Anyway, when people are fearful they look for simple answers and thus become vulnerable to scapegoating. Reflection, deliberation and (especially) praying and fasting don't get immediate results, especially come election time.

Turn to the word of God for direction and wisdom, read James 1:5-8 and follow accordingly. Also, consider Colossians 2:2-4. God did not leave us helpless when sent his son Jesus to save us from death. Praying and fasting will indeed give us results if we pray and fast with a pure heart and godly intentions.

Isaiah 58 is a good starting point to learn how to fast.

Jesus also taught us how to pray in the gospels. Or is the word of God, which is Jesus (Jesus is the word), too much orthodoxy for today's society? Remember, Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

And as far as being either "with them or against them" Jesus' message of salvation was "take it or leave it". A house divided against itself will not stand. If you are not for Jesus you are against Jesus.

Education is something I don't have many gripes about, personally... The staff is generally altruistic, and the school as a whole is governed by the parents. They could probably be streamlined, but I don't hear much about bad bureaucracy in this area. I think this is more of a social issue than an economic one, really.

Note that I restricted my libertarianism to economics. While I am growing a bit more liberal on social issues, my template for those is the Republican platform.

Let me suggest one specific area where I think "welfare" is highly beneficial to the society as a whole and the individual members: public funding of schooling. An uneducated child is a menace to society, as well as a tragic waste of potential. I think universally provided education via tax funding is right--not necessarily in government-operated schools, but funded by tax revenues. Most parents are not able to fund their children's education out of current income, and putting them hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt to fund it doesn't seem wise. The reality is that if school taxes didn't exist and we depended on benevolence, not all children would get an education (see the situation in Africa).

Another way in which its "won't care" attitude seems problematic for a Christian is the idea of eliminating all laws restricting "consensual" behavior. So prostitution should be legal, there should be no regulation of drug usage (recreational or medical), abortion should be permitted. While I don't think that all religious prohibitions should be enshrined in law, all of these are highly destructive activities that I think the state is right to prohibit.

There might be a place for limited welfare... I currently don't think so. Of course I'm still learning libertarian theory, so my opinion doesn't count for much. But I want to know where libertarianism can't patch the problems, then I want to know what the minimalist solutions are.

Essentially, I defaulted to libertarianism because I understand its basic tenets. And I don't see any other template to start poking holes in - Democrats and Republicans seem to only use ad-hoc solutions without any solid theory behind them. And as mentioned, I don't think Scripture provides enough detail to conflict with it. (Actually, Scripture would probably place some blame on debt for our original problems.)

I disagree with trying to wrap libertarianism in "nothing but the pure Constitution" clothing. Libertarian philosophy is much more far-reaching than federalism; it denies that states or local governments have appropriate roles beyond very limited police powers (and I've spoken to some far-out libertarians who don't even agree with that, and think all security should be handled by private services, empowered by the private owners of all property, including city streets, with disputes handled by private arbitration services rather than courts).

"Libertarianism won't care"--that's exactly my point. It denies any role in caring for the rest of society (local, national, or international): sink or swim. That's what I mean by calling it individualistic. While I'm not an advocate for the cradle-to-grave welfare society, I don't think following Scrooge's "Let them go to the poorhouses" advice is healthy, either. There is a place for working together as a community, funded by mandatory taxes. I find libertarianism utopian, and in our fallen world, utopianism is inevitably disastrous.

I haven't read Ayn Rand (yet), but you might want to see this article: http://www.american.com/archive/2009/october/gr...

Libertarianism is about the Constitution. The idea is that the private sector is more fit to solve social ills than the government (a good reason for "social justice" to get a more specific name). Government is regarded only as a rule-maker and arbitrator, and groups can define how they want their beliefs to manifest at the state, local, community, or even club level, subject to the hierarchy. Libertarianism doesn't insist on individualism; you can live in a commune if you like and libertarianism won't care. However, it also refuses to insist on any other set of values.

I took to economic libertarianism very easily because it's really what the Republican Party claims to believe, at least when it's politically expedient. And I see nothing in Scripture to say that government is a better problem-solver than private entities, unless you think all of the Old Testament applies. My social views are following for pretty much the same reasons as I would expect of most here, although I still hold to conservative theology and ethics.

It's really hard for me to see how libertarianism squares as either economic or political theory with faithful Christianity. Libertarian philosophy is extreme individualism, while Christianity is highly concerned with the community and one's (expansively defined) neighbor. I'm conservative, but Ayn Rand-style worship of greed, selfishness, and Social Darwinism is a whole different direction.

Yep! Looking at some prominent conservative forums, you just gave a rather accurate profile of the typical member (at the end of your post). I don't think I should start with the more popular ones... (Someone suggested above that I start my own site; I might try it, but a political forum is something of a large leap of faith.)

I think we all need to seek to understand and reflect "the wisdom from above" (James 3:13-18). If we as Christians, whatever our political convictions, lived with that kind of wisdom, we would reflect Christ's "grace and truth" in what we say and do, and might actually make Christian faith appealing to onlookers, rather than repelling them with arrogance, meanness, and narrow-mindedness!!!

You're right that historically the right has tapped into Christians and built a base there, but speaking purely political you could easily insert "Liberalism" into your post that I quoted above.

Sounds like conventional wisdom; historically, however, that simply isn't true at all. For openers, you don't have "liberal Christians," evangelical or otherwise, as part of a similar bloc; there are, for example, no Christian TV or radio outlets that cater to them, nor do they have much pull in the Democratic Party and in fact were all but ignored there. (African-Americans make up the closest thing to an exception but only because of their five-decade battle with the political right.)

"Part of the power of modern conservatism, even (or even perhaps especially) its "Christian" wing, is resistance to any changes in its orthodoxy regardless of facts or history that may contradict it"

You're right that historically the right has tapped into Christians and built a base there, but speaking purely political you could easily insert "Liberalism" into your post that I quoted above. Both sides have their own orthodoxies that they cling to, not just conservatives. Liberals do not have a monopoly on free thinkers, either.

I do need to read some hard-copy literature, but I gotta say I didn't like the Frank Schaeffer I saw in the recent article, for various reasons.

PS. Let your biblical views shape your economic and social views instead of letting the political views shape them!
I'm not so sure the Bible has much to say about how to run a country. Seems to me it's all about how (and when not) to run yourself. Translating that into political theory is a big job.

Yeah, that's one of my side projects... It's a wiki; ask if you're interested. I feel hesitant to post a URL without any request.

EDIT: And while I recognize the divisive effects of the liberal-conservative continuum, I think labels do serve a purpose - especially in a discipline that's so rich with complex theories. But short of reading a sociological theory, I guess I'll have to give your suggestion a test-drive in order to decide whether it's good.

Just got done reading Frank Schaeffer's book titled "Crazy for God".
His dad Francis was a "thinking" evangelical conservative but changed with time. Frank's book explains his take on the conservative movement. Finally Frank left the evangelical conservative movement and is now a Greek Orthodox member (or at least attends that church once in awhile). I don't agree with everything Frank says (he's published some pro military books I'd have problems with) but his insite makes a good read about some of the questions you're asking. He cusses way too much for my liking, etc. It's worth a read though.

PS. Let your biblical views shape your economic and social views instead of letting the political views shape them!

Utter nonsense. Modern conservatives, who were for the most part secular, began reaching out to evangelicals, particularly in the South, in the late 1970s. There is no "liberal" counterpart, so your attempt to "flip the script" is invalid.

Be the answer you are looking for. You will create the space into which many persons can come who have things to offer and to receive--including intelligences of many kinds. I like intelligent discussion. I like gifts of wisdom. I love those who can listen and truly hear. I love those who offer grace. And I wouldn't tie any of those characteristics to any particular political orientation nor would I get sucked into placing persons onto a liberal-conservative continuum.

I totally agree. His commitment is to the Christ and the Body of Christ. . Not making the hand better then the foot.


Quest Church Faith Statement


The Scriptures, both Old and New Testaments, are the inspired Word of God without error in the original writings, the complete revelation of His will for the salvation of men and women, and the divine and final authority for all Christian life and faith.

There is one God, Creator of all things, infinitely perfect and eternally existing in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Jesus Christ is God's eternal Son. As true God and true man, He allowed Himself to be born of a virgin, taught men and women how to live through a sinless life, was crucified as a penal substitute for our sins, arose bodily from the dead, ascended into heaven, where, at the right hand of the Majesty on High, He is now our High Priest and Advocate.

The Holy Spirit persuades us to repent of our sins and confess Jesus as Lord. He lives in us, teaches us, gifts us, and enables us to live godly lives.

Men and women were created in the image of God, tempted by Satan and rebelled against God. As a result of their rebellion against God, men and women are dead in their sins. Through repentance and personal faith in Jesus Christ, we are forgiven our sins, reborn by the Holy Spirit, and we become children of God.

The Church is the living Body of Christ on earth; Christ is its head and source of life. The Body is composed of those who have received Him personally. The Church exists to celebrate the living God, cultivate personal growth in Christ, love one another in Christ, and communicate Christ to the world through words and deeds.

Jesus Christ will return to earth to raise the dead, judge the world, and establish His glorious Kingdom. This is the hope of the Church and its encouragement for ministry. At the end of time the redeemed will go on to eternal life whereas the unredeemed to eternal hell.

Baptism soon after accepting Christ as personal Savior is a testimony to sin and resurrection to a new life, and the Lord's Supper is a time of thanksgiving and communion with Christ, setting forth in sacred and symbolic manner the death of the Lord Jesus Christ and the unity of His Church; all true believers and only believers should share in it. Infant baptism is appropriate of believing parents as a testimony of the expectation of the future grace of Christ in the life of the child.

Because God gives us eternal life through Jesus Christ, the true believer is secure in that salvation for eternity. If you have been genuinely saved, and trusted in Him, then you cannot lose your salvation. Salvation is maintained by the grace and power of God, not by the self-effort of the Christian. It is the grace and keeping power of God that gives us this security.

touche

You might be interested in Eugene Cho. He's one of the few Sojo authors without a political axe to grind. Check out his blog; it generally rises above "God's Politics". (I still have to chuckle when I think of how hubristic that sounds.)

Part of the power of modern liberalism, even(or even perhaps) its "christian" wing, is resistant to any change in its orthodoxy regardless of the facts or history that may contradict it-- basically your either with or against them, take it or leave it. people who criticized obama for making that kind of statement in reference to just about anything he is for; however, I felft it was well within his character.

Anyway, when people are fearful they look for simple answers and thus become vulnerable to scapegoating. reflection,deliberation and (especially) praying and fasting dont get immediate results,especially come election.