WHAT'S NEW

About
My Other Blog
Blog Schedule
Activism
Past Blog Posts
Various &
a Sundry Blogs
Favorite
Websites
My Stuff
On The Web
Audio-Visual Updated: 08/01/2025
Favorite
Articles
This Month's Scripture Verse:

For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.
I Timothy 6:10

SEARCH THIS BLOG

Showing posts with label Franklin Graham. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Franklin Graham. Show all posts

Friday, October 15, 2021

A Window To The Past

 Realizing that the terms 'conservative' and 'liberal' are relative to where one lives and what ideological groups one associates with, the most prevalent error committed by conservatives is that they rely too much on the past to interpret and react to the present.

BTW, terms 'conservative' and 'liberal' are relative because the tenets taught by each depends on their setting. For example, back in the Cold War days, what American conservatives believed should be practiced by the government was vastly different from what Soviet Union conservatives believed. Why? It was because the context for the the beliefs and practices that American conservatives wanted to be preserved was Capitalism and Democracy while the context for what Soviet Union conservatives wanted to see from their government was "Communism" and totalitarian rule. The word 'Communism' was put in double quotes because what was practiced by the Soviet Union barely resembled, if at all, what Marx taught. But the point here is that what is conservative and what is liberal depends on one's location and the groups one belongs to.

Franklin Graham (click here for a bio), the son of the well known evangelist Billy Graham, just wrote a Facebook post that called into question and expressed extreme concern for both the course being pursued by the Biden Administration and what has been happening to our country (click here). And his questions seem to stem from an old conservative view of America that existed in his father's heyday. So at this point, we need to remember the major flaw of conservatives is that they rely too heavily on the past to interpret and respond to what is happening in the present. BTW, I am not sure if you have to be logged into your Facebook account to read the post.

Before commenting on his post, we should note two things about Graham. He is the President of the organization called Samaritan's Purse (click here), which is a charitable organization that travels around the world to help those who are in need caused by disasters and such, and he was a strong supporter of Donald Trump's candidacy and presidency. So even if one starts with having a jaundiced eye in looking at Graham because of his support for Trump, we must realize that he and his organization has provided significant help to people in need.

Graham's concerns include political concerns, economic concerns, social concerns, and foreign affairs. Graham's political concerns include the government using the pandemic to grab more power and spending bills that will harm us because they will increase the national debt to a dangerous level, and increasing taxes on the wealthy. Graham's economic concerns include an increase in the unemployment rate (click here to see that the unemployment rate has been dropping ) and inflation. We should note that the current inflation is at least a partial result of an increase in the demand of goods, especially in the demand for gas, and a renewed dependency on foreign oil. Regarding the last claim, it has both false and misleading information. As of late August, we have been importing less oil from the Middle East and that we have been importing most of our foreign oil from Canada. However, the EIA reports that the US will be importing more oil in 2021 and 2022 than it exports. But that same report did not attribute that change to Biden's policies (click here for source).

We should also note that Trump cut regulations in order to tweak the nation's economic output. But some of those regulations were environmental regulations the cutting of which may not only hurt our future due to climate change, it can hurt our present in terms of environmental pollution.

Graham also expressed concern that the government was exploiting the current pandemic by making mandates at whim which may not be supported by science. But the problem here is that we haven't seen any national mandates let alone mandates by whim that are not supported by science. The majority of mandates are being enacted by the private sector or by institutions like schools. Biden's vaccine mandate covers federal employees and contractors only and thus it resembles a private sector employer mandate.

Graham complained about the proposed increase taxes on the wealthy claiming that its purpose was to make everyone 'economically equal.' But when one looks at the increased tax rate that Biden proposed, can one honestly say that that was the purpose. We should note that Trump decreased taxes on the wealthy while sharply increasing military spending causing a spike in the deficit. I don't remember Graham expressing any concerns about that spike in the deficit.

Graham criticized Biden's withdraw of troops from Afghanistan. But Graham neglected to mention that Biden's withdrawal of troops, though deserving legitimate criticism for how it was done, was in line with an agreement that Trump made with the Taliban. So where was Graham's expressions of concern when Trump made that agreement?

Graham complained about censorship on social media. But the only example he provided was President Trump being banned on social media. Graham attributed that censorship to the socialist left even though that censorship was in response to misinformation being spread by President Trump and that this "censorship" was practiced not by the government nor influenced by the socialists and communists who are in our universities, but by the private sector.

Graham complained about CRT being divisive and pitting blacks and whites against each other instead of building patriotism. But this complaint seems to have come from a disbelief in the systemic racism that still exists in our nation that has already pitted blacks and whites against each other. In fact, we should note that despite the 400 years of white supremacy being practiced in this nation to varying but significant degrees, we haven't seen a violent backlash by blacks against whites that we pretty much deserve. And if Graham thinks that it is CRT that interferes with building patriotism, he should remember what Jackie Robinson, the first black player who played in MLB, wrote in his autobiography (click here for source):

I cannot stand and sing the anthem. I cannot salute the flag; I know that I am a black man in a white world.

It is tough to read Graham's post as being serious. Why? It is because his complaints indicate that either he has extreme sensitivities to changes that easily trigger a hyper vigilance that cause him to anticipate that the sky is falling when it isn't or he is acting like a political operative. His conservative upbringing would indicate the former while his employment of double standards and failure to include the contexts of the some of the pursuits by the Biden Administration would cause one to believe the latter. Of course, it could be a mix.

If Graham is demonstrating a super sensitivity to changes he disagrees with causing a hyper vigilance in him, then realize that his expectations of what will result from Biden's current decisions are quite in line with what many religiously conservative American Christians believe. He is simply echoing their concerns as well.

If Graham's criticisms here are motivated by politics, then realize that this is simply another example of the predominant branch of the Church supporting those with wealth and power as has been occurring for the last few centuries. We should note that the vast majority of Christians in the US are evangelicals and the vast majority of evangelicals have supported Trump in the last two elections. And Trump's policies strongly favored those with wealth which is followed by power. We should also note here that power is not necessarily measured in the level of governmental authority one has but in one's ability to influence others.

Whether out of being oversensitive or out of  being political, we must not forget the good that Graham's Samaritan Purse organization does. And that only shows that all of us are mixed bags when it comes to doing what is wrong and what is right. And we must always remember that and remind ourselves of what the mirrors in our lives reflect back to us as we criticize Graham.



Tuesday, December 24, 2019

CT Editorial Shows That Christmas Is Impeachment Season

With Christianity Today's editorial on the need to remove Trump by either impeachment or voting, some in the evangelical community pushed back (click here for the editorial). Below will be links to those pushback articles as well as my responses to them.

Franklin Graham's response to the CT Editorial (click here, you must be logged on to Facebook to read it). BTW, my response to Graham can also be accessed by scrolling down enough on the same page.


My response:
I have yet to see you biblically address the issues raised by the CT editorial.

Citing Trump's accomplishments avoids those issues. And citing his economic accomplishments without first acknowledging that the economy under Trump continues a trend that started under Obama is disingenuous. Citing Trump's economic performance without acknowledging that part of that performance is riding on the back of the elimination environmental regulations designed to protect us both now from pollution and later from climate change is morally questionable. And citing Trump's economic performance without acknowledging that wealth disparity between the economic classes glosses over the fact that the economy is not doing well for everyone.
Your logic says this: if Trump has done enough good, then he is excused from any charges brought against him. Such logic is the defense for privilege based on moral relativity.
Finally, your accusation about CT being used by the left ignores the fact that we have no left of any influence in the US. We have liberals, but no left. Also it shows that your basic response to CT is not to deal with the issues they raise in detail, but to try to shame them. In that, you speak not as one who wants fellow Christians to think both biblically and critically through issues, but as an authoritarian who wants Christians to do what you say because you said it.

The next response to the CT editorial is written by pastor and author Jentezen Franklin (click here for his article). In my response, I have the name of the writer of the article wrong. The response below is also posted on the FaceBook page of the Christian Post.

My Response

 One thing that the CT editorial did was to introduce a dialog that did not have the markings of a blog battle.

As for the article posted here. Let's understand some of the praises of Trump in context.
First, the economy and unemployment rates were already improving under Obama. And what Trump did was to plagurize that improvement in addition to putting his own stamp to it. He eliminated many regulations that protected the environment and workers for federal contractors. As a result pollution increased as well as CO2 emissions. into the air and the pollutants also increased into our waterways so that companies increase their profits. Also, some workers became more vulnerable.

Second, Trump's tax bill along with his increased spending on the defense budget helped the deficit spike during Trump's first two years of his presidency and the increase in the deficit will continue in his third. But there is something even worse than the immediate increase in pollution, greenhouse gasses, and the deficit, it is the basic tenet that is being reinforced by the Trump. That tenet comes from Ayn Rand. And that belief is that the pursuit of self-interest is one's only moral obligation. What follows that belief is the practice and promotion of the maximizing of personal profits. That practice only devours all And thus not only are there negative physical and fiscal effects to Trump policies, the practice and promotion of the maximizing of personal profits devours all ethics, morals, and principles. The breaking of laws is justified if there is a profit in it. BTW, we should also note that wealth disparity continues to increase under Trump and many of the new jobs are low paying jobs. So what has been his performance on the economy from an overall view?

If we stop right there, we see Christians promoting a selfishness in both society and the economy. And when has such a promotion been free of both social injustice and condemnation from the Scriptures?

And while Jack Graham praised the prison reform effort, we should note that that effort was strongly bipartisan. Then we should look at how Trump is increasing our national security. Part of increasing our national security essentially sabotages it. We have now helped initiate a new nuclear arms race and are taking the lead in the militarization of space. That makes us more secure?
And putting immigrant kids in cages with inadequate health supplies in order to increase our security is moral suicide. That especially true when one considers that private contractors are making big profits in helping the government contain illegal immigrants.

And then there are the offenses that started the impeach process. Realize that Trump has been displaying dangerous levels of signs of narcissism and he his becoming more authoritarian as his Presidency continues. The seeking to have a political rival investigated when he had constitutional right to do so is a very dangerous sign. And while some of his supporters claim that the treaty with the Ukraine authorized him to do that, it didn't. The treat with the Ukraine authorized the Attorney General of the US along with his counterparts in the Ukraine make requests for investigations. So neither president was authorized by that treaty to either call for an investigation or receive a request for an investigation. Seeking to investigate and prosecute political rivals is what we see autocrats like Putin do. And speaking of Putin, he defends Trump in this issue.
So now we are down to the pro-life issue. But unless we reduce pro-life to the abortion issue, Trump's record is very spotty. For it has already been shown by this comment that Trump is anything but pro-life.
Other things merit mentioning, but it should be apparent by now that Christian support for Trump's presidency causes more harm than good to the reputation of the Gospel. And that support for Trump emerges more from a selfishness, either individual or corporate, than it does from any honorable interest. And when that selfishness includes a religious selfishness, then the Gospel is significantly harmed.

 Finally we have the response from R. Scott Clark who is a seminary professor, author, and the owner of the Heidelblog (click here for his response to the editorial).

My response:

The CT editorial spoke for many religiously conservative Christians. And it did so not because the writer believed that America is the Kingdom of God or that the President is our national pastor. And it did so not because the writer denied that we have a 2-fold citizenship or denied that we should have different expectations of members of the Church from members of society.

It was done because both there is still a role of demanding justice from our government and because the reputation of the Gospel is a stake here.

Just because there are two different standards for members of the Church and members of society, doesn't mean that there are no standards of justice for society and the state. That was an important point made by Martin Luther King Jr. when he referred to Augustine when he said that unjust law is not a law. We should note that our nation was founded on white supremacy among other things. White supremacy order our society, determined land acquisition through ethnic cleansing, enabled the race-based enslavement of people, enabled Jim Crow, was part of The Constitution, and still exists in the growing wealth disparity between the races. Christians who supported white supremacy hurt the reputation of the Gospel. Why? That is because when we call ourselves Christians, everything we do or refrain from doing, say or refrain from saying is associated with the Gospel. That is just as true for when we act and speak as individuals as when we witness society and the state acting and speaking for us. The various levels of guilt of so many Germany citizens during the Nazi regime bears witness to that. And since we so often fail to adequately represent Christ in all areas of life without living in a dictatorship, the knowledge that everything we do and say as well as what we refrain from doing and saying is associated with the Gospel should strike fear in every Christian's heart. It does in mine.

We should also note some Church history here. For preceding the French, Russian, and Spanish Revolutions, the respective predominant branch of the Church in those 3 cases supported those with wealth and power prior to those revolutions. Lenin spoke observationally when he repeated Marx's claim that religion 'is opium for the people.' As a result, when those revolutions took place, the Church was credibly portrayed as the enemies of the people. Here we should note that Post Modernism is an expanded macrocosm of those events--Post Modernism also rejects the metanarrative of Modernism, not just Pre Modernism.

We should note that though both of our major political parties are bought and paid for by financial elites and corporations. And the Republican Party, more than the Democratic Party, caters to the interests and even cravings of those elites and corporations and do so to great harm to our nation and, thus, eventually to the reputation of the Gospel. So when the vast majority religiously conservative Christians back Trump and the Republican party, we are merely witnessing Church history tragically repeating itself.

Clark's ironic weakness here is the pedestal on which he places our nation and is founders. Ironic because he writes from a 2KT viewpoint regarding the different levels of righteousness that exists in society and the Church. That pedestal, however, has a caveat. That condition is that one sees the nation as political conservatives, some of whom have refused to apologize for America's actions, see it. And it is that wedding of political and religious conservatism that, again ironically, allows Clark contribute to tragic repeating of Church history.

 
This year is odd in that at this time of year, many of us Christians are talking about impeachment almost as much as we are talking about Christmas. The loyalty being shown to Trump can be attributed to the two most prevailing faults in America's conservative Church: misplaced loyalties and a penchant for authoritarianism.

We should note that when loyalt to other groups or ideologies are stronger than to God or universal morals, then loyalty becomes the leading cause of blindness. We become blind to the faults of those in our groups and/or to ideologies. That is as true for liberals and leftists as it is for conservatives.

In addition, we have a penchant for embracing authoritarianism. Here we should note that  when referring to authoritarianism, I am referring to how it is defined by post WW II scholars. Their work on authoritarianism grew out of a concern for why Germans remained so loyal to Hitler even after their painful demise was so imminent. And here we should be reminded of what Trump once said about his base. He said that they would remain loyal even if he were to shoot someone in the middle of Manhattan. Thus, though it might seem counterintuitive for many of us religiously conservative Christians. we need to be able to identify and avoid authoritarianism.

Friday, March 23, 2018

Letting Go Of The Future By Looking Back To The Past

The death of Billy Graham appears to be the final nail in the coffin of American conservative Christianity from the past. Conservative Christianity was the rage in America from time to time and preachers like Billy Graham ignited interest and brought in many new followers. But there seems to be no one who is taking his place and Thomas Kidd (click here for a bio), who is from The Gospel Coalition and Baylor University, recently wrote a reminiscing  article that appeared on the First Things website asking if another Billy Graham is waiting in the wings (click here for the article).

Kidd's question is asked from a certain perspective. That perspective wasn't focused on Graham's personality, beliefs, or political connections. Kidd's question was asked regarding whether there will be another evangelistic preacher who will have the impact Billy Graham had. And Kidd's answer to his own question seems to be 'no.' And Kidd gives a surprising explanation why while praising Graham for his vision and his many skills.

Why did Kidd answer his own question with a 'no.' It is because today's audience is far different from the audiences on which Graham began to build his ministry. That was true even when Graham ran crusades in other countries. For then, Graham was riding on the coattails of his own success in America. And his audiences back then were, for the most part, evangelical or heavily influenced by evangelicalism. Thus Graham's crusades not only easily reached unbelievers, his crusades ministered to believers as well. But today's audiences are too secular for any evangelist to follow in Graham's footsteps by imitating his methods and message, according to Kidd.

Kidd believes that any "future Billy Graham" would have to accomplish the following. He would have to distinguish the evangelical message and movement from what evangelism has been all strongly associated with: a 'religious white' Republicanism. And any future Billy Graham would also have to exhibit Graham's combination of entrepreneurial skills with his adept use of the communications technology of the day.

There are several points to be addressed in Kidd's article. Again, he asked, will there be a new evangelist who will have the same impact that Billy Graham had? And I fully agree with his answer and he gives a substantially qualified explanation as to why. But his explanation could also be added to.

What else could explain why it is unlikely that we will see another Billy Graham? We should note that both Modernism and Post Modernism have made more of an impact now than during the beginning of his ministry and heyday. That means that the Christian metanarrative is more likely to be heavily challenged than it was when Graham was popular. Modernism's metanarrative still challenges Christianity's explanations for the physical world around us. In addition, Post Modernism is giving fits to what Kidd referred to as white Christian Republicanism because of how religiously conservative Christians have all too often aligned themselves with a self-exalting patriotism and conservative American political ideology. The challenges of both Modernism and Post Modernism have effectively, in the eyes of many people, dismantled the credibility of the Evangelicalism promoted by Billy Graham.

But one other point needs to be made here. That is when use Billy Graham's message and political entanglements as the basis of comparison, we already have another Billy Graham. His name is Franklin Graham. He pretty much adheres to the evangelicalism promoted by his father. And like his father, Franklin has his own questionable political associations. But those associations have hurt Franklin more than Billy Graham's associations hurt him. Why? The difference in in the audience. The audience back then was more accepting of a conservative authoritarianism than it is today. And that is why Kidd alluded to the need for any new Billy Graham to distance evangelicalism from its past political and racial associations. That is why this article has pointed to Post Modernism as contributing to a new audience that is less receptive to Billy Graham's messages and political associations than the audiences he preached to.


Is there a new Billy Graham visible on the horizon? I'm afraid not, though too much dependence on such a figure is not healthy. Why? Because too many conservative evangelical leaders have not distanced themselves enough from the Republican party and politically conservative ideology to at least answer the objections of Post Modernism.






 

Monday, March 6, 2017

ONIM For March 6, 2017

Christians News

World News
Standing Rock Sioux - DAPL News

Pick(s) Of The Litter







Friday, December 9, 2016

Is Election Of Trump God's Fault?

Franklin Graham (click here for bio)  is jubilant about the election of Donald Trump. Graham believes that the election of Trump gives our nation a better chance at returning to God and being one nation under God again. Of course, we could ask the all important question: When was our nation under God? We will but we will wait to do so.

Graham's article on the election (click here for the article) credited the conservative votes and prayers for Trump's victory. However, what he calls an election victory I call the beginning of a nightmare. And I say that as someone who refuses to vote for any Democrats. Graham's main concerns is the appointment of conservative Supreme Court justices and he is confident that Trump will nominate such justices.  Of course, Graham wants conservative justices on the Supreme Court in order to reverse Roe V. Wade and preserve the religious liberties of Christians which, according to him and others, have been under constant attack by progressive judges.

Of course, there are two problems with that reasoning. The first problem is what about the religious liberties of those who disagree with religiously conservative Christians? How would conservative justices decide on the rights of the LGBT community? And what about any future cases regarding voters' rights? We have already seen how the Supreme Court has ruled against an important part of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Of course the second problem here is with Graham's confidence in Trump's nominations is this: How can anyone trust Trump to keep his promises when he has such a tenuous relationship with reality? Whether reality consists of his claims that he opposed the Iraq War before the invasion (click here), or, as his spokespeople claim, that he never walked in on beauty contestants when they were dressing (click here and there, look for the first audio file under 'On Beauty Pageant Contestants' for the latter link), his claim that he was endorsed by ICE (click here), his claim about the size of the size of the loan he received from his father (click here), or that he denied calling climate change a 'hoax' (click here), Trump seems to struggle knowing what he has said or done.

We could also go to Trump's pre-inauguration reversals of promises such as that of criminally prosecuting Hillary Clinton and that he was going to drain the swamp (click here and there). So either Trump made an empty promise about draining the swamp or he has already broken that promise as well as the one regarding Clinton. And when one looks as Trump's appointments overall, what is clear is that the interests of elites are well represented while the interests of the public, especially workers, are not (click here).  

There are other problems we could document, such as the accusation of sexual misconduct and misogyny or his reliance on racism for votes, but the point seems to have been made regarding Trump's trustworthiness.

But what is more disturbing about Graham's joy here is that, again, too many Christians have failed to vote independently. For too many of them, their votes are owned by the Republican Party and it is as if they believe that everything to the left of that party is anti-God. This means that the Republican Party can still take the votes of religiously conservative Christians for granted to a significant degree. And that means that Republicans can merely campaign on a platform of not being Democrats to secure enough of the religiously conservative Christian vote to be competitive. In the meantime, corporate control of the nation, destruction of the environment, the destruction of safety nets for those in need, and wars and imperialism all fly under the radar because they are not part of  the immediate concerns held by these Christians. In addition, religiously conservative Christians blame progressives and other nonconservatives for the problems they do recognize.

But what is most disturbing is that despite his verbiage, Graham is relying on the election of the right politicians to allow for Christianity to regain a place of supremacy over our nation rather than having Christians look to share society and the nation with others as equals. It seems that Graham is afraid that if the US is not Christian enough, it will suffer a similar fate that Israel suffered. All of this comes from a distorted and self-aggrandizing picture of America and our founding fathers. For we might ask Graham when was America ever a nation under God? Was it when America ethnically cleansed Native Americans from the land or when it sorely persecuted Blacks through slavery and Jim Crow?

Even now, doesn't America still have a significant problem with racism? And isn't White America in denial of that problem? Michael Che, from SNL and previously on the Daily Show, illustrates America's problem with race in undeniable terms. According to him, when slavery is brought up, Blacks are told to forget about it because that was in the past. And when segregation is brought up, Blacks are told that they got Black History Month as a result. And Blacks also get a pushback from conservatives over the police shootings of unarmed Blacks. So Blacks are told that their complaints are not worth holding on to. However, when 9/11 is brought up, we say 'Never Forget.' Such illustrates a point Noam Chomsky has made a career out of pointing out that we are taught to always remember the sins committed against us but to quickly forget the sins we commit against others.

When was America a nation under God? The fact that the above mentioned facts represent a small percentage of America's sins tells us that we were never such a nation regardless of what we claim about ourselves. And if we realize that our founding fathers wrote The Constitution in response to widespread dissent and Shays Rebellion, we realize that the purpose of the government formed by The Constitution was to maintain the status quo for the sake of America's new elites many of whom were also counted as our founding fathers.

Now it isn't that these religiously conservative Christians who supported Trump are evil or stupid. It is that this community of my fellow believers is a strongly insular community who, because they fear the godlessness of outsiders, look only to trusted authority figures for their information and to a place of supremacy in the nation in order to protect themselves. As a result many injustices will continue to be associated with the Gospel including the election of Trump.




Friday, October 7, 2016

Who Are Socialists Scared Of?

In an effort to discredit Obamacare as well as any further attempt to nationalize healthcare, Franklin Graham (click here for a bio) quoted conservative Catholic leader who said:
socialists and atheists are scared to death of the church

Graham also added the following:
I'm not a Catholic, but as the Democratic Party embraces socialism...
They don't want anyone except the government responsible for caring for the poor...
Here in this country, the poor were cared for by churches for over 200 years, the Catholics, the Presbyterians, the Methodists, the Baptists all had great hospitals to care for the sick
The article that reported these remarks were quoted in a CNS News article (click here for the article). Graham also predicted that if the "Democratic Socialists" get the healthcare program they want, the quality of healthcare will go down while its costs will become prohibitive to the poor.

In short, Graham's remarks seem to be a combination of a spiritual machismo along with both a historical and political ignorance. And this is sad simply because that combination of traits, while not affecting Graham's choir, inadvertently discredits and thus dishonors the Gospel that Graham serves before others.

Graham's seems to equate Socialism with big government and government intervention. And it seems that in Graham's statement, there is the implicit claim that anything Socialism can do, the Church can do better. And thus, he accuses, and possibly projects onto, Socialists of being afraid of competition. Competition for Socialists in this case, according to Graham, would be the Church.

To get to why Graham is doing the Gospel more harm good, one should note the following:
  • Big government is not the same as Socialism
  • The Democratic Party neither pursues nor follows Socialism
  • Some Graham's claims about the Church providing healthcare for the poor are false 
  • Socialists are a diverse group. And thus Graham's claim about all socialists are demonstrably false since some Christians are also socialists.
 Regarding the first point, just because a government is big or intrusive, doesn't mean that it is practicing socialism. This is especially true from the Marxist tradition. Here we should note that a socialist government, according to the Marxist tradition, would be one where those without wealth would have at least an equal power in determining laws as those who have wealth. In fact, Marx believed that the transition from the economic and political systems he observed at his time to the classless paradise he envisioned would by performed by a proletariat dictatorship. Seeing that Marx was opposed to the rule of the bourgeoisie, any big or intrusive government that was controlled by wealth could never be called Marxist. Thus, it appears that Graham is, to say the least, confused as to what constitutes socialism.
 

Now whether we have Republicans or Democrats controlling the three branches of government or whether there is a mixed control by both parties, it is evident that those with wealth do control our government (click here for some documentation). Thus, any big government program that is the result of control over government by either major political party is not a demonstration of socialism. Obamacare, itself, was the result of legislation that was crafted by and written for the benefit of the health insurance industry (click here and there). And Obamacare definitely has problems. So while Graham's observation about the future perils of our healthcare system might have some merit, he is wrong to attribute that to socialism. He can rightfully blame one or both of our major political parties, but he can't blame socialism.

In addition, his claim about the Church in America providing hospital care for 200 years doesn't account for the fact that churches did not provide hospitals until the mid 1800s. And even if we ignore that fact, we need to understand that just prior to Obamacare, healthcare costs were the first cause for personal bankruptcies. In addition, the costs of healthcare, prior to Obamacare, made getting treated prohibitive for many people. Thus, the transition from our past system into Obamacare was not an exodus from any kind of healthcare utopia. Rather, for all of its flaws, Obamacare did try to at least partially address the shortcomings of our then healthcare system.

Finally, considering that some socialists were proponents of Liberation Theology, and considering that some Marxists, like Rosa Luxemburg for example, coveted support from the Church in helping people, it is difficult to make the case that Socialism is afraid of or opposed to the Church. Even if you want to call Democrats who support Obamacare 'socialists,' we should note that some Democrats are confessing Christians. Thus Graham's bipolar view that we have Christians in one corner and socialists, both real and pseudo ones, in the other paints a false picture of reality. 

What Graham is really asserting is that his politically conservative ideology is the only one that both provides for people in need and is aligned with Christianity. In other words, Graham is making an ideological tribal claim on God. And because his claim is a false one, he is misrepresenting the Gospel. And in misrepresenting the Gospel, by associating the Gospel with inaccuracies and distortions, he causes some to dishonor the Gospel as they respond to that association.  

Like others who conflate religiously conservative Christianity with conservative politics and ideology, Graham seems to believe in an American mythological past. And when changes occur that challenge that past, Graham, in this case, lashes out and does so while spouting the errors that come with American mythology as well as his lack of understanding of the diversity that exists in Socialism. But not only that, his response is ideologically tribal--something we are all at risk for doing. And when we do respond tribally, we are likely to sound more like the self-righteous Pharisee from Jesus's parable of the two men than like preachers from the New Testament or the prophets from the Old Testament.





Monday, September 12, 2016

ONIM For September 12, 2016

Presidential Election

Christian News


World News


Pick(s) Of The Litter



References







  1.