//
2012 Presidential Election, American Evangelicalism, politics

Evangelicals for Perry

I can’t let Evangelicals for Mitt have all the fun!

Yesterday I launched Evangelicals for Perry on Facebook and Twitter. Obviously not every contributor to CRM endorses Rick Perry for President. These views are my own.

Come by, check us out and be sure to follow us on both Twitter and Facebook and we’ll pass Evangelicals for Mitt in no time!

Updated to add: You knew it was coming…Evangelicals for Perry the blog! New content coming soon.

Advertisements

Discussion

23 thoughts on “Evangelicals for Perry

  1. You follow up with an article about Pat Robertson? So, was that just to prove my point. I don’t listen to Pat Robertson at all, so why do you? Why are you so judging toward others? Looking in the mirror might do wonders for you as you attempt to preach the good news. Thanks for the dusting off of your sandals. You might as well have spit in my face as well.

    Posted by Justin "Get" Wright | September 20, 2011, 9:59 am
  2. “…whose outlandish, idiotic, and woefully ignorant pronouncements are taken by the world as representative of true Christianity and of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

    Would you give me an example of who you have in mind here? Who do you know or have seen on TV, etc. who has said something to the effect of: ‘I perceive that Rick Perry represents true Christianity in the world. Therefore, I renounce Christ.’ Perhaps we can reach out to them because a little knowledge could go a long way toward helping these folks. As I said previously, a healthy understanding of total depravity can be very instructive when it comes to setting expectations for folks as “pure representatives” of Christ and Christianity.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | September 20, 2011, 7:18 am
  3. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/septemberweb-only/robertson-alzheimers-divorce.html?start=2

    This is the kind of right wing “Christian” politicization that shames the Name of Jesus Christ. Robertson is only one of many like Backmann, Palin, and Perry whose outlandish, idiotic, and woefully ignorant pronouncements are taken by the world as representative of true Christianity and of our Lord Jesus Christ. I reject them as caricatures ans stereotypes that taint the church’s mission in America to evangelize and preach the “GOOD NEWS”, not the gospel of conservative right wing reactionaries. It is painfully obvious that I was misled by the name of this blogsite. This will be my last post. There is no reasoning with political wingnuts who think they are doing the Lord’s work by espousing a Eurocentric, exclusionary agenda of selfishness, greed, and un-neighborliness totally devoid of compassion and the love of Jesus Christ. I dust my sandals and leave you to your fate. May God have mercy on you.

    Posted by bereanfields | September 19, 2011, 10:59 pm
  4. Here’s a good article by Chuck Colson, written just before the 2008 election, that discusses his views on christians going into politics.
    http://www.christianity.com/Christian%20Living/Christian%20Living%20FAQ/11543235/

    Posted by Justin "Get" Wright | September 19, 2011, 8:44 pm
  5. Our small group has been reading and discussing Romans. Last night we finished chapter 12, which describes the marks of a true christian. My friend, Rob, asked which of the characteristics of a christian do we struggle with the most. To be honest, I struggle with being and doing most of these things. But, I feel like a place like this has given me an opportunity to work on such things and to learn from fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. This discussion has prompted me to open my Bible and pursue God’s word in this matter. I, again, must be in honest that it has been quite some time I have spent some time in the Word on my own accord. This discussion has made me do so and for that I am thankful.
    Before I go I would like to point out Romans 14:1-12, 1″As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. 2 One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. 3Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master[a] that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. 5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s. 9For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. 10Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; 11for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess[b] to God.” 12So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.” (ESV)

    Posted by Justin "Get" Wright | September 19, 2011, 8:29 pm
  6. Wow, what a lot of hate to ingest all at once. I have a hard time figuring out where to begin. I may have a tough go because I’m probably considered to be one of the “uneducated” christians that was mentioned on here. It’s been quite some time that I have commented on politics, religion, and politics mixed with religion. I have no problem with civil debates where people agree to disagree, but I have a real problem with vicious, unproven attacks. I would like to know why you, Bereanfields, feel it is appropriate to judge someone’s walk with the Lord when you have never met them and really have had the chance to see their faith. Why is it that you feel the need to take a small minority opinion from a few individuals and falsely apply the label to all christians who enjoy to be involved politics. I appreciated some of your earlier comments, but your last post showed your true colors. It will be hard for me to trust or value your opinions from here on out unless you prove me otherwise. But, I will try my best not to judge you as you have judged others.
    You said, “North American Christianity for the most part mistakes the USA as “God’s chosen nation” and purports to be solely represented by the right wing of Tea Party/ Republicans.”
    Honestly, you must have read too much Pat Robertson or something. Again, there you go painting all christians with the same brush. I actually believe Israel is God’s chosen nation. That being said, it is quite obvious that the Lord’s hand was in the making of this great nation. The United States was not a mistake. We may not be the chosen nation, but have been looked favorably upon by the Lord. Sorry you take so much offense that I love my country so much. I, for one, am thankful for all He has done for us.
    I had a friend the other day, tell me that Perry will have a tough time for being so outspoken about his faith. I said that is exactly the wrong thinking. I reminded him that Perry is a christian who happens to be a politician, not the other way around. Obviously, since you do not take Perry for his word, what exactly has you convinced that Perry is some conniver who is using us for political gain? Where is your proof? I’d be careful how you judge.

    Posted by Justin "Get" Wright | September 19, 2011, 8:04 pm
  7. Good bull. Loves me some Perry, very electable and sympathetic to the conservative cause and values shared by evangelicals.

    Posted by Eric "Gunny" Hartman | September 17, 2011, 2:17 pm
  8. Far from it Jeff. I am just fed up with evangelical politicians speaking for the church or certainly being perceived as speaking for the church by the world or representing theology or doctrine by their political stances on various issues. The church’s witness is being categorized and caricatured as ignorant, nutzo, illiterate, anti-science and many other pejoratives NOT because of our actual theology or doctrine or preaching of the gospel, but because of the self-serving, political machinations of politicians who attempt to pass themselves off as “Christians”. If we are to suffer persecution, let it be for our Godly witness not for our political foolishness. Personal politics is fine, if kept in the political realm, but those of us proclaiming the Word of God via modern media outlets have one duty and one allegiance to only one kingdom; that of the Lord Jesus Christ. North American Christianity for the most part mistakes the USA as “God’s chosen nation” and purports to be solely represented by the right wing of Tea Party/ Republicans. If we want to venture into the pigsty of politics, just don’t drag the church or besmirch the Name of Our Lord with your political garbage, deception, hypocrisy, opportunism and quest for worldly power. Perry’s so-called prayer rally a few weeks ago was nothing but political prostitution of the church for his own political gain and advantage. Romney is a 100% Mormon who cannot and should be mistaken for being evangelical, yet born again Christians are actually lining up to endorse, support and promote his agenda. Palin and Bachmann are ignorant, uninformed neophytes who constantly bring up the Christian faith as the driving force behind their political agenda. Let politicians be politicians, if they must, but the church should not allow itself to be manipulated, prostituted or exploited for political gain.

    Posted by bereanfields | September 15, 2011, 5:59 pm
  9. Trueman does not teach abstinence from politics or Amish-like separation from the world. He has an excellent book entitled Republocrat where he shares his thoughts on Christians and politics.

    Are you Amish or a form of Anabaptist?

    Posted by Jeff Wright | September 15, 2011, 4:50 pm
  10. Brother Jeff, I’m quoting Bavinck via Trueman from your excellent prior of Sep 9th entitled “The Sordid Side of Church Politics”:

    “Bavinck’s theology is shot through with the fire of personal devotion. This is
    captured brilliantly in a passage from his Inaugural Address at the Free University:
    Religion, the fear of God, must therefore be the element which inspires and animates all
    theological investigation. That must be the pulsebeat of the science. A theologian is a
    person who makes bold to speak about God because he speaks out of God and through
    God. To profess theology is to do holy work. It is a priestly ministration in the house of
    the Lord. It is itself a service of worship, a consecration of mind and heart to the honour
    of His name.”

    *[Therefore, my belief & opinion that mixing (tainting) faith (religion) with politics, evangelical as it may claim to be, detracts from our holy work and ministration. We have enough trouble defending the faith once and for all delivered unto the saints to both -immature believers and unbelievers, that we need not complicate (compromise) our theology with sordid temporal politics. I hold that political endorsement or condemnation of any candidate, dilutes the universality of the Gospel and Jesus Christ great commission. Our Lord’s Kingdom is not of this world. There is no hope in any political party, process or candidate. Let’s fish for unsaved sinners, regardless of their political stream. BereanFields]

    Posted by bereanfields | September 15, 2011, 4:29 pm
  11. Berean,

    You seem to be intertwining Perry-hate with a position that Christians should never endorse a candidate so its difficult for me to understand where you’re really coming from.

    Re: the Dalrymple piece: After providing a laundry list of imagined fears, Timothy states, “I realize many people say the same thing about Romney.” But he doesn’t fear Romney. He doesn’t think his candidate is a scary, destructive force. Why? He says, “But I haven’t seen Romney perform his religious beliefs in the way Perry has performed his.” Really? That’s it?

    I have to say, the anti-Perry articles I’ve read from the Frenchs and Dalrymple have been surprisingly weak, lacking in substance, hyperbolic and, frankly, demagogic. Its disappointing because I greatly enjoy their other writings.

    I hope to continue to reply to their articles at http://evangelicalsforperry.blogspot.com as time allows. I responded to a David French post this morning and will respond to Dalrymple’s soon.

    Jeff

    Posted by Jeff Wright | September 15, 2011, 2:44 pm
  12. Some quotes fromTimothy Dalrymple: “Let’s see if we can get to the heart of the matter. I realize this is going to upset some of my fellow conservatives who read this blog. But my job here is to speak honestly. So I’ll be honest with you. Perry scares me. He embarrasses me. He makes me uneasy.

    Even for a Christian and a conservative like myself, Rick Perry’s brand of god-and-country politics goes too far. To be sure, he’s no theocrat. But there is a subtle blurring of the lines between the church and the state amongst Perry and his devotees that could end up greatly damaging the church. Political leaders cannot be religious leaders. I do not mean that he cannot pray in public; but Perry managed to position himself as a kind of political, cultural and pseudo-religious savior all at once, someone who would restore small government, a respect for law and life, and a commitment to fundamental Judeo-Christian values and truths.

    When church and state grow intertwined, the state always wins, and the church is distorted. This is because the state appeals to the flesh, appeals to our natural inclinations toward power, fortune and fame. The church asks you to put these inclinations aside. When the two enmesh, and the state becomes the means for the church’s ends, then eventually you find religious leaders so thoroughly imbricated in the pursuit of power, fortune and fame that they cannot find their way out. Another way of putting this is: When the church and state are enmeshed, the church cannot gain the distance it needs to speak prophetically over against the state and the culture it sanctions. Thus the earlier generation of the Religious Right, when it lost its way, essentially became incapable of criticizing the GOP. This is not healthy for the church, and it’s not healthy for the state, which always needs a prophetic critique.

    I hope my fellow Christians will think long and hard on these things before they support Rick Perry. There’s a sense of mounting pseudo-messianic expectation around Perry. He’s happy to accept the religious adulation of conservative Christians, for political purposes. It’s worrisome.
    The world is a complicated place, and Perry sees things too much in black and white. To be sure, I believe in truth and falsehood, right and wrong. I never felt that Bush was in the wrong when he called some things good and some things evil. But how those truths are understood and how those goods are enacted are very complex things. I’ve seen no evidence so far that Perry understands the world in all its numerous layers of complexity.

    This is not to say that he’s unintelligent or foolish. He is a very accomplished governor. Fools don’t get that far. It’s more of a mindset. Voting for Rick Perry feels like a vote for battling the opposition; it’s putting a bruiser in the ring, someone who will take the fight to the Democrats and then cut loose like a bull in the beltway China shop, breaking up the old Washington order. And I too feel like we need dramatic change. But we need exactly the right kinds of changes, in exactly the right order and the right timing and the right modulation. We are at a delicate moment in our history. If we mismanage the transformations that we so desperately need right now, we are going to suffer for years, even decades. I’m not sure that Rick Perry is the right person to manage this tremendously precarious moment in our national history.

    A vote for Perry feels destructive — in the best sense, destructive of those things that seem to conservatives like they are the enemies of the state. A vote for Romney, to me, feels constructive. I’m open to having my mind changed on this, but Romney communicates the optimism and hope of Reagan, whereas Perry feels like a battleship in the culture war.

    I also don’t think that Perry could win. This is not going to be a cakewalk. Electability is important. As the public gets to know Perry better, I firmly believe they’re going to like him less. And if he did win, would we spend 4-8 years making apologies and explanations for a President who says the Fed chairman is guilty of “treason”? A guy whose swagger turns off half the country, and half the world?

    Finally, this is just an impression, a personal sense, but I feel a kind of falseness to Rick Perry. There is a kind of performance he presents in order to win the support of the religious right. And another performance to win the backing of the Tea Party. This doesn’t mean that he doesn’t believe the things he says he believes. He almost surely does. But I think Rick Perry believes, first and foremost, in Rick Perry. I hate to say this, but in many ways he feels like the mirror image of Barack Obama — a conservative, Texas farmer version of Obama, as far to the Right as Obama is to the Left, as anti-intellectual as Obama is fawningly pro-intellectual, but ultimately shifting and performing in order to advance himself. There is a kind of arrogance and self-interest in Rick Perry that I think people on both sides of the aisle should be able to recognize.

    I realize many people say the same thing about Romney. But I haven’t seen Romney perform his religious beliefs in the way Perry has performed his. Maybe Romney has changed his views on a point or two, in part because of political expedience. But the whole of Perry feels rather like an act. Friends who know Romney (and know him well) say that he is, through and through, a man of great integrity. Friends who know Perry (and know him well) say that he is not. The word “slimy” comes up repeatedly.”

    Posted by bereanfields | September 15, 2011, 1:42 pm
  13. One’s most significant statement of faith is one’s actions when exercising personal values, family life, and when holding political power. More so in how one reflects this claimed “faith” in our decisions and public statements. Perry, in particular, is manipulating the ignorant and uninformed evangelicals with his “in church” oratory but totally undermining the church with his public statements and actions. This applies to all so-called evangelical politicians. A true and faithful “evangelical” politician (is there such a ting?) would not likely be successful in the sordid and scandalous world of politics; especially how it’s been practiced nowadays.

    Posted by bereanfields | September 15, 2011, 1:35 pm
  14. Danielle,

    Here is a link to the speech I was referring to: http://www.liberty.edu/news/index.cfm?PID=18495&MID=37253

    Posted by Jeff Wright | September 14, 2011, 5:13 pm
  15. Matt,

    I did and hope to post a reply here soon: http://evangelicalsforperry.blogspot.com/.

    I think Tim and David’s portrayal of Romney’s liberal positions with Perry being a conservative Democrat as “less-conservative phases” is terribly weak along with the equation of their “healthcare decisions.” No comparison. I’m surprised they even attempted the comparison frankly.

    Posted by Jeff Wright | September 14, 2011, 4:12 pm
  16. Did you read Timothy Dalrymple today on Perry v. Romney?

    Posted by Pastor Matt | September 14, 2011, 3:51 pm
  17. Bereanfields,

    I’m not convinced that truth telling is compromised by endorsing a candidate for president. Since I look kindly upon the “Reformed” in Conservative Reformed Mafia I endorse the concept of total depravity which helps me keep a fairly realistic perspective regarding the liars and hypocrites and pollution in politics and the church and theology and candidates for president and everything else.

    Jeff

    Posted by Jeff Wright | September 14, 2011, 2:24 pm
  18. LOL

    Wrong Joe, Jeff. Wrong Joe.

    Posted by Nate | September 14, 2011, 2:13 pm
  19. Nate,

    Speaking of Joe, I hear Joe the Plumber may be running for office. So there you go!

    Posted by Jeff Wright | September 14, 2011, 2:06 pm
  20. Danielle,

    I don’t know that he has a statement of faith per se but he has been outspoken regarding his beliefs. You might check his speech at The Response in August and today’s speech at Liberty University for starters.

    Jeff

    Posted by Jeff Wright | September 14, 2011, 2:01 pm
  21. Your truth telling mission gets compromised by public endorsement of any politician (as they are all liars and hypocrites), but even more so when you pick the worst of the “evangelical” exploiters who say pious things to the church but act like heathens when exercising their political power. They shame the name of Jesus Christ. I would exhort you to please keep your politics out of your theology on this blog. Keep this blog free of worldly political pollution.

    Posted by bereanfields | September 14, 2011, 1:29 pm
  22. Unless something significant changes, I for one will remain a vote-for-Joe guy.

    Posted by Nate | September 14, 2011, 9:00 am
  23. Does he have a statementof faith?

    Posted by danielleefox | September 14, 2011, 7:59 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

From the Vault

Friend of Grace

Photobucket
All articles © 2007-2011 by the respective authors of the Conservative Reformed Mafia. All Rights Reserved.
%d bloggers like this: