp writhe and snarl like the damned in a Renaissance painting of Judgement Day. Between taking a knee in prayer mid-game and his former practice of inscribing his eye-black with Bible verses, Tebow’s commitment to Christ is so overt that even his equally inspiring fellow Christian Kurt Warner has publicly told him to tone it down a little.
In my own life, I have to admit, I fully understand Warner’s reticence. I find it very uncomfortable to follow the risen Christ’s injunction to “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation,” (Mark 16:15) and am far more at home with his instruction to pray in secret (Matt 6:6). I hate pompous piety and intrusive evangelizing and I certainly never want anyone to think I claim any special relationship with God. After all, if they found out about that, they might start asking for stock tips!
But it seems to me the time for Christian reticence may be past. Just as Islamo-fascists and their left-wing facilitators have abused western tolerance to clear a space for their vicious intolerance, so belligerent atheists and their left-wing facilitators are abusing Christian humility to try to shove Christianity out of the public square and seize that square for themselves. This year, left-wing Governor of Rhode Island Lincoln Chafee christened, if that’s the word I want, the state’s Christmas tree a “holiday tree” for fear of giving offense — though when questioned about the decision, he ran like a dog. The City of Santa Monica has allowed irritable atheists to take up space usually given to nativity displays. And the anti-American ACLU only takes enough time off from its war against Christmas to produce articles claiming its war against Christmas doesn’t exist.
We know these assaults are not really protests against “religion,” or attempts to insure the government maintains a proper role in regards to religion. We know that because, so often, the moment the religion in question is Islam, so many of the anti-Christian players seem to switch sides and begin to sentimentalize Islamic practices which, if sponsored by Christians, would appall them. Indeed, Christians can be forgiven if they look to a teetering Europe — where Christianity is often persecuted while the most despicable forms of Islamism are protected — and see the specter of our own future.
In these unpleasant controversies, the average citizen can be relied on to unknowingly play into the atheists’ hands by saying, “What’s all the fuss about? Call the tree whatever you want,” or “I hate these loud-mouthed evangelists anyway.” And, truly, I understand that attitude. I don’t want to spend Christmas arguing about Christmas either.
But the fact is, under all the rationalizing and smooth-talking denials, attacks on Christmas are an assault on a load-bearing wall of both freedom and tolerance. No states but those that evolved from Judaism and Christianity have ever been truly free or truly inclusive in any modern sense of the terms. Remove the specifically Judeo-Christian foundation, and the tower of liberty falls, as we’re seeing in Europe now. (See also secular Italian intellectual Marcello Pera’s fine essay, “Why We Should Call Ourselves Christians.”)
The outspoken faith of the Drew Breeses and Tim Tebows of the world may make even some Christians uncomfortable, but they are living examples of the fact that Christ came not to bring peace, but a sword — a sword that sometimes has to be brandished in defense of the only faith on earth that has ever made men free.
Christians are not of this world system. They are in it, but not of it.
Those who hate Christ, hate G-d the Father and morality. Morality means there is sin. If there is sin, then humans should not do things like molest children, are worship themseves as a god, etc…
The New Age is all about doing what feels good. Therefore, in the New Age Christianty is hate speech for those who wish to believe G-d does not exist.
Amen.
((((NODS)))))
We are in the world, but are not of the world
The longer I live, the more I alienated I feel.
Thank you for stating it so clearly.
I know the feeling well. I think that is as it should be since we are not long for this world. My pastor made a comment in his sermon this past Sunday about how true peace can only come through death, whether it is men going off to war to die, or the death of an ideology, etc. That gave me something to think about during this season when we say, “Peace on earth, goodwill to men.”
Leatherneck, SO?
It is difficult for me to add a comment on your article, Mr. Klavan, other than to say – - Excellent!
An excellent commentary! There must be a strong defense of Christianity in the US or we will be faced with a terrible choice later on–dhimmitude, or death. I would go so far as to say that if an established religion openly advocates to its followers in our nation that they will take the nation down and make Muslims or dhinmmitudes out of our citizens, they have lost their protection under the Constitution out of their own mouths. Our Establishment clause is not a suicide pact.
Look what fell through a worm hole at the HuffPo:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alexander-goerlach/no-skanks-allowed_b_1137744.html
Better print it and frame it cuz this kind of common sense at that politically correct hate-speech-lite rag is almost as rare as a dodo.
Thank you for this!!
I told my wife that, if Tebow takes this team to the Superbowl, I will go to church for the first time in nearly 40 years. The Broncos are lousy and the hand of God will have to be involved in order to make that happen. I like the kid and, if he wants an evangelical life, I know a lot of a lot of worse ways for him to spend his time.
Why wait until then? The man has won 6 straight, 7 of 8. His completion rate is poor, except in money time. His QB rating is poor, except in money time. He leads a team that had a losing record, 1-4. Despite that, they are now 8-5 and lead their division. He does it through faith in God. People are going crazy for him.
Do you really need fiery letters in the sky? Get thee to church.
Going to church will not get you into the presence of God friend. Just as a man born in a garage is not a car, or one born in a hospital in not a doctor, you can’t get into God’s presence by going to church. I suggest you read the Scriptures, for they speak of Him. The book of John is a good place to start. Christ died for your sins, but you must first understand that you HAVE sinned. IF you deny that you have sinned, Christ is of no help.
Going to church because God has blessed a young Believer who happens to be a pro player is not a reason to go to Church, Go because you see the NEED in your life for the God who blessed him.
All the best to you.
Short, simple, and honest. We have to first admit our sin, then accept that free gift from God – he paid what we all owe, past, present, and future (as long as we’re her on earth).
What made you an authority on my religious motivation? I am not a believer. I am enjoying this Tebow stuff as much as anyone because I am a longtime Broncos fan. I did not intend to make light of anyone’s religious activities, I thought I was making a little tolerant humor. I have no dog in this hunt, so I apologize for any offense I have created. I am 60 years old and I have not been to church in 40 years. But I am sure I spent more time reading the scriptures in my first twenty years than most people will do in a lifetime. I am impressed by Tim Tebow and his fourth quarter heroics, and I am unimpressed by your attempt to provide me with insider knowledge of what it takes to be a Christian. By the way, Tebow will probably lose this week because the Broncos have to play a powerhouse team and because intensity can only carry a football player so far.
Jim Baker wrote: I told my wife that, if Tebow takes this team to the Superbowl, I will go to church for the first time in nearly 40 years. [snip] What made you an authority on my religious motivation? I am not a believer.
Jim, if you are not a believer, don’t waste your time going to church.
wow–talk about being mixed up on the concept! how UN-christian your remark is. it’s exactly the unbeliever that Jesus wanted to reach! if you don’t get that, you don’t get anything about Christ and what he offers.
and please remember that G-d doesn’t make these stupid hoops for you to jump through: He is always happy to see you, even if it’s once every 40 years!
as for the humans on this board who are sitting in judgment of you…screw’em.
Mike, you almost have a sense of humor. If Tebow takes this team to the Superbowl I might just gain enough curiosity about the faith to make a trip to church very much worthwhile my time. I take it that you would be a person who believes that unbelievers would be wasting their time to try a visit to church? Isn’t religion all about faith in a fact that is not proven but which can only be inferred by the evidence? I admit that I don’t have much faith. Is your response that because I don’t that I would be wasting my time to attend a church service? Isn’t church the place where people of faith go to worship the object of their faith? Are you saying that the faithful cannot influence the unfaithful if those who are unfaithful also go to church? If so, do you believe that faith cannot be acquired by the currently unfaithful? If so, how did the faithful get their faith?
Luke 5:29-32
New International Version (NIV)
29 Then Levi held a great banquet for Jesus at his house, and a large crowd of tax collectors and others were eating with them. 30 But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to their sect complained to his disciples, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?”
31 Jesus answered them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”
Mike, i am wondering how you call yourself a Christian.
“I am not a believer,” Nuff said.
PS You can’t get/find faith from church. But you and Michiganruth can always get together and share more stupid comments about faith, religion and God. And if your motiviation for going to church is Tim leading the Broncos to the SB then you REALLY have a twisted concept of religion and faith. So stay home and contemplate the meaning of peanut butter being made of super nova stuff. That will give you a much better grasp of God then a church ever could.
I had never noticed in my readings of either the bible or conversion narratives that God cared what inspired the sinner’s interest.
Perhaps it might behoove all of us to shut up about what anyone finds inspiring?
Tell me about it. I’ve been a huge Broncos fan all my life, and lately any discussion of the team has been religious-oriented. I watch football as a DISTRACTION from major issues, not to create new ones. I care if he wins games for my team. I do not care about any other aspect of his life. I *WILL* thank G-d for our defense, though.
My thought’s completely.
Kids show up at Sunday School and talk about the verses painted on his eye-black. It shows up in Adult Sunday School as well. You’d have a fine old time, and meet people who showed up for the same reason.
God is willing to work with any reason at all that we give, for going to church, or praying, or anything. He doesn’t have to have the “right” attitude- God works with anything at all. So- welcome, come on in!
Welcome, do please come in, even if it’s the play-offs, we’d be glad to see you!
Again, amen.
That kind of thinking is part of the problem.
What a sad commentary.
Yes, but it was lively, eh?
I should warn you first that God doesn’t give a damn about football, so I wouldn’t be basing my decision to go to church or not on whether some guy can carry a ball across a line as other guys chase him.
God doesn’t care about football? Really?
“God doesn’t care if the Fighting Irish win or lose. But his Mother does.” Lou Holtz
I’ve never been a Bronco fan but I will pray for their place in the Superbowl this year. God’s been waiting for you, Jim.
Read Heb.10.25,”… do not forsake the assembly”, and start obeying today!God savws those who obey Him, Heb.5.9, and you have disobeyed Him for 40 years!
Repent!
Wonderful Andrew. And I’ll bet that article will make even a few of the PJ crowd uncomfortable. Too bad…
Why secular Americans continue their headlong wish of sliding to Gomorrah Western Europe is beyond me.
Mr Taylor–
I respect your right to have religion in your life as long as you do not impose it on your “secular brethern”. However, I will not let your implied insult to non-religious people like myself stand without response. Morality and ethics did not begin, nor does it end with Christianity or any other religion. I would argue that most commonsense ethics and morality guidelines we use today come not from religion but from Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. I would challenge you to produce evidence that secularist are more likely to engage in unethical or unsavory behavior than religious people.
I do not go out of my way to insult religious people, so please restrain from doing the same to non-religious people like myself.
Thank you.
David Wall
Mr. Wall, With all due respect, morality did not come from Aristotle nor does it come from Christians. Morality is in the soul of men, which come from God.
“Morality is in the soul of men, which come from God.”
Prove it.
Brilliant people have thought about this for millenia.
What he is talking about is simply natural law, i.e., the purposes and natural ends that are built in. A defect exists when something does not fulfill its intrinsic purposes, as in the case of a knife that can’t cut.
http://www.aquinasonline.com/Topics/natlaw.html
Right. Not only the brilliant, but the less than brilliant. And they will continue to do so…
Is man’s intrinsic purpose, then, to serve God? One’s moral perfection is determined by the degree one serves? Again, prove it. You can’t. Faith is your only answer, but what if a person reject faith and embraces reason.
Here is another answer:
A moral life is making the most of the life you are given. Pursuing happiness. Take what you want, but pay for it. Find others you wish to share it with and love them.
You, Sir, are an intellectual snob, and, at best, a Humanist.
Perhaps, but I am not a namecaller. Humanist is bad, I take it.
And you sir, just aren’t near as smart as you hope your comments make you seem.
Here, here!
David Wall,
First, I find it somewhat funny that you, as a non-Christian, would go into the comment section that follows an article on, as Klavan puts it, “Christ-o-phobia.” Sort of looks like you’re looking for an argument. And if you can’t find an argument, you’ll just invent one from a non-existent slight.
For some of us (not necessarily myself), Christianity provides the “moral guidelines” that you mention. Not for you? Fine. But it sure as hell ain’t Christians that are leading us on our slide toward Gommorrah. Is it?
Why not move the game to that giant church made of glass? Regardless, the winner will be determined by who plays better and not by a mysterious push from some being on the other side of the Crab Nebula.
Yeah David it’s your business if you want to go to Hell.
Boldly speaking of Christ makes people uncomfortable, because it has become unfashionable, even outre. People are very status-conscious. It used to be almost universal in this country. Folks just need to be told that, that it was commonplace to speak of God in everyday life.
I most heartily agree.
These days is does seem as if all religions are tolerated in America except for Christianity, the symbols and expression of which are increasingly denied to view because of political correctness. And, these same purveyors of PC behavior turn an incredible blind eye to the symbols and expressions of other (read muslim) faiths. All except the American flag of course, which, while not a symbol of religious faith, does represent our country and it’s values, and is being increasingly removed from view by these pc clowns. Indeed, as Mr. Klavan said:
“the time for Christian reticence may be past”
I, as a forgiven sinner, labor to be not reticent at all. Mr.Tebow and others who overtly express the Christian faith they have should be supported, not denigrated. I submit: If a loud mouthed evangelist makes you uncomfortable, perhaps the discomfort comes from God and His conviction of your sin, and not so much from the evangelist himself. This is just a thought of mine. Read God’s Word.
“in defense of the only faith on earth that has ever made men free.” Not true. Judaism has kept the Jewish people free for a long long time – it contains in its dogma the first and most lasting elucidation of individual human rights.
I agree. Excellent point.
The article did mention Judaism alongside Christianity as the progenitor of free states.
Sorry Diana. Judaism brought us Law. Law never saved anyone because we are too weak to DO what the Torah requires us to do. Messiah did fulfill the Torah, therefore we must put our trust in the atoning death and life-affirming resurrection of Messiah, not in Judaism. Judaism without Messiah is an empty shell.
Remember, of course, that Christianity is Judaism fulfilled; it is not a completely separate religion. (Jesus was a Rabbi).
So says a Christian. I think a Jewish person would disagree.
Uh…yeah – that’s the difference between the two
How about this one? A Muslim would say that Islam is an extension of Judaism and Christianity. I know that this one will get some people’s boat.
A Zen buddhist might observe that there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
And that Zen guy would be as stupid as he is opinionated.
YEAH !
Thank you, Andrew! Let me just add that in addition to the hypocrisy of vilifying devout Christians who don’t hide their faith while at the same showing a bizarre and self-destructive tolerance for the intolerance of Sharia law the Left is hypocritical in another way. The fact of the matter is that many black athletes, professionals in particular, demonstrate their faith in identical ways as Tebow. There’s nothing new about what Tebow does. Players have been praising the Lord, pointing skyward and kneeling for a brief moment for years now. Lefties may not be comfortable with those demonstrations, either, but don’t dare complain. Either that or they dismiss outward demonstrations of faith as a “black thing” that is unsuitable or unseemly for white players to do. They don’t criticize blacks for doing it because they’re assumed to be “good liberals” and therefore untouchable, even if they are openly devout. But Tebow, as a devout Christian and pro-life white guy has no such PC protection and so gets blasted and demeaned whenever possible. And while Tebow is in the news right now because it’s football season this type of thing happens all the time in a lot of different avenues of life.
While black players do indeed profess faith often and publicly, I have to note that Tebow isn’t going out after the game and getting into trouble. God apparently helps them win games but does little to keep them out of strip clubs, from shooting themselves in the leg, or assaulting their girlfriends.
The black athletes/coaches who are truly professing faith by living it don’t do those things. My examples would be Tony Dungy and Gary Brackett.
1. Strip club. Just a job like any other.
2. Shooting oneself in the leg. personal choice to learn from
3. Assaulting a woman. Bad sin.
I look for followers of Christ to inspire me by their personal example. If they can’t i get to inspire them. I would be kind to a stripper and help her out like I would help any other person out. If someone shot themselves in their leg, I’d call 911 for them and try to make their healing time easier. If someone assaulted a women, i would intervene physically and have a question.
Tebow is a good man who understands his faith well. i would gauge by the pressure cooker he is in.
Thank you for making this about race.
Excellent comment!
What audacity! A Christian acting like … a Christian! In a country founded on Judeo Christian principles no less! He even gives some of his money to a hospital in the Philippines! And when he’s mocked for his faith he turns the other cheek and says he’s just happy that people are talking about faith.
Shouldn’t he be demanding tolerance and apologies and maybe calling for some one’s head? Oh, wait a minute, that’s the other religion.
Tebow is white, male, and Christian. He belongs to THREE groups for whom tolerance is not required by the PC crowd. But, Tim Tebow exhibits tolerance for those who ridicule him. He just doesn’t get it!
Exactly. If Tim Tebow was black this is no doubt a non-story.
I’m a card carrying atheist (well I don’t *really* have a card) and reckon Tebow has as much right to talk about his faith and/or act upon it as he likes. But this isn’t exactly new. Football players often talk about god etc in post-game interviews, are filmed in prayer huddles on the sidelines, etc. Reggie White (former defensive end) was known as The Reverend for his unabashed speaking ability and mentoring of younger players. For all I know he may have been a real reverend.
Layden’s job meanwhile is to talk about football nuts and bolts and deliver insight into the nts and bolts with limited wordspace. Same as any other journalist — talk about X with an 8000 word limit. As a reader of Layden what I want to read about is how stuff happens, and as per above whether Tebow believes in god or the flying spaghetti monster isn’t the insight I’m paying for. Tebow is a religious guy. Yay. Good for him. So how did he get the 46 yd bomb to that receiver who didn’t even look open? That’s what I read Layden for, same as the rest of his readers. You ought to check with Layden to see if he really has a problem with faith or is simply doing the job he’s paid to do. Could be you owe him an apology.
I didn’t read the article.
But if the author misrepresented what Tebow meant by “faith,” then that’s bad journalism.
When a public figure makes a statement, it’s the journalist’s job to report it as is, not to spin it as “He didn’t really mean what he said.”
random, the piece was a HUMAN INTEREST piece.
Not my cup of tea, either. Though Brees is proud of his faith, he and his family moved very close to a few N.O. wards to specifically help those in need.
And yet Layden wrote his own version.. of Brees’s piece. The dude is/was wrong on many levels.
randomengineer – your comment was brilliant!!!!!!!! In the spirit of your own brilliance, I have been tasked with a two paragraph limit to share your wisdom to the world. Like Layden, it is important that I mold it to the interests of my readers. As you were good with this for insight regarding Tebow, I’m sure you will be completely okay with my edit and slant.
Randomengineer’s brilliant insight on Tebow:
“I’m a reckon Tebow has as much right to talk about his faith and/or act upon it as he likes. Football players often talk about god etc in post-game interviews, are filmed in prayer huddles on the sidelines, etc. Reggie White (former defensive end) was known as The Reverend for his unabashed speaking ability and mentoring of younger players.
Tebow believes in God. Tebow is a religious guy. Yay. Good for him. So how did he get the 46 yd bomb to that receiver who didn’t even look open? You ought to.. see ..faith. “
You just like engineers, Becky. I once was a geophysicist, maybe you would like me too. Unless it was the random part you like, in which case, my bad. I hope you knew I was kidding on that. If not, my bad some more.
Excellent?! Get over yourselves, Christians. Really? Just really? After all the nonsense we put up with from Christians, one sports commentator, a freaking sports commentator, speaks against it and it’s under assault? Are you kidding me?! This is what conservatism has to offer? Outrageous hyperbole and intellectual dishonesty.
I’m not sure WHAT nonsense you put with from Christians, but how about the Sharia nonsense from the Islamic radicals? do you put up with that? Or how about the utter repression of women from the Taliban, (also from Islam)? Or how about the nonsense from Washington D.c. where liberals view their ideology as their religion? how do you manage, really? Just really???
Bob we have a secular government on purpose and 99% of what you perceive as anti-christian from atheists is simply resistance to what is reckoned as attempts to have federal level institutionalising of christianity. Atheists by and large care not one whit what others want to believe. The only problem is when christians reckon they can enforce their beliefs in public schools and such; if you want to teach your kids that the world is 6000 years old or that evolution is the work of the devil, go for it. Atheists simply don’t want this being taught to their kids. At the end of the day this is all that is happening. It’s not an attack. It’s a response.
Meanwhile.
We don’t live in islamic parts of the world, and atheists have a tendency to view all religion/government admixture with suspicion. It’s not christianity in the government that is objected to. It’s ALL religion. Atheists have no use for islam any more than they do christianity. Yes there are LEFTISTS out there who are into the delusional “cultural relativity” idiocy, but this has nothing to do with their religion or lack thereof. The ‘relativity’ thing has more in common with letting morons go to universities. It’s a function of stupidity rather than religious preference.
Interestingly it’s fun to note that here in the US many christians tend to view a lack of christian specificity in government as equating to an attack on christianity. Usually this boils down to a vague claim that the government is too secular. Now what makes this fascinating is the low regard christians seem to have for foreign governments where *other* religions (e.g. islam) are institutionalised and there’s great deal of support for efforts to make these governments more secular. Look around. Secular governments are what’s running the first world. Even now and yes they’re flawed. Let me know if this changes. And before you respond to the negative, having a population with personal faith is seen as a plus. Not the same thing as what we want from government itself, which ought to be blind in that area.
random -
Please read up on “old earth creationism.” The “all fundies are ignoramuses who believe the earth is 6000 years old” jibe is a hackneyed caricature worked overtime by the media. It is beneath you to fall for such silly generalizations and display such a sloppy lack of original thinking.
Next up in the bigoted stereotype catalog: All people from West Virginia are gap-toothed inbred hillbillies who fondle guns & their 14-year-old cousins …
(Kick!) To paraphrase Johnson, I refute your argument thus! Q.E.D.
Or to quote Klavan, “Insults, stupid arguments, and lies”
Typical… Next time try being less hysterical.
Get outta town, If you had gotten over yourself you wouldnt be such a smart mouth!
What nonsense, exactly, do you put up with from Christians. Because, it seems to me that we put up with atheist nonsense all the live long day and ESPECIALLY at Christmas time – the one and only holiday that we get to express ourselves.
I don’t know about that lolly. Christians are pretty pumped up at easter as well, which insofar as I can tell is also a christian affair where christians let their faith hang out for all to see. The plus side is that the stores are at least not playing nonstop musical dreck involving easter bunnies.
The “we christians are under constant attack, poor us” stuff wears thin after a while. Use google and look up Christian Persecution Complex. I don’t know of the christians being under attack in the US at all. I have yet to see it, anyway.
Ah, the conveniently moving goalpost of what defines “under attack.”
Because there’s “Christians under attack” …
http://tinyurl.com/76am5dh
And then there’s “Christians UNDER ATTACK” … (warning: extremely graphic)
http://tinyurl.com/25f7d7t
I guess American Christians should be thankful that our kids are just being called “fascist bastards” in the classroom and not, y’know, being beheaded on the way to school. And guess what? Those of us who pay attention to such things actually are indeed thankful that we live in the United States of America with its First Amendment liberties.
But just because there aren’t beheadings here sure as heck doesn’t mean there’s no hostility. If you aren’t aware of the myriad cases, then you are the one who’s not paying attention. I don’t see drug deals going down every day in my city but that doesn’t mean they aren’t happening; it just means I’m not on the spot when they do & not tracking the police blotter.
So please, yes, go ahead and write off the “fascist bastards” comment and all those myriad cases as low-level outliers, signifiers of nothing. Keep the blinders on, by all means. There ain’t no anti-Christian hostility. And even if there were, it never amounts to anything. Ever.
I’ve been teaching for 17 years and I have to say, I have never heard of a Christian kid being referred to as a “fascist bastard.” I would not tolerate such hateful language in my classroom anymore than I would tolerate the use of words like “nigger,” “fagot,” “wetback,” “chink,” “cracker, ” or even “moron”. I have had to displine students for using the words listed in the previous sentence on several occasions. The only time I have heard of a Christian kids being “attacked” in the schools I have working in is when he or she condemns and insults others for their life styles or beliefs.
If their are kids out there dealing with the type of persecution you describe, I feel for them.
You know, putting up with stuff is a part of life. It used to be we either just took it, removed ourselves from it, or punched the offender in the mouth. Okay, that last part isn’t so good, but the first two parts are. We Christians are not going away, Get Outta Town. Christians have been here a long time. You’re just going to make yourself miserable wishing people you don’t like should stifle themselves for that reason alone. It’s not a good enough reason.
Wow. What an epic misunderstanding of my position. All I am saying is no one is in any position of power relative to the position of power Christianity has in this country. Come on! It’s so obvious. I an not going to repeat engineer’s points but he made some good ones.
All I am saying is no one is in any position of power relative to the position of power Christianity has in this country
This is a gob-smacking statement. Please look around you at American culture, American government, crime, drug use, social pathologies.
This is what you think an America where Christianity is THE dominant power looks like?
Because that vision does not square at all with the scary-scary tales that come out of fiction and Hollywood, like “The Handmaiden’s Tale.” In those alternate versions of reality, Christianity Rampant leads to all sorts of horribles like enslaved, barefoot & pregnant wimminfolk, violent repression of non-Christianism, absolute intolerance of dissent, and Hugh Hefner as the unspeakable name in the ashheap of history.
Okay, so last time I checked, these things were not the status quo. Mr. Hefner is still chugging along, very rich & very in the media; one of his ex-boos was on Dancing With the Stars last season; and a show titled “Playboy Club” was on a network this year.
Apparently Christianity Rampant, for all its supposed power, has not managed to muzzle or cloak one 80-something geezer who’s constantly showing up in his silk pjs. But in your version, “no one is any position of power relative to the position of power Christianity has in this country.” Huh.
It’s a nice attempt at sleight of hand but I’m not buying.
Churches in America are more toofless than ole Heff. That, not living in a Nathaniel Hawthorne novel, is our reality today. “Jersey Shore.” Not “The Scarlet Letter.”
TO answer your question: yes. I think it is the America you refer. It funny but I am sure most if not all of those people you mentioned will identify as Christian. All of those people are your folks. They are looking for something that normal society isn’t providing them.
Well, you left-wing anonymous coward, I’m agnostic and I’ll tell you frankly: Yes, Christianity and Christians are under assault by your types. I’ve had issues with some intolerant Christians, but I’ve had hundreds of times more problems with intolerant leftists, and have seen intolerant leftists cause Christians hundreds of more problems.
If lefties would start practicing tolerance, rather than speaking about it, then perhaps you’d see what’s going on.
I won’t hold my breath.
Robby while your personal experience can’t be denied I believe it’s is the exception and not the rule. I also think you are exaggerating like most people on this forum. So I don’t really trust you. Also what is a leftist?
Oh, come on! You know what we are and how we do things… Ignorance is bliss, baby!
You people have stretched the separation of church nd state to such an extent that kids aren’t even allowed to carry a bible to school, yet muslims can pretty much do as they want in the same school and those same secular humanists are just FINE with that.
A cross erected in the early 20th century to commenorate war dead is fought for decades by ONE man (with the help of the ACLU) and after losing time after time – even on the ballot twice, what is the reaction of your ilk to the will of the people of THAT community? Who followed the LAW? They STOLE the cross.
So don’t bore me with how put upon atheists are by Christians.
What a perfectly worded article! I agree 100% with all points of this article. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
Great article, Mr. Klavan. Hit the nail on the head.
Message from a right wing Jew. God bless you Tim Tebow.
Some top football players are Christian? Big deal! Some are Muslim, Atheists, Jews, Buddhists? Big deal! Success in sport is a combination of genetic factors, skill, training, physical fitness and attitude.
If Tebow wants to advertise his faith, fine with me. Just don’t pretend it is his faith that makes him the player he is.
It’s clear that Tebow *believes* that his faith made him the man he is.
And that should be reported.
Perhaps faith ought to be somewhat downplayed in the public arena by public figures and Kurt Warner is right. Not because faith is bad or wrong but because a misstep impugns ALL the faithful. 5 years from now imagine Tebow is busted having a homosexual affair in a minneapolis airport bathroom, the press will go wild and imply that this is the typical behaviour of what will be called the hypocritical faithful type. Open season on christians professing their faith. The good ones doing good work and such will get slammed for something not their fault. Christian progress in the public eye is set back again.
You think I’m wrong? Tammy Faye Bakker. Punchline for years. Laughingstock.
If Tebow wants to advertise his faith, fine with me. Just don’t pretend it is his faith that makes him the player he is.
Faith is what makes him the PERSON that he is. And the PERSON that he is helps make him the player that he is. And you yourself mentioned “attitude” which is simply a reference to the mental/emotional aspect of sport. That’s where his faith plays a part.
Are you jealous of his faith? If not, then why worry about it?
I think it is that attitude part in which Tebow excels, don’t you? Of course, the meaning of “attitude” can be construed just a little to the religious side in his case, don’t you think?
Yeah don’t paint Bible verses under your eyes but go ahead and lobby the city of Paris to allow speakers to blare “God is great” 5 times a day including 3 AM and at dawn.
That’s coming here: as Muslims grow in number you’ll be awakened at all hours of the night. Presumably SI’s writers live in neighborhoods without speakers and that will remain without speakers for some decades yet although I’d like to set up some just for a sporting preview.
John, how right you are.
Were in a Muslim majority country (and claims to be ‘Moderate’ of all things!) and due to ‘assigned prayer times’ (?), our iPod speaker system is playing ‘jungle sounds’ as I type.
As for the commenter ‘Get outta town’ who spoke of, ‘..what we have to put up with from Christians..’ – you have NO freakin’ clue, bub. None. You obviously don’t get out much in a myriad of meanings.
Get outta town, it was a SPORTS WRITER not commentator. And yes there is a huge difference.
Goes to show you were but looking to pick a fight and toss in some insults for good measure. Attention to details, let alone a lucid and respectful discussion is beyond your grasp in the few bitter words you’ve left.
Have a great life in your all-knowing bubble.
You nailed it. Even “Moderate” Muslim countries have a very intolerant culure against other religions.
” …. in defense of the only faith on earth that has ever made men free. ”
A complete whitewash of historical fact and morally repugnant to boot.
Perhaps some here will be deeply offended by my comment. Klavan to perhaps.
However I am under no moral obligation to respect your religious doctrine- I do have a moral obligation to respect your right to them. Would that Christians accepted that same humanistic approach.
Jews ask for neither love or reverence. We just want the same respect granted to others with ease. And if my position offends you , interferes with your positive view of Jews, then shame on you. After all I am just one guy posting on a message board not a spokesman for the Jews of the world. Jews have had 1500 years of ” Christian love ” burned into our history. Burning us alive in our synagogues to turning us into lampshades and soap has left its mark.
Let me leave you with a bit of Christian wisdom. It has been expunged from Catholic liturgy however it will stand forever as the prayer of a truly honest and G-d fearing man….
” We are conscious today that many centuries of blindness have cloaked our eyes so that we can no longer see the beauty of Thy chosen people, nor recognize in their faces the features of our privileged brethren. We realize that the mark of Cain stands on our foreheads. Across the centuries our Brother Abel has lain in blood which we drew or shed tears we caused forgetting Thy love. Forgive us for the curse we falsely attached to their name as Jews. Forgive us for crucifying Thee a second time in their flesh. For we knew not what we did…”
Pope John XIII
To deny the past, to deny the truth, to turn a blind eye on wrongdoing, is to be complicit. For that their is no salvation.
Since your own harping of your cultural supremacy is non-stop I’m glad you agree that it is morally repugnant. However since the statement is accurate, it only leaves your own repugnance.
You use a quote and then ignore it, arguing other stuff not in the quote. Christianity is the only religion that has been in the forefront of the only nations that have ever severed men from bondage; bondage to kings, bondage to slave masters, bondage to an aristocracy.
Not liking a thing cuz it punctures your own pervasive cultural conceits is not the same thing as it not being true. Anyway, you can help make it true and set a shining example by being Moses and freeing the Arabs in Gaza, Israel and the West Bank from bondage.
Good luck and happy trails.
Gaza was “released from bondage” in 2005, when the government of Israel sent its soldiers in to deport its own citizens. instead of enjoying their freedom, the all-Muslim residents of Gaza began shooting rockets into southern Israel.
any time the Pals want to be “released” all they have to do is stop fighting Israel.
Menachem, first Shalom to you. The shalom that comes from Messiah. Christianity and Judaism are inexorably linked because of Y’shua ha Nazari. Judaism was given by G-d to enlighten the world to the fact of the One True God. Moschiach embodied the One True God and your people rejected Him, not all, but the leadership did and lead the others into their error. G-d dealt with Israel in 70 AD for this. Despite what Poop Whomever says, G-d calls every man, Jew and Goy alike to believe in Messiah, not the Church. Messiah died for your sins and rose again. HE is the Paschal lamb of Pesach. Don’t harden your heart as Pharoah did, Menachem. Y’shua was a Jew. And so He remains a Jew…Moschiach.
“No states but those that evolved from Judaism and Christianity have ever been truly free or truly inclusive in any modern sense of the terms.”
Your response doesn’t disprove the claim made by Klavan. Perhaps you can offer examples of nations not evolved form Judaism and Christianity that meet his “truly free and inclusive” standard ?
After all I am just one guy posting on a message board
Actually, you’re just one guy who deliberately attempted to hijack the thread for your own purposes. The article was not an attack on Judaism or Jews. And yet you pretended that it was in order to go on your rant.
And if my position offends you , interferes with your positive view of Jews, then shame on you.
Don’t flatter yourself. As a Roman Catholic myself I can say with certainty that nothing you can say would interfere with my positive view of Jews. I support Israel 100% and I respect the beliefs and customs of my Jewish friends and Jews in general. As you said, you don’t speak for the Jews, just yourself. Which means that you’ve only embarrassed yourself, not them.
Woe to false teachers who pervert the Law. Woe to them that slander the ones whom God has sent. Woe to the stiff-necked and hard of heart. Woe to the self-righteous, who think they can please God with their works. Woe to blasphemers of every sort. Woe to them that cheat and mistreat the poor, the widow or the orphan, and who defraud their workers of their wages. Woe to them that trust in money, power or heathen gods which cannot save.
Blessed are the God-fearing. Blessed are the humble and contrite. Blessed are them that hope in the Resurrection. Blessed are them that love the Messiah. Blessed are the disciplined. Blessed are those who are faithful even unto death.
I have repeatedly pointed out to you, Sir your selective memory.
You repeatedly (and correctly) highlight the guilt of Christians during the Holocaust. But, you also neglect to mention the Roman Catholic Priests who suffered with and for their Jewish brothers and sisters.
Try Googling Father Alfred Delp, Father Carl Lampert, Father Freidrich Lorenz and Saint Fr Maximiliam Kolbe. That’s is merely a few of the Roman Catholic clergy. I could site many from the Lutherans, too.
St. Kolbe and Blessed Lampert Pray for us.
You think American Christian soldiers who liberated concentration camps in WW II felt guilt? Fortunately Jews freed didn’t say such things or they may have closed the doors and walked on by instead of providing food, water and doctors. Never let a good deed go unpunished.
My Brother-
I am not clear on the point you are making?
But, surely we see the difference between giving care and comfort to the holocaust victims AFTER their persecuation AND standing up to the evil regime before and during the persecution of the jews? Surely the first is an act of mercy and the second is an act of heroism and sanctity that led to the crown of martyrdon for some such as Blessed Lampert and Saint Kolbe?
Generalizations about Christian guilt as being correct. You include yours, I’ll disinclude mine.
I think the article references both Judaism and Christianity as the key pillars of the “load-bearing wall of both freedom and tolerance.” I don’t think Andrew was exonerating individual or collective Christianity for any sins of the past. I’ve read a lot of your postings and it’s clear that the only thing you hate more than Muslims are Christians (despite your intellectual claim to respect their right to have a belief other than yours). How sad.
I suggest looking into the mirror: you risk becoming the intolerant person you so despise.
on the contrary, Christians are IN the world and FOR the world : let’s defend with all means we got our prinviples, our faith, our God and our traditions. So do others in other parts, so we MUST DO. God Bless America and all the Free Women and Men living under HIS protection and HIS hope (not Obama’s).
It is uncomfortable. Perhaps it should be — and perhaps we who strive to follow Christ’s command should temper our efforts with the advice of Saint Francis of Assisi:
It has been proven that St. Francis never said this.
I have no idea if St. Francis ever said this or not, but given that you did not cite a reference, you look foolish.
It has been alleged that St. Francis never said that — by a rather contentious fellow who has written a biography of St. Francis of Assisi. I’d love to see him try to prove a negative of this sort.
Frankly, it hardly matters whether St. Francis said those exact words or not. He lived them — and his example converted thousands and strengthened the faith of innumerable others. I could wish I were named after him…oh, wait…
What makes Tebow so inspirational is the fact that he’s not afraid or cowed by the constant onslaught of his faith. he also backs up his beliefs with actions many are unaware off – his charities, his outright kindness, assistance and volunteer work off the football field.
This is what faith is all about!
Your comment about the ACLU et al. is accurate. They have advanced radar to pick up the tiniest radar cross section when it is a Christian but then they turn off the radar and turn on NPR when it is a Muslim. Bah.
It’s a s plain as the nose on your face. Anybody who denies this selective radar has to be ignorant or lying.
I would ask the question, are all atheists “belligerent atheists”? For that matter, would all non-believers be classed as “atheists”?
Is that meant to be a serious question? If so, then the answer is NO, not all. I’m sure most athiests don’t give it a second thought. But those who go out of there way to pick a fight with Christians or other religions over symbols of faith that supposedly have no meaning or significance to athiests can accurately be called “belligerent.”
And “non-believer” is a vague, subjective term which has no real meaning without context. Most people are both. Some things we believe it and some things we don’t.
“Or other religions?” Seriously? What other religions do atheists go after? Because I’ve never seen them go after anybody but Christians. Heck – they even go after Santa Claus and he’s a made up secular figure.
I don’t disagree. But I was attempting to give the basic concept of “atheism” the benefit of the doubt. Theoretically, “atheism” is not solely anti-Christian because Christians aren’t the only ones who believe in God. Sadly, there is no doubt that Marxist-inspired atheism is deliberately anti-Christian and it is Marxist-inspired atheism that we are dealing with in the United States.
Lolly, I think they go after the Jews as well, but it is generalized as anti-Semitism. If they’re in a Muslim country and go after Islam, they get executed, so we would never know of it….
There are some who believe in the power/primacy of the Universe in a spiritual sense. God in the sense of the major religions, usually does not enter into the conversation. Someone might be classed by as a non-believer/atheist in this case?
Another question – Muslims and Christians have characterized each other as non-believers (infidels). (One can argue about the historical frequency of one faith characterizing the other). Both believe in the same God. So does a belief in an “other” religion qualify you as a non-believer?
Would a non-believing atheist have less or more (better) faith (for want of a better words) than a heretic? Therefore…
Atheists believe that there is no God (or any other supernatural beings, for that matter) and that the natural universe is all that their is. Agnostics believe that the matter is open to question and hasn’t been proven yet. Both usually accept a basic morality based on civil society, with a large dose of pragmatism.
Of course atheists are belligerent. They’ve sorted things out and they’re easily riled because the rest of us haven’t. Far more people have confessed their atheism to me than have professed a religious faith. They just can’t shut up about it.
I’m an atheist, but I tend to call myself a “non-believer” nowadays to distinguish myself from the types that this article is about. Maybe that is a sort-of wussy way to put it, but I don’t want to be included with the lefty know-it-all atheists who can’t even tolerate a “Christmas” tree.
I have been to a few atheist meetings, and I have to say, they are a sad-sack lot. They really feel they are being Persecuted by any reference to God in the public arena. It’s pathetic.
It takes a good deal of faith to resolve to be either an atheist or a non-believer. It also takes a good deal of discipline: Should a dragonfly accidentally intercept your line of sight, be careful not to look at it too much, lest you start getting ideas…
Thanks God not all atheists proselytize their faith-in-the-negative. With those who do, use words if you have to! Or, better, do like Tim Tebow, radiate your faith preemptively. If it makes someone uncomfortable, it’s to their credit: It means they have not turned into stone!
It takes a good deal of faith to believe the Christian God who answer prayers and loves humanity but hates sin doesn’t exist? Really? It seems pretty obvious to me. Change God to another abstract concept and your statement makes no since. For example, it takes a good deal of faith to believe mashooto doesn’t exist. That is a meaning less statement. What evidence is there to suggest that God can even plausibly exist in the first place? That’s not how knowledge works. You don’t just assume whatever position you like and then argue affirmatively for it. There has to be some reason for it. Like you don’t just assume some special energy exists in the universe for no reason and then proclaim that this source of energy is the reason for existence. What proof is there the energy exists? That’s how your argument works. It assumes validity about the concept of God and when you cannot show God exist you blame the other side with retorts like: well you can’t prove God doesn’t exist as if the onus is on the naysayer and as if both positions are some how equal.
After yesterday, I’m starting to, at least, believe that some power is on Tebow’s side. As for the rest of it? You make strong points Andrew. I feel like maybe it’s time to dust off my faith, as well.
Here is the bold truth if he was a Muslim shouting Allahu Akbar the secular
religious racists wouldn’t dare comment .
As a Christian I respect your right not to believe . I would hope you respect my right to believe.
American Christian Infidel
Michael Canzano
That is exactly on point. If Tim Tebow were a Muslim and was professing his faith, you wouldn’t hear a bit of criticism from the media, the militant Atheists or hardly anyone else.
You wouldn’t hear Christians making extremely suggestive comments that it was the reason for his wins either.
Manny is so bad: no one is askng him to respect the faith: all he wants is to be seen as part of God’s Chosen People and bask in unearned respect from all the ‘cattle’.
I always wonder at Jewish obsession with the Roman Church: being a Protestant, such quotes are otiose at the minimum is not presumptuous.
We might also ask chapter and verse, out of curiosity, does it exist. Lying never fails the like of Manny, but hey, God gave him permission, to do so if it is good for his group or I suppose him personally.
Primitive beliefs about the nature of reality is the description of modern Christianity. The notion that there is a “Creator” is preposterous. The Universe by its own self nature is intelligence and love. Every atom in our bodies comes from the center of exploding stars, an endless recycling. The IS no Big Daddy God. It as to be said that the Priests’ power gathering conference at Nicosea Cyprus 400 years after Christ died really distorted everything. Jesus NEVER, ever, not once, claimed he was the “Son of God.” If Christianity weren’t so dangerous these days with the “crusader mentality” it would simply be, as John Adams and Thomas Jefferson termed it, “quaint.”
“The notion that there is a “Creator” is preposterous….”
Couldn’t agree more. And in fact I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is. I am willing to buy you plane tickets (one-way) to Teheran and/or Riyadh so that you can set up a soapbox in any civic square of your choosing and publicly expound on these views. Remember to throw out the “universe is love” line when the crowd starts to close in.
Atheists have decided that “God is Dead” or that the “Creator is preposterous” because they cannot observe God. Without revelation no one can observe God, yet the great majority of people believe that God is not dead — including our Founding Fathers. Despite the inability to observe God, the great majority of people believe that God created the Universe and its self-evident scientific laws. Despite the inability to observe God, our Founding Fathers believed (as did Cicero and John Locke) that God established the self-evident moral law whereby all men and women are created with equal unalienable rights to their life, liberty and fruit of labor in pursuit of happiness.
The question arises: If the universe was not created by God, then where did it come from? We know from the first law of thermodynamics that without supernatural force neither mass nor energy can create its self, nor can mass or energy be destroyed; mass and energy are limited to interchangeability (E = MC2).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics
Thus, according to the most fundamental laws of science, a self-created universe is an un-scientific belief – an irrational belief. If the universe was not created by God, then, since it did not create its self, and since it cannot be destroyed, it must be eternal in time, both in the past and in the future. Since faith is any belief based on that which is unobservable (such as belief in God), and since no one was or could be present to observe the beginning of a Universe with no beginning, belief in an eternal un-created universe is based on faith. Thus, like belief in God, atheism is based on faith. The belief that God is the source of all individual rights does not ignore physical reality or the law of identity; it is an expression of faith — the faith of our Founding Fathers.
And furthermore, the Second Law of Thermodynamics forbids the Universe from being infinitely old. If it were, there would be only iron and degenerate matter. So the claim that the Universe is eternal is not merely a statement of faith but also a belief in an absurdity.
The second law of thermodynamics does not conflict with the first law of thermodynamics – which states that mass/energy cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system. Absent God our universe is a closed system, so by the first law of thermodynamics the universe could not have created its self nor can it be destroyed, thus under atheism our universe is eternal in the past and in the future – a belief which requires faith to the same degree as faith in God – because no one was or could be present to observe the beginning of a universe with no beginning.
The second law of thermodynamics simply states that over time the total energy in a closed system tends to equilibrate within the three dimensional limits of the system, yet the total mass/energy of the closed system remains constant over time. The second law of thermodynamics simply states that over time there will be no relative high-energy and low-energy areas in the universe; in time there will be a uniformity of energy in the universe, but the total energy (in compliance with the first law of thermodynamics) will be at all times equal – eternally equal energy in a closed system Godless universe.
So the claim that a Godless universe is not eternal is an absurdity.
You’re delusional. Have you read the Gospels at all? Because Jesus on many occasions claimed to be the Son of God and equal to the Father. You can’t say that these accounts were later falsified, because they were written by people who knew Him. And furthermore, you offer no explanation as to how the Sun could go dark for a period of three hours over much, if not all, of the Roman Empire, during a full moon. This “Great Eclipse” was recorded by secular historians as well as the Gospels, but it could not possibly have been an eclipse because solar eclipses don’t last that long, don’t cover that much land, and they definitely don’t occur when the Moon is on the wrong side of the Earth to block out the Sun!
I don’t follow your logic. If there is no creator, then there is only matter and energy. Is love considered matter or energy? How about intelligence? In this worldview, neither love nor intelligence can exist. If I am wrong, please reply with proof that either of these even exist.
Well that does it for me! I’ve just been waiting to hear from JC on this issue. I can sleep soundly now knowing JimmyC has it all figured out for us.
Our Founding Fathers asserted that God is the source of all individual’s equal rights. Thomas Jefferson said that the Declaration of Independence (with its assertion that God is the source of all individual rights) was “an expression of the American mind.”
If God created the Universe, and man is created in the image of God, then all men are created with equal (infinite) value, and all are therefore created with equal rights. If God is in Heaven, and man is created in the image of God, then all men naturally possess an equal right to their life (and self-defense), and all men naturally possess an equal right to keep the fruit of their own labor, because all men possess equal value before God. Through these two equal rights (life and fruit of labor) all men naturally and equally possess rightful liberty, which, according to Thomas Jefferson, is “unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.”
Envision 1,000 people moving three dimensionally in the Superdome — each a unique individual — yet each naturally surrounded by an equally protective bubble — each individual equally protected in their life and labored-for property. Under equal rights each individual possesses maximum freedom of activity — each individual has maximum human liberty — maximum “unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.†As soon as any individual or group of individuals unjustly possess superior rights they become surrounded by larger protective bubbles which, out of geometric necessity, unjustly reduces in like measure the freedom of activity — the liberty — of everyone else. Imagine a King or Prince, or the Pigs of Animal Farm — superior animals surrounded by bubbles tens or hundreds or thousands of times larger than that of the lesser animals — inferior creatures with restricted liberty — their activity restricted within limits drawn around them by the superior rights of others.
Rightful human liberty is a function of equal rights to life and fruit of labor. Equal rights are a function of equal human value. Equal human value is a function if man’s infinite value. Man’s infinite value is a function of man being created in the image of God. Thus, rightful human liberty is the gift of God to every man.
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?” Thomas Jefferson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Memorial
Think about the historical context at the time these men were writing. Few people would have been taken seriously as out and out atheists. On top of that, Jefferson was speaking during a time when Kings used the God argument in support of their right to divinely rule. What could be a better counter argument than “God believes all men are created equally and no one man had a divine right to rule,” at that time?
You imply that our Founding Fathers were really atheists – afraid to tell the American public about their laci of faith in God, but nothing could be further from the truth. Only a coward would hide his true thoughts, and we know that our Founding Fathers were courageous, so they spoke the truth regarding their belief in God and their lack of belief in the so-called “divine right of kings.” Our Founding Fathers had no fear to say what was on their minds – no fear to tell the truth about any thing.
“Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour…” George Washington
“Before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe.” James Madison
“The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave.” Samuel Adams
“The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased.” Alexander Hamilton
“I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: that God governs the affairs of men. And if the sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that ‘except the Lord builds the House, they labor in vain who build it.” Benjamin Franklin
“Almighty God hath created the mind free. All attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens . . . are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion… Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him?” Thomas Jefferson
I Guess it does sound as if I was implying that; I wasn’t really trying to. I just think they were much more secular minded when it came to matters of governance and I think at the time, the only way you could justify individual liberties was to say that they came from God.
Couple of more points. Just because the founding fathers believed it doesn’t mean it’s true. And secondly, do you believe anyone that claims to be a Christian is a Christian? Or do you believe someone must behave as a good Christian would? Because if you believe the latter then there is significant evidence none of the founding fathers were Christians. But then again, if you can sin constantly and always be forgiven, what’s the point of Christianity anyway?
Just because the founding fathers believed that all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights doesn’t mean it’s not true. And secondly, do you believe that your right to life and freedom of speech, and your right to keep the fruit of your own labor in pursuit of happiness comes from government (a small group of other people after all)? If so explain how those “rights” are unalienable and not reversible.
Our Founding Fathers were almost all Christians of the Judeo-Christian sort – not of the corrupted European type where a self-serving church was firmly linked to a self-serving authoritarian state. Even Thomas Paine, although not a Christian, believed that God is the Holy Author of human liberty.
“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has a right (not only to TAX) but ‘to BIND us in ALL CASES WHATSOEVER’ and if being bound in that manner, is not slavery, then is there not such a thing as slavery upon earth. Even the expression is impious; for so unlimited a power can belong only to God.” Thomas Paine
If there is one thing all our Founding Fathers agreed on it is that man is not the author of man’s equal rights.
“The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased.” Alexander Hamilton
“Almighty God hath created the mind free. All attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens…are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion… God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?” Thomas Jefferson
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Thomas Jefferson
Our Founding Fathers stood in good company in believing that God is the source of man’s equal rights to life, liberty and fruit of labor in pursuit of happiness – that there is a higher law – Natural Law – the law of nature and nature’s God – which supersedes all man-made law.
“There is a true law, a right reason, conformable to nature, universal, unchangeable, eternal, whose commands urge us to duty, and whose prohibitions restrain us from evil. Whether it enjoins or forbids, the good respect its injunctions, and the wicked treat them with indifference. This law cannot be contradicted by any other law, and is not liable either to derogation or abrogation. Neither the senate nor the people can give us any dispensation for not obeying this universal law of justice. It needs no other expositor and interpreter than our own conscience. It is not one thing at Rome and another at Athens; one thing today and another tomorrow; but in all times and nations this universal law must for ever reign, eternal and imperishable. It is the sovereign master and emperor of all beings. God himself is its author, its promulgator, its enforcer. He who obeys it not, flies from himself, and does violence to the very nature of man.” Cicero
“The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; all the servants of one sovereign master, sent into the world by his order, and about his business; they are his property, whose workmanship they are, made to last during his, not one another’s pleasure: and being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another’s uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for our’s.” John Locke
So liberty, if God doesn’t exist do humans still have inalienable rights? If the founding fathers didn’t believe in God, would their words convince you any more or less?
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?” Thomas Jefferson
Rightful human liberty is a function of equal rights to life and fruit of labor. Equal rights are a function of equal human value. Equal human value is a function if man’s infinite value. Man’s infinite value is a function of man being created in the image of God. Thus, rightful human liberty is the gift of God to every man.
What is your counter argument to the tyranny of unequal rights? Do you believe in the social justice of equal rights? I so how do you propose that everyone comes to possess infinite value as the source of their equal rights?
I don’t Really understand your question or why I am obligated to answer it based on my previous post. All I was saying was, even if a founder father was an atheist, operative word IF, he could not really come out as one at that time and be taken seriously. Do you agree? Secondly, invoking God’s name to get the populace to revolt against divine rule– which also used God’s name but didn’t quite have the amount of biblical backing for it– is a brilliant tactic. Do you agree?
First of all none of our Founding Fathers were atheists; they were very intelligent and courageous men, so any atheists among them would have had the courage to say so. On the contrary our Founders repeatedly acknowledged God as the source of our inherent equal, unalienable human rights – to life, liberty and fruit of labor in pursuit of happiness. During this time the European Kings and Bishops self-servingly, and without Biblical authority, opined that God was the source of the King’s right to the life, liberty and fruit of labor of the King’s serfs – in pursuit of the King’s happiness. Invoking God’s name in just revolution against the so-called “divine right of kings” was a brilliant tactic – based on the true nature of God – and the true nature of man. The true nature of God is to assign infinite value to all men – and therefore equal value to all men – thus the true nature of man. The equal value of all men naturally leads to the equal, unalienable God-given rights of all men – to their life – to the fruit of their own labor – and to their freedom limited only by the equal rights of other men.
“All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God.” Thomas Jefferson
“That is the real issue. That is the issue that will continue in this country when these poor tongues of Judge Douglas and myself shall be silent. It is the eternal struggle between these two principles — right and wrong — throughout the world. They are the two principles that have stood face to face from the beginning of time, and will ever continue to struggle. The one is the common right of humanity and the other the divine right of kings. It is the same principle in whatever shape it develops itself. It is the same spirit that says, ‘You work and toil and earn bread, and I’ll eat it.’ No matter in what shape it comes, whether from the mouth of a king who seeks to bestride the people of his own nation and live by the fruit of their labor, or from one race of men as an apology for enslaving another race, it is the same tyrannical principle.” Abraham Lincoln
You imply that our Founding Fathers were really atheists – afraid to tell the American public about their laci of faith in God, but nothing could be further from the truth.
There sure is a lack of reading skill in evidence on this blog. S/he implied nothing of the sort. S/he was saying that in an era where it is common to mention god gratuitously every third sentence one hardly expects to see anything starkly different regardless of an individual’s actual level of belief. Why? Because it was also an era where admission of even mild agnosticism was akin to admitting to serial rape of nuns while roasting orphans.
“Think about the historical context at the time these men were writing. Few people would have been taken seriously as out and out atheists.”
He/she was irrationally implying that our Founding Fathers were secret atheists because he/she irrationally mentioned the possibility that they were secret atheists. There is a lack of cognitive skill in evidence on this blog because failure to draw a self-evident inference from a self-evident implication is irrational. What he/she failed to say is that our Founding Fathers had an actual belief in the God of equal unalienable individual rights – to life, liberty and the fruit of labor in pursuit of happiness – regardless of the era, and in defiance of the tyrannical belief in a God of unequal (superior) rights for Kings. One would hardly expect our Founding Fathers to be atheists because rightful human liberty is a function of equal rights to life and fruit of labor in pursuit of happiness, and because equal human rights are a function of equal human value, and because equal human value is a function if man’s infinite value, and because man’s infinite value is a function of man being created in the image of God. Thus, rightful human liberty is the gift of God to every man – just as our Founding Fathers believed and stated.
“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others… God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?” Thomas Jefferson
Thank you. At least you understood.
“The Universe by its own self nature is intelligence and love.”
Ohh, boy. That’s some grade-A prime Gaia worship you got going on there. I got bad news for you — the “Universe” doesn’t give a rat’s behind whether you live or die in painful agony.
And “crusader mentality”? Which Daily Kos diarist taught you that phrase?
Considering what the Crusades were — defense of civilized, Christian lands and people against Muslim invaders — count this agnostic in on that “mentality”.
It is kinda funny listening to Muslims whine about Christian Crusaders stealing lands they had stolen themselves from a Christian empire. That’s not even including all the Islamic crusading empire building that engulfed lands from Morocco to Delhi to Java.
When it comes to fair play in viewing history, context is as rare within Islam as stripper poles in Mecca.
I thought militant atheists were of the thought nature harsh and cold? Reality, survival of the fittest, may the best random gene adaptation win, and all the other bunk.
Intelligence and love? Hmmmm…that sounds very much of a loving Creator.
The notion that there is a “Creator” is preposterous.
Even as an atheist I know this is a stupid thing to say. First, because it doesn’t do anything other than needlessly cheese people off, and second, because it’s wrong.
Why is it wrong? Even basic sci-fi can answer that one. e.g. in Baxter’s timescape series the idea is that the universe is on its nth iteration and we humans re-seed the next one with the ability to create life again, hopefully an iteration will come along that can solve the entropy problem. In short the creator of life is previous life. This is but one of a gazillion plausible scenarios.
The notion of a creator is perfectly consistent with what we know. What makes for atheism isn’t rejection of the notion of a creator, but rejection of the notion of one that seems to have an inordinate intertest in the outcome of north american sporting events.
The upshot is that you’re either a troll or a troublemaker. Either way you’re a crappy atheist.
Almost all physicists and cosmologists today think that the “Big Bang Theory” — that they universe began at a single instant in a huge explosion about 14 billion years ago (give or take) — is correct. Do you have any idea how subversive that theory is with respect to your there’s-no-such-thing-as-a-creator theology?
Excellent essay, Andrew! I thank God for you (and many others) daily. Have a blessed Christmas and a numinous New Year.
If you’d like to examine the horrifying nature of some of the liberals who hate Christians, see this lunatic’s blog: http://drudgeretort.wordpress.com/2011/12/08/the-problem-with-believing-in-god-and-jesus/
He believes that he is “more evolved” than Republicans. It’s comical.
Thanks so much. Tim Tebow (and Drew Brees, Tony Dungy, Jeff Suppan etc) are all men of faith and good character. It drives some people crazy, that they believe in God and are unapologetic about it. I hope Tim and team win the Superbowl decisively, but I’ll bet that won’t stop the naysayers.
What Klavan was saying is that countries founded on the Judeo-Christian tradition are the only countries to truly produce free societies. Why? The ultimate reason for that is not so much the tribal God of the Jews, although He is the root of it all, but rather Christ’s call to have Faith in Him (Christ) as that God. To have Faith is to chose, and if there is no freedom, you can’t chose.
Hence the problem with the Inquisition or the Pilgrims putting ‘witches’ on trial, or membership in a particular church being a political necessity (as was the case with the Church of England in the past). All of these go against the basic Christian idea that we must be free to freely chose to believe that Jesus of Nazareth is God.
The Jews are a special case in that they exist because God exists. They’re one of the proofs of the existence of God. There are many proofs for the existence of God (the uncaused cause, for instance). My favorite is the Beauty proof. Beauty exists. Therefore, God. And there is only one real argument against the existence of God, a strongly emotional as well as intellectual argument: the existence of Evil. But the Jews, surviving against ALL the odds for millennia against all sort of evils, are proof of God’s existence, for how else would they have survived?
However, in this thread, I don’t think Jews per se can be said to be the pillar of religious freedom–after all, God was THEIR God. He is their tribal God, first and foremost–sure, He is God of all and king of the Universe; but for them, He’s their God first.
What Christianity did was in effect to expand the franchise–to say that the Jewish tribal God is THE God of everyone, and that we are all called to the Israel of God (as St. Paul put it). But the Church also made membership in the Israel of God (the Church) dependent on Faith, not lineage, circumcision, Temple ritual, or any action on our part, except Faith.
Islam is sort of a nightmare child of Christianity and Judaism: It says Allah is their God, period. The rest of us don’t know Allah from Fallah, FDR’s dog. On the other hand, Islam isn’t content to stay in its tribal dustbin, but wants to escape and capture the world. Islam says it is our duty to submit to Muhammad, the prophet of God, whether we believe or not. This submission (literally, “Islam”) is not faith-based, but obedience based, like circumcision and Temple ritual. Islam isn’t free itself, and it produces no freedom, not even intellectual thought (since the Asherites defeated the Mu’tazilites back in 848 in Baghdad). But it is Hell-bent on world-wide expansion.
As for atheists, well, they must be free to chose. But Christians don’t have to be dhimmis to either Muslims (the “Submitted”) or to atheists, either.
None of this makes for an easy-going world, but hey, them’s the breaks.
An Préachán
What Klavan was saying is that countries founded on the Judeo-Christian tradition are the only countries to truly produce free societies. Why?
Study anthropology and archeaology a bit and it becomes clear that the entire freedom associated with christianity thing never really got going until it was adopted by the northern european tribes. And why is that? These tribes all had a longstanding tradition of democratic rule from the neolithic, millenia before such a thing became popular. The northern european mind was ready. Freedom has more to do with THAT tradition than it does with which god they worship. It’s almost as if celts and saxons were genetically ready.
Cool thing? Combine democratic tradition and monotheism and the human condition improves by leaps and bounds. But be aware. It’s not the judeo christian tradition that counted. It’s the democratic one. Need proof? The free countries that are the bulwarks… northern european and former colonies of same.
Ultimately this isn’t very PC but there are many who reckon that the grand experiment in the middle east is doomed to failure. You can’t export democracy at the point of a bayonet, nor can you get peoples with 2000-5000 years of nothing even remotely like democracy in their heritage to get it. Freedom isn’t something that will go over well in the middle east.
Also, those European tribes rediscovered reason which was given to the world by the Greeks. The Renaissance and the rebirth of freedom (in the New World especially) resulted. To give credit to Christianity for the rebirth of freedom, one has to ignore its detrimental influences on mankind’s progress during the Dark Ages.
Medieval Christianity was a perversion of true Christianity as well as a rejection of reason. The Reformation was part of the Enlightenment and brought reason back into the Christian Church – both Catholic and Protestant.
Reason is the ability to observe, comprehend and accept self-evident truth – both moral and scientific – and thus reason pre-dates the Greeks – because there have always been individuals capable of observing, comprehending and accepting self-evident truth. Give Aristotle his due though – he clearly articulated the scientific and moral value of self-evident truth – the value of reason.
How can anyone believe in someone who’s principle mention in history is through religious texts, and whose birthday is actually celebrated on the date of a pagan festival.
I dunno but something tells me that you have no such difficulty believing in the scientific consensus on AGW. If you don’t believe in something, you’re liable to believe in anything at all. By the way, that’s whose.
You planning on doing anything for Earth Day this year?
In what year of Anno Domini will we be celebrating again? I continue to be amused by militant neopagan chants of trying to minimize Christ’s obvious influence on all of the world – whether they recognize it, or not.
The mere mention of Jesus’ name sends them into a state of apoplexy.
Complete rubbish. BCE and CE dating format is being used increasingly due to internationalisation in the sciences. Most of the people on this planet aren’t christians.
Internationalization that seeks to preserve the format of the Gregorian Calender while abolishing the reference to Jesus therein. You accept that Jesus’ birth divided time (mathematical errors notwithstanding), but you don’t want to call Him, “Lord.” That’s pathetic.
This reminds me, I need to download Michael Medved’s discusson on this very topic, the origins of our modern Christmas observance. Fascinating.
Also, your comment is non-sequitur defined.
Thank God for Tim Tebow. Thank God for Andrew Klavan.
Mr. Klavan,
Thank you for putting virtual pen to paper on this particular subject. You have said what I think many of us would also say, but not as well.
I hope that just as we have seen the silent majority wake up and make it’s presence felt in our country’s political arena through the Tea Party, that Christians will also wake up, realize that leaving the arena because we don’t want to be lumped in with the televangelists, or the “God Hates Fags” sign carriers is not an option and begin to work out how they will obey Jesus’s command: ““…go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (Matt 28: 19-20)
i love tebow for the wedge he thrusts into the ninny east coast libified sports “journalist” cabal
as these writers wait to be plucked up into the ranks of the major msm outlets they pontificate and wallow in their narrow minded smugness and pc selectivism unable to categorize tim tebow for what he is– a winner– so they react by going after an easier target to peg– his faith
the failure of all the so called gurus of professional football to accept/acknowledge tebow’s greatest asset– the ability to win and lead — points more to their inability to devise/envision a system outside their comfort zone (the zone of the mythical and utopian prototypical nfl quarterback aka the combine robot)
essentially, their ability to make a living in this profession is threatened by the unorthodoxy of tim tebow
Love that ‘load-bearing wall’ image. You know how to write and I’m glad you’re using your gifts in the right place. Good to see that you’re more interested in coming out of the shadows of shy Christianity, as well. There are ways to do this without being obnoxious, you know. I sent you a letter a year ago last autumn introducing you to world missions, Drew. Here’s hoping that sort of thing is a little more on your radar- not to minimize your valuable efforts for conservative world views in the secular-dominated arts. Thing of it is, about 90% of your best conservative minds are also disciples of that Jewish builder fellow we mistakingly call a carpenter Jesus was a ‘xtistis’ in Greek- a builder. He worked with stone as well as wood He was a physically strong man who could probably have thrown me across the street.
For about 10 years, I published a newsletter/blog (by email) that covered a very wide range of subjects. The only subject I made off limits was religion. The comments on this thread are a good illustration as to why.
As I recall, in part of Andrew’s column, he deals with how different faiths are treated unequally in the legal/public arenas. That would have been a legitimate subject in my newsletter. But then he went on to say why one religion is better than all the rest. I think that was a mistake. I think, as he put it in his column, that it “alienate[d] readers like myself”. But I doubt if that was his intent.
Personally, I don’t care much what people believe or don’t believe in terms of religion. I only care about what they *do*, and only when it affects me or those I care about.
Secular journalists – particularly those who work for magazines that exploit and degrade women, liberal leanings, etc – puzzle no one with regard to their lack of experience with believers. Tebow, however, does baffle even ordinary Christians because he seems to have no fear of people, only a fear of God ~ a trait to be greatly admired. He is an inspiration to us believers for that simple reason.
“Tebow, however, does baffle even ordinary Christians because he seems to have no fear of people, only a fear of God ~ a trait to be greatly admired. He is an inspiration to us believers for that simple reason.”
How True! Most of us have allowed ourselves to be cowed by secular society.
Afraid to speak out because someone may ridicule us.
i’m not a church-goer, but i love this article and I love most of the comments, think i’ll put it on my FB wall.
I can’t judge whether Tim Tebow is “overly religious” or not – However having seen the last two minutes (and the overtime) of yesterday’s Broncos/Bears game I am starting to wonder if Tim is getting his fourth-quarter plays sent in from a power somewhat higher than that of the Denver coaching staff.
all the intelligent and honest christians know that Jesus was a jew and christianity is modified judeaism (or judeaism fullfilled, if you prefer) faithful christians are the most ardent supporters of Isreals right to exist and the vast majority of christians are extremely tolerant of the jewish faith, when we promote our own faith, we glorify the same God that jewish people worship.
The reason the left hates Tebow is the same reason they go into a foaming rage over Sarah Palin. Tebow was a baby whose mother was told to abort, and she refused. Tim Tebow is a living example of why abortion is wrong. Sarah Palin refused to abort her beautiful Down’s syndrome baby, Trig, and she is a living example of why abortion is wrong.
As Ann Coulter says, abortion is the sacrament of the left. They hate Tebow because he exists. When you wonder why they go into spitting, insane rages over Tebow, now you know.
I think, likewise, the Sports Illustrated writers are going to have an increasingly difficult time as the years pass. The Fellowship of Christian Athletes has done yeoman’s work with young men for years ( decades?), like laboring in vinyards, and the fruit is coming up ripe. Christian athletes of good character are going to be the new normal.
One of the local high school’s varsity line was half Eagle Scouts. The coaches credited the scouts for their run to state. Then the coaches started giving speeches about the effect of Scouting and faith on the character and work ethic and leadership skills, and pressure-handling, and so on- to other coaches in other schools. Coaches want to win. They’ll look for winners in every nook: including fragile little freshman who wear orange tee-shirts to school.
Writers don’t seem to be coming up in the character-factories that is the sports department. Seething, angry loners may have beams in their eyes.
Unfortunately, this split is going to kill sportswriting and sports magazines, Or at least render their pages like Pravda.( what really got said?)
I loved that one of the TV interviews of Mr Tebow, a few of the sportscasters asked about faith and effort and so on. He answered in cadences that spoke true, rather than the canned responses we heard from Bull Durham. And, they also asked about technique and skill. I love it when the interviewer is well-matched to the interview-ee.
(my side question: women athletes:christian in the same way as FCA?0
The spouse makes sure to stay up and watch the initial after-game interviews, now. And he tapes them.
The editing out of mentions of prayers and bible-verses is pretty insidious. He thought he was a little crazy- his curiosity would get piqued when a player mentioned a verse, it was late, he’d go to sleep, then wake up and try to find the interview again, and the bit mentioning the verse would have been edited out- even in the middle of sentences. He was taking extra supplements for memory, and really worried, and then he found the local news story where the kids mentioned how their interviews had been edited- and what the verses were.
it’s a really impressive memory hole operation.
Interesting and not too surprising, sadly. I guess I’ll have to look for my spiritual edification from sources other than ESPN.
Well, wouldn’t you want to know what motivates someone who is excellent at what they do?
What are they thinking? It’s what interviews are for- not just what someone does, but why, and what they think about when they are doing something, and what is running through their head at the time.
Editing out a portion of their thoughts is lying, in some pretty insidious ways. It’s interview malpractice.
Nobody reads Atlas Shrugged for felicitous phrasing, for instance. They read it for the ideas, that stick with them. Paul Krugman believes in The Foundation series. Editing that out- that he believes in technocratic super-men running the little people’s lives- would do a great disservice to profilers of the man.
We are raising young men. We’d like them to be healthy, excellent and honorable young men. It’s worth asking what healthy, excellent and honorable young men think about, and do, and why.
“…the only faith on earth that has ever made men free.”
Mr. Klavan, if you are speaking of the American Revolution, it was not faith that made America free, it was a rebirth of reason. The American Revolution was a culmination of the Renaissance period. The Renaissance was a rebirth of reason after 1300 years of dark ages brought on by Christianity. Christianity also brought the world the Inquisition, witchhunts, the Crusades and numerous other attempts to enslave people throughout its history.
Yes. America is the most moral, just and free country on earth, but only to the degree that it follows its Renaissance roots and the age of reason that brought it about, not its faith.
I love a lot of what you say Mr. Klavan, but you need to temper your admiration and espousals of faith.
Ah yes, the Renaissance. That’s why the French revolution produced the same freedom as the American revolution. Because, you know, the slogan “Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite” made it so.
Of course, the Great Revivals and the Reformation and the Great Awakening had nothing at all to do with it. The fact that literacy was so widespread in the American colonies and early states so that children could be taught the Bible, and that they were so taught, that also had nothing to do with it. The fact that American soldiers, although plunged into war on reasons of varying worth over the past century, showed a radically different spirit of tenacity and magnanimity on the battlefield and to the conquered, that too can be traced to the Renaissance. French on the battlefield are the same as Americans on the battlefield, after all, right?
Ah yes, the Renaissance. That’s why the French revolution produced the same freedom as the American revolution. Because, you know, the slogan “Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite” made it so.
The french were just as religious as their american counterparts and had a much higher literacy rate. The answer is more complex and has more to do with geography and politics. The single most important influence re religion was the formation of a deliberately secular US federal government.
@randomengineer – “The french were just as religious as their american counterparts”
Christian in name, yes, but not so affected by the Protestant Reformation and the revivals and awakenings that graced Britain and America. The religion of the French was very different in substance than that of America, with visible and considerably different results.
As for the deliberately secular U.S. Government, it was non-sectarian. But the First Amendment’s context re. religion was both to avoid the imposition of a sectarian federal government AND to allow state sectarian government(s) if the state(s) so chose. It also assumed the virtues of a religious and moral people, without which the new government could not long last.
“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. … Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” – John Adams
checkmate
Dean — But the First Amendment’s context re. religion was both to avoid the imposition of a sectarian federal government AND to allow state sectarian government(s) if the state(s) so chose.
The point was that it was the deliberate secularisation of the FEDERAL government which was the key that allowed religious freedom to flourish. You seem to agree with this, yet you attempt a reply of “but…”
It might help if you respond to the point actually made rather than thinking you can score cheaply via appealing to the uber-wise religious dittoheads that permeate this place. Respond to what is said, not what you think might have been meant.
With all due respect, I think I did respond fully. I merely disagree with your contention (that is also an answer) that the government was secular, at least as most people mean it today, which is the imposition of a naked public square with no expression of religion as part of government. Perhaps I should have used quotes for “deliberately secular” since I was disagreeing with that phrase.
The U.S. Constitution instead formed a federal government that was non-sectarian, which then meant avoiding the establishment of a particular organizational or denominational expression of Christianity. Room for the Hebrew faith was also meant, and if pressed, would likely have included Mohammedans, Hindus, Sikhs, etc. (I’m using terms then in use as best I can). Prayers in public meetings, support for religion, deference to the Ten Commandments, declarations of days for fasting and prayer for special purposes, and other non-sectarian displays of Christian devotion were all envisioned within the normal scope of the duties of elected federal officials. The free exercise of religion meant exactly that–including by government officials as long as they performed their duties and did not use their power to favor one sect, denomination or organization over another.
The Christian view of the public servant, and the accompanying citizen’s responsibility both to God and to the state, made room for functioning governments in many forms, and put the state in a context in which it functions best. Secularists (here I use the word’s contemporary meaning) who do not recognize this context tend to become statists, thereby placing government in the place of God and demanding subjection of all spheres of life to it. As an example of this, consider the assault of the Obama administration on pro-life conscience exceptions for pharmacists and nurses. Secularists/statists constantly say to these religious objections, “You have no right to make such objections; go find another line of work.” From a Christian perspective, that is idolatry, worship of the state as god. From a political perspective, that is a perversion of the Novus Ordo Seclorum, the new American era inaugurated by the birth of the United States of America.
P.S. The U.S. motto, “In God We Trust” is entirely compatible with Ohio’s motto, “With God all things are possible.” It is also compatible with mottos of other states, such as Montana’s, “Gold and Silver,” because the federal government has, at least for now, been restricted to its proper sphere in matters of mottos, which is to let the states do what they want as long as they do not advocate the violent overthrow of the federal government.
When Christ talks of making people free it doesn’t just mean in a physical way. Christianity started as a religion for the slaves and the poor. Few rich people would stoop so low. Christ sets you free from fear and anger and so many other things that cause the problems in our lives. That is what has made the greatest difference in my life. I still work where I did, I make no more money than before but by bringing Christ to others and by having faith in him none of it matters and I have little or no fear.
It is interesting that no one addressed the multitude of examples where Christian’s have enslaved in the name of their religion. Historically, Christianity has not been a good steward of freedom of any kind. It is a historical anomaly that American Christians for the most part favor at least religious freedom. However:
“And [Job] said, Naked came I out of my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.”
Let us not handover our freedom to a God who can take it away. Man’s freedom is based upon observations about the nature of man that anyone of us can make–man lives by the use of his mind and the ability to act upon the judgment of his mind. Also, no other man can think for another person. We each own our own life and must be responsible for it. From here logic will lead us to the conclusion that freedom is necessary for the survival and flourishing of mankind. To bless freedom is to bless mankind and vise versa.
@David Wall
Your sincerity is obvious, and I appreciate that. However, I believe you have overlooked two key points:
1. The beginning of Christianity spelled, eventually, the end of the slave trade around the world. Whenever people followed the teachings of Jesus and the apostles, slavery went by the wayside. This was true in the Roman Empire, the culture of Greece, the British Empire, the United States of America. Yes, there were, and are, plenty of examples of peoples and nations choosing the economically profitable (without God, material things are paramount) and culturally comfortable over Jesus’ hard teachings. But that is neither a bug nor a feature, as they say in software development; it is instead operator error. Look at the areas least affected in practice by the gospel of Christ in the past 250 years–the evil empire of Communism, the Muslim Middle East, the continent of Africa–and you will find slavery in practice. Read Solzhenitsyn.
But hindsight is easier than sight. Take for example the current global evil of abortion. Someday people will revile and condemn our civilization for killing defenseless human beings, in the same way we revile older civilizations for keeping the slave trade going when they could have stopped it. The Christians are the ones who are standing up against abortion, opposed by government, media, entrenched businesses such as the despicable Planned Parenthood, and others. Someday these pro-life Christians will be seen as the heroes they are, and their opponents will receive the universal disgust they deserve.
Keep in mind also that the moral platform on which you stand, from which you condemn slavery, was provided to you by the Judeo-Christian ethic. Be careful in sawing off too many limbs from the tree of history; where you sit on the limb may surprise you.
2. The central message of Christianity and Judaism is that the fundamental law of the universe, created by God, is is not physical but moral. Above all, God is holy, and rebellion against him can bring only death. We know this in our consciences and can bury it only with great and self-destructive effort. But in Jesus’ cross, the love of God and the justice of God intersect. In the person of Jesus, God took on himself the punishment for your sins and mine, and signed “paid” on the charges against us, with the ink of his own blood. He rose from the dead to show that this payment was accepted.
He now frees us from the sins that hold us, humankind, captive. Whether it is lust, greed, idolatry, anger, or any other human failing that brings us down, it will be in the end only the desire to “do it my way” without God that dooms us to an eternity without God. Reason cannot save us; only the God who created reason and the mind can. The Gospel, Jesus says of himself, “If the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.”
I heard again a song a couple of days ago that summarizes well the kindness and love that God showed in reaching out to me, to free me from my own self-destructive road. It is “How Many Kings” by the group Downhere. Here’s an excerpt:
Follow the star to a place unexpected,
Would you believe after all we’ve projected,
A child in a manger!
Lowly and small, the weakest of all,
Unlikeliness hero, wrapped in his mothers shawl, just a child,
Is this who we’ve waited for?
Cause how many kings, stepped down from their thrones?
How many lords have abandoned their homes?
How many greats have become the least for me?
How many gods have poured out their hearts
To romance a world that has torn all apart?
How many fathers gave up their sons for me?
…
Only one did that for me!
The beginning of Christianity spelled, eventually, the end of the slave trade around the world. Whenever people followed the teachings of Jesus and the apostles, slavery went by the wayside.
Nonsense. Read some history. e.g. Rivers of Gold by the pre-eminent historian of renaissance Spain spells out (in readable form rather than college text style) that slavery was dictaed by economics. Spain at the time Columnbus was awash in black african slaves. Isabella thought it her christian duty to abolish this and did try, bless her. Others (the learned cardinals etc) reckoned that Isabella was wrong. There was still quite the intellectual dogfighting re slavery 1500 years after christ because it was rampant. The Spanish simply moved the africans to the new world where they also decided what the hell we’ll enslave the indians for their own good as well. The **only** thing that abolishes slavery is technology that obsoletes it. It has nothing to do with piety and the historical record proves it. Stick to what you know (which doesn’t appear to be much.)
…Eric Metaxas’ book Amazing Grace: William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery.
It appears that my previous comment to this was lost, so I’ll summarize.
1. Spain was in great need of the Reformation, including its participation in slavery.
2. Ad hominem attacks are generally a tacit admission of the weakness of one’s argument, and are unbecoming for an engineer or anyone else.
But I’ll read “Rivers of Gold” if you read the book I’ve noted above.
Hmmm. I am not so sure about this. I remember quite well through my studies that Christianity was used just as much to justify slavery as it was used in abolitionist rhetoric to help free slaves, if not more so. Think about the curse of ham. Blacks were supposedly the descendants of the accursed ham which meant they were inferior to others and thus could be enslaved.
David Wall: “It is interesting that no one addressed the multitude of examples where Christian’s have enslaved in the name of their religion.”
Actually it is always mentioned by people like David Wall. Atheists are in fact history’s worst enslavers and mass-murderers.
“We [in the Soviet Union] are slaves there from birth. We are born slaves. I’m not young anymore, and I myself was born a slave; this is even more true for those who are younger. We are slaves, but we are striving for freedom. You, however, were born free. If so, then why do you help our slave owners?… Alexander Solzhenitsyn
http://www.alor.org/Library/LegacyofTerror.htm
“But how to understand a teaching which in its ideal version includes both an appeal to freedom and a program for the establishment of slavery? Or how to reconcile the impassioned condemnation of the old order and quite justified indignation at the suffering of the poor and the oppressed with the fact that the same teachings envisage no less suffering for these oppressed masses as the lot of whole generations prior to the triumph of social justice? Thus Marx foresees fifteen, perhaps even fifty years of civil war for the proletariat, and Mao Tse-tung is ready to accept the loss of half of humanity in a nuclear war for the sake of establishing a socialist structure in the world. A call for sacrifices on this scale might sound convincing on the lips of a religious leader appealing to a truth beyond this world. But not from convinced atheists.” Igor Shafarevich
http://www.robertlstephens.com/essays/shafarevich/001SocialistPhenomenon.html
Hand it over? It already belongs to Him! He is the source of our rights, and thus He can, by His Wrath, take them away. What you suggest we do is not only morally wrong, but also impossible.
If I spread my Christian faith by what I say or what I do, it doesn’t matter. Both are effective.
If you think Tebow make Christians uncomfortable, to me, it’s like saying a rightous fight makes cowards uncomfortable.
If I tell you Obama’s parents were communists and Obamas’ a communist in secret, I don’t care a cotton pickin’ second if that makes you uncomfortable.
Uncomfortable is code for politically correct. And politically correct neighbors are pukes.
And the politically correct I chew up and spit out every day. And, believe me, that makes them uncomfortable.
And if you think Newt Gingrich has baggage, then Barack Obama keeps his in a huge store-house with a lock on it under the custody, care and control of the Godless mainstream media.
I may be just a girl, but I wear my religion not just on my sleeve, but also on the knuckles of my right hand. And if that makes you uncomfortable, just be glad you don’t have a bloody nose.
At the same time, we have a Marxist mole in the White House; proving that there’s something that should make us all uncomfortable.
@rachel peepers – “we have a Marxist mole in the White House”
True enough, but don’t forget the Muslim part. He doesn’t bow to the King of Saudi Arabia because he is a Marxist. He doesn’t say “the revealed Quran” because he is a Marxist. His early adulthood was Marxist, but his childhood, and the religion of his fathers, was Muslim.
Marxist Muslim, Muslim Marxist. Only time will tell.
freedom can not exist unless there is a widespread spiritual belief in it’s necessity and goodness.
we created a political system that provides individual freedom because we as a people came to understand that God gave us free will and intends that we use it, so we created a government that reflected that spiritual belief.
I prefer the secular approch to freedom: a philosopher king who is powerful and violent enough to secure the liberties for the unwashed mindless masses to enjoy and hopefully evolve from. There is no other secular moral than power, why not use it for the good of those who lack power?
Why do I consider freedom and liberty a moral good? Yeah, I know- I just said power is the only moral good. Well, uh. I dunno. That’s how mom raised me. Yeah… she went to church. I think she said it had something to do with people having the freedom and liberty to love God and being given the legal benefit of the doubt to find god’s will without violent state coersion, and the principles of property ownership and individual human rights as laid out in the bible. I wouldn’t know I’ve never read the thing cuz I’m an atheist!
Are you on acid? Care to clarify what the hell U R getting at?
Exodus 22:18 says “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.” Fortunately, Judaism has been defanged by the Talmud and Christianity by the Enlightenment. We no longer execute witches. Musliums, on the other hand, have faith. They still execute witches, despite the fact that there is no such thing as a witch and never has been.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/woman-beheaded-saudi-arabia-practicing-witchcraft-report-article-1.990253
I really hate this article.
In America, Christianity is mostly not “being assaulted,” “under attack,” or whatever else you want to call it. It used to be the favored religion. The reason it looks like it’s under attack now is because it’s being brought down to the same level other religions are on. That’s where it should be.
Some people are picking on Tebow. Big deal. That doesn’t mean Christianity is being warred against. There are some Christians who are warring against Separation of Church and State by trying to boot evolution out of schools in favor of young-earth creationist non-science.
I think the religious group in America we should be worried about is the Jews. According to FBI statistics, they are the only religious group with a significant number of hate crimes against them. I made a graph of anti-religious hate crimes based on those statistics, which can be seen here:
http://i536.photobucket.com/albums/ff326/GreekAsianPanda/ReligiousBiasHateCrimeIncidents1996-2009-1.jpg
So stop whining.
To clarify, I’m not a hard-core leftist atheist; I’m a centrist Christian. And I’m not saying there exists absolutely zero intolerance against Christians in America (Acts 17 in Dearborn comes to mind), nor do I want to minimize any true persecution against Christians in the rest of the world (like in many Islamic and some Communist countries). But there simply is very little dangerous bigotry against Christians in the Western world for any of your ranting about leftists and atheists and Muslims to be valid.
Again, stop whining. All of you.
@GreekAsianPanda – “But there simply is very little dangerous bigotry against Christians in the Western world for any of your ranting about leftists and atheists and Muslims to be valid.”
In other words, the barometer is dropping. The winds are shifting. Clouds approach. No matter. It’s still just fine here. Wouldn’t you like some lemonade? Pull up a chair and sit with me right under that tall tree. Again, stop whining. All of you.
if you are a centrist in america you’re most definitely a leftist by default
“centrist” is a tepid existence between the statist hardcore left and the wishy washy republican center– therefore– you are a leftist
pick a side for christ’s sake
Me, a leftist? No way. I’m too pro-life, and I care too much about religious minorities and women in the Islamic world to be a liberal.
You read like some ACLU shill, plus a little paranoid Southern Poverty Law Center lackey mixed in for good measure. Centrist Christian – like Obama.
How many crucifixes do we need to strip from the city seals after 150 years, or file lawsuits against the Boy Scouts, or defend the right of Muslims to exercise prayer in public schools in San Diego (have the come to the defense of Christianity) before maybe at the very least, at least you acknowledge huge double standard applies to Christianity?
The dishonesty by liberals posing as some loosely held form of Christianity under the guise of their real religion progressive politic is mind numbing (and revolting).
Thank you!
I say MERRY CHRISTMAS to every muslim I encounter. I laugh at Jews who support obama and ask them about celebrating Hannukah 2 weeks early and lighting all the candles on the first evening. I ask them if muslim holidays should be celebrated 2 weeks early.
Well said, Brother Klavan! Hopefully some who have posted will realize that you are underlining secular squeemishness re.: Tebow / Brees in order to underline the deeper issue of assaults on Christian belief and practice in the wider culture.
“There are those who hate Christianity and call their hatred an all-embracing love for all religions.”–G.K. Chesterton. Source: American Chesterton Society
Woo hoo, Andrew. Thank you for this fine piece. Pithy. Merry Christmas!
I think Tebow may be being lifted up to be later torn down. Eventually this story will lose luster, either from the Broncos coming down to earth,or the short American attention span coming into play. The story gets much attention because of the love of football as a sport and the position of leadership of QB on a football team. Micheal Vick went through some of this, without the religious aspect, and in a sort of reverse fashion. I would guess many may enjoy seeing Tebow rise and then fall.
Thank You Mr. Klavan, now I know where you stand, and it’s refreshing to know I actually may get to meet you, “but not yet, not yet”
Luke 22-36 – if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one!
The Atheist War on Christmas and Christians Goes Asian
Just when it looked as if the annual War on Christmas was showing signs the good guys were winning, the other side pops up and does something stupidly outrageous to demonstrate how stupid and outrageous they are.
Admittedly, the positive signs that Christians were winning were minimal in the first place but when the head of the Catholic Defense League, Bill Donohue, sees room for optimism there has to be some hope. Then there’s the unfortunate reality that, hope or not, the War on Christmas is still raging across the land–and across the Pacific Ocean.
Invariably, the forces of darkness are led by nihilistic atheists, domestic and foreign, dedicated to little else but negativism.
Personally, I don’t care if someone is an atheist and worships old socks, pink gerbils, or the almighty dollar instead of the Almighty. However, in a nation in which 96% of the population celebrates Christmas, actively campaigning against December 25th as either a holiday or a holy day is an intolerable, un-American annoyance.
It’s also an infringement on the First Amendment’s guarantees of freedom of religion and free speech.
Out on the Left Coast, a 57 year old Christmas tradition is being attacked by the usual horde of atheists employing an unusually subtle yet still pernicious tactic, gobbling up most of alloted public spaces to celebrate the winter solstice instead of Christmas.
For those fifty seven years, a group of churches in Santa Monica has traditionally erected 14 life-size displays depicting a variety of Nativity. This year, they are reduced to two, the other spaces alloted to out of town atheists who have filled two “solstice greetings” spots ranting against religion while monopolizing a total of 18.
In government courts, that should be considered an illegal restraint of religion and of a national holiday.
Hunter Jameson, a spokesperson for the churches, contends what the atheists are doing smacks of collusion and “that these new applicants have been working together to displace and push out the Nativity scenes from the park, rather than erecting a full display of their own.” (http://tiny.cc/0s9uj)
There’s no smacking involved at all. It’s just another battle in the American atheist War on Christmas.
Reflecting the truism that wars tend to widen, battles in that war have now spread to the Korean Peninsula.
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), where people are so poor and desperate they are known to eat the bark off trees, the atheistic, Communist leaders have taken great umbrage over their slaves viewing Christmas trees in the prosperous and actually democratic Republic of Korea (ROK). . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=10565.)
Klavan, why not simply title your article Tis the Season of christ-o-phobia because I said so? What a flippant piece. You use an NFL football game to show that poor Jesus is under attack? How silly. So you are telling me the opinion of a few people out of a crowd of 30,000 or so people in a country of 300,000,000, most of whom probably identify as Christians anyway, constitutes chirst-o-phobia. Well I guess Christians are just very christ-o-phobic about other Christians because chances are, that’s who is making those complaints. I think NFL games tend to draw fairly religious people or at least people who identify as Christians more so than it does Atheists.
Okay, I have been a Packer fan since I was about 10 years old. At that time I had liked the Pittsburgh Steelers for some unknown reason. Anyway, for decades almost it took the Packers to get back into the fray of winning. I spent numerous years throwing my Packer brick at the TV. Then came Brett and a Superbowl victory, now we have the best offense I have seen in my 35 years of watching football.
If the Denver Broncos were to somehow make it to the Superbowl against the Green Bay Packers, and even if those Packers were to be undefeated at that time, and the Broncos were to defeat the Packers I would rejoice. Why, because HE is still keeping an eye on things.
No, he would not intervene to get Tebow the championship, he would do it to allow those that do not believe, to believe. He is all welcoming if only you believe.
I am not that religious, though I am a Christian. I do not regularly visit church because church and God surrounds us. But if anyone thinks that God is not carrying a sword, just think back a few years to the leftist enclave to Mexico for their communist takeover plan on Global Warming. It was the coldest it had ever been recorded.
God has a sense of humor, it he laughs the loudest.
Thank you Andrew Klaven.
Regarding Rhode Island’s ‘holiday tree’, the Islamofascists and leftards have a common objective to secularize Christmas.
In addition to violent Christmas-time attacks, Muslim infiltrators and subversives throughout the West are trying to downgrade and secularize Christmas, removing all its Christian associations to turn it into a politically correct ‘Winterval’.
The Islamic motivations for this relentless campaign against Christmas are three-fold:
(1) Supremacism: to remove a Christian festival from its officially recognised place in the calendar.
(2) Protection of Muslim children from Christian influence.
(3) The Scrooge syndrome: resentment of kuffars having a good time.
More at http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2011/03/islams-jihad-against-christmas.html
I must inform you that the excellent GREEN BAY PACKERS won the Superbowl last year, not the Saints.
from Susan in WI
Hi, Susan. No one has more respect for the amazing Packers than I but they won THIS year (2011)! And the way they’re going, they may well win again next… unless, of course… Tebow… AK
Thank you for the acknowledgement of the Pack. This is a bit of light-hearted interjection, but so meaningful;)
Cannot believe you have less than 5000 followers on fb. Now, that is a travesty! When does the Homelanders movie come out? sk
– Andrew Klavan.
Good article! Thank you Andrew Klavan. I’ve been a Bronco fan for almost 40 years, longer than I’ve been Christian. It’s great to see Tim Tebow lead and win whether or not they keep winning. This season has been much better than many expected and it’s entirely due to Tim Tebow’s inner fire.
I just read through the comments and find many of them truly amazing. I know from discussions with atheists and humanists that it’s impossible to find a common moral ground with those who deliberately reject Judeo-Christian values. There is no basis for human or civil rights there since no foundation for such exists. The Greek philosophers are of no use as a foundation either for a variety of reasons. Once you abandon Judeo-Christian foundations, it’s a free-for-all and chaos reigns until a strongman comes on the scene and takes over.
The whole Tebow thing has been way overblown from both sides. It does amaze me how much of an uproar his professed Christianity has made within the sports community — maybe they’re upset his religion seems to trump their own? Believe me, for many people sports IS a religion. I can’t help pondering what beings from, oh, another planet, or 2000 yrs. in the future will make of our stadiums/temples, days & hrs. of worship, how the god of _____ (insert fav. sport) attracted so many devoted fans, etc.
Other random thoughts:
I’m also wondering why Christians seem to almost DEMAND everyone acknowledge Tebow’s winning is BECAUSE of his beliefs. i.e. G*d grants him victory. I’ve lived in Denver for 35 yrs., and the Broncos are past masters of the “4th Qtr. Comeback”. Not for nothing do we here in town call ‘em “The Cardiac Kids.” Yet I don’t remember Craig Morton or John Elway being held up as major religious role models or figures — well, except by the football-as-religion fanatics. Occasionally they both also pointed skyward. What, were they crediting the weather for a good play or win? Sometimes they took a knee, but because they didn’t feel the need to overtly advertise faith does not mean they weren’t having a quick word.
I think many people would agree with Mr. Klavan when he says, “I hate pompous piety and intrusive evangelizing …” Whenever anyone of strong convictions can’t do/be/talk of anything else, it can get rather boring, and frustrating for others; we’ve all known a “one-track mind” person who can only discuss ONE thing. Too, most Americans still honestly believe in gumption, practice & hard work — the “awful” meritocracy — and while miracles still happen, I speculate even the most evangelical Christian doesn’t think anyone can be a NFL star by prayer alone. So maybe it feels that Tebow’s blatantly advertising his faith kinda goes against the grain, the independent American spirit?
Lastly, IS the time for Christian reticence past? Unfortunately, many of us have run into that person/family who, while making a point of being uber religious in public, certainly don’t live their lives that way. When the rubber meets the road, they’re willing to do dirty if it saves them money or face. My poor son married into one of these families. The rehearsal dinner at a buffet? They loudly announced several times that we all needed to hold hands, then decided to pray at full volume for a really long time. The kids decided they wanted a beach wedding; her parents about died. So 5 min. before the ceremony, great surprise! their minister plus family just happened to show up on that partic. stretch of Atlantic Ocean beach, 3 hrs. from home. When my son’s dad visited later (he couldn’t make wedding), because son doesn’t believe as they do, they insulted his dad. I mean, RUDE to the Nth degree. Just because we’re divorced gives them no reason to attack! They’ve lied/cheated around car repairs/parts. The father was fired as a teacher in their county for inappropriate speech/behavior in the classroom, and is now banned from teaching positions there. My son is currently serving in the army, his second overseas deployment. His m-i-l runs an in-home daycare, and charges him $50/wk. more than anyone else because “the govn’t can afford it.” And on and on; really not very nice people. But they sure identify as Christian at 140 decibels! Are all Christians like this? Absolutely not! The problem here is that anyone who is so one-track IN PUBLIC runs a big risk. To paraphrase Samuel Johnson: “Pushy public displays of religion are the last refuge of a scoundrel.” Personally I’d rather see the agora free of brand-name religion altogether — that’s not to say I don’t want it as an important part of people’s lives, informing how they do business. I just don’t need to know exactly how it operates for them at all times.
D.D.
I too am a native Coloradan. Yes, Bronco football IS a religion to many. Though since Mile High’s been torn down and replaced with ‘Invesco Field..’ to whatever it’s called now, I’ve lost interest in our football team.
As for the uber-Chiristian or uber-Atheists/Agnostics we encounter, it seems from your post you HAVE NOT said to the aforementioned peoples vis-a-vis you don’t appreciate their take, their condescending air, their inability to respect another’s belief/non-beliefs etc etc.,
You know and I know the best form of resolve is to FACE said issue and bring it to the forefront.
I agree though religion can sometimes be a cover for one’s ignorance. West Denver is filled with Mexican-majority uber-Catholics though you know this doesn’t help ‘spread the word’ when it comes to said Catholic’s gang member children inflicting violence, making the Denver Metro area a 3rd World craphole, decimating the education system etc., and were sold it’s as a faced of, ‘diversity ‘multiculturalism’.
With Colorado going Illiberal some years back this and many other problems are turning Colorful Colorado into a wasteland like CA, NZ, NM and AZ.
Whew, most of that stuff is way over my head but I think I agree with you on a lot of it. But, you have to admit that even John Elway seldom did this much with the talent he brought to his position. Tebow can’t play quarterback at this level and as soon as he gets a leg broken by an angry 300 pound opponent, he will be finished. But, he hasn’t gotten hurt yet and the pro game has gotten so far from the option offense that they can’t figure out how to defend it. I am riding this horse until he drops and I am enjoying every minute of it! By the way, while no one has been looking, the rest of this team has been improving with each game they play.
Also, this was a very good article before all of us buffoons started commenting afterword.
I’m somewhat confuse by the lead here as it refers to the article. Christ did not come as a soldier, hence the whole born in a manger thing. He didn’t come to command, to coerce or to control. He whole ministry was about loving God, loving others, obedience, integrity and dare I say it “faith”, which without words is dead at least in the New Testament. So simply saying you have faith is good but demonstrating that faith is better and best. (ie Brees and Tebow)
Faith is a personal thing. One’s faith should never be the subject of someone else’s opinion. Of course since that’s an opinion, it’s subject as well. Reporting and commenting on religious issues is just filled with pot holes, isn’t it.