The Difference Between Liberal Progressive Christians and "Conservative Fundamentalist Christians"

[SarahM32]

Last edited Sat Aug 18, 2012, 10:01 PM - Edit history (1)

Since so many right-wing partisan "Conservatives" make a show of being Christians, it is helpful to observe how Liberals and Conservatives interpret Christianity differently.

Conservative Christians focus on the patriarchal aspects and love to quote all the things based on the idea that Jesus said "I am the Way, and the Truth," even though they don't understand what Jesus meant by that. Instead, they sum up Jesus’ message as "Obey me or you're going to suffer in hell for eternity." It's an authoritarian, patriarchal approach.

Liberal progressive Christians, on the other hand, focus on the matriarchal aspects that are around the Golden Rule, and around peace, love, freedom, compassion, charity, forgiveness, and pacifism, acknowledging the idea that it will be the humble, gentle, peaceful and meek who shall inherit the earth.

Those two approaches inevitably produce the situation we have now, with proud and militant Conservative Christians trying to impose and enforce their beliefs, while Liberal Christians usually do not retaliate but instead tend to turn the other cheek.

Of course, today you have to be very brave to [criticize the "Religious Right"], because their leaders are quick to accuse critics of being “anti-religion” and of “persecuting Christians.” And even though that is not true, most real Christians are simply too polite and politically correct to voice their criticism any more.

(The above [edited by request for brevity by request] is an excerpt quoted from Part 2 of Why the "Religious Right" Is Wrong. And it is a companion article to About Christianity.)
.

[rrneck]

1. Are men capable of nurturing others? nt

[eqfan592]

7. Actually, it seems that under certain circumstances, they can.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=strange-but-true-males-can-lactate&sc=rss

[rrneck]

8. There's an Olive Garden joke in there somewhere.

But I ain't touching it.

[roguevalley]

9. yes.

[cbayer]

2. Great article and thanks for posting. One note about copyright issues on DU.

Unless this is your original work, you need to limit it to 4 paragraphs with a link to the original source. You can edit it at any time to do that.

Welcome to the Religion Group.

[dimbear]

3. I would suggest altering one line to read "Most Christians are simply too polite, politically

correct, or afraid to voice their criticism.

Especially in the political arena, standing up is a good way to get pushed down.

The best place to look for resistance would be the secular community. They're used to the blowback.

[cbayer]

4. Afraid of what?

[dimbear]

5. Being shunned.

In the political arena, being classed with the non-believers. Considered not a real Christian. Considered a sell-out. Considered soft and weak.

At work, not being promoted or even retained by a conservative Christian boss.

There many reasons to be silent.

The conservative Christians have many favorite verses, but their fave of faves is "He who is not with us is against us."

I don't need to point out there are many fine exceptions to this rule of thumb.

[SarahM32]

6. Afraid of slander, propaganda, demonizing, etc.

As part of what I quoted says, the leaders of the "Religious Right" are "quick to accuse critics of being 'anti-religion' and of 'persecuting Christians.' And even though that is not true, most real Christians are simply too polite and politically correct to voice their criticism any more."

That's been a tactic for nearly 30 years, beginning as soon as the original Reaganite "Moral Majority" had gotten obvious and blatant about their theocratic agenda, and consequently came under criticism.

As soon as they were criticized, they quickly labeled their critics as "godless secular humanists," "anti-religious persecutors of Christians," etc.

It's just one of the many ways right-wing hypocrites try to silence dissent, criticism, truth, and everything they don't want to hear.

[Igel]

10. Eh.

I Kings 3:16-28.

The thing about the cross is it has a nifty handle on its top, with a nifty handguard for use in combat. Conversely, you can use it like a two-headed axe.

And the sheer irony in this passage needs no comment: "Their leaders are quick to accuse critics of being 'anti-religion' and of 'persecuting Christians.' And even though that is not true, most real Christians are simply too polite and politically correct to voice their criticism any more."

[cbayer]

11. How do you see the Bible story you refer to in relation to this article?

I kind of read it as hopeful, that the true mother will win out because she is the one who is true to the baby.

[SarahM32]

14. Irony? Sorry, that does need explanation, at least for me.

Igel,

Perhaps isolated and taken out of context you may somehow see that statement as ironic. However, understood in context, it is is not.

Not long after the American "Religious Right" rose to political power with Ronald Reagan, they came under criticism for their obvious "religious" bigotry and hypocrisy. And, to quell criticism, they quickly adopted the tactic of labeling their critics as "godless," "anti-Christian," etc., as well as "unpatriotic."

They have continued that tactic for decades, and they have used it increasingly as their theocratic intrusion and imposition of their religious beliefs into the operations of government has increased during the last ten years.

Their theocratic political actions have been so successful that being a Christian became a de facto litmus test for being a viable presidential candidate in 2008, despite the fact that it violates Article 6 of the Constitution.

As for I Kings 3:16-28, while it shows the great wisdom of Solomon, I wonder why you think it is relevant here.

[Silent3]

12. Men/fathers/patriarchal bad, women/mothers/matriarchal good.

Got it.

[dmallind]

13. Still trying to work out why "I am the Way and the Truth...." is patriarchal myself

I mean sure there is a " Father" in the verse but there are few believers who believe God has a specific human gender, and if you take that view then there is NO "matriarchal" side to Christianity at all no matter how tolerant loving and nurturing you consider it to be. If God is male, it's all patriarchy by definition.

[SarahM32]

15. No. That's not it.

Silent3, The author of the message is not saying what you suggest.

His favorite quotes from the Bible are these:

According to the Book of Wisdom: "Wisdom is beneficent and kind. She is the aura of the power of God, the radiance of the eternal Divine Light, a spotless mirror of God. She renews all things, and passing into holy souls from age to age, She produces friends of God and prophets. She is firm, but Her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all Her paths are peace. She is a Tree of Life to them that lay hold upon Her. And Wisdom is far better than weapons of war."

The great and wise Solomon in Proverbs 9 wrote: "Wisdom has built Her house and she calls to all: Come, eat my food and drink my wine and you will live abundant life and walk in the ways of understanding. Forsake the foolish, and live. Go in the way of understanding."

The author of the message is against the abuse of power, whether patriarchal or matriarchal. And a verse from one of his songs, It Takes Two, states: "It takes two to make a union; Like the Yin and Yang, and the man and woman. There is no positive without the negative. But when our eye is single, we can truly live."