What? You want Christians to be compassionate without being judgmental?

Leonard Pitts’ byline in the op-ed page caught my attention. In it, the Miami Herald columnist lambasted evangelical Christians for speaking out against gay rights. His article was titled, “Don’t use the Holy Bible to support your bigotry.” Some of his quotes must be edited in order to appear in a church newsletter. He attacked a teacher and students, who chose to present a counter-point to the politically-correct newspeak that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle. Newspeak says that gays should be awarded the same rights given people of color, who had suffered from discrimination by the majority culture.
In his article, he presents a counter-point of his own to the Old Testament Scripture references --from Leviticus 19—cited by the evangelicals. Quoting from various Old Testament texts in the Law of Moses, which had to do with proper conduct of God’s people in the agrarian economy of ancient Israel, he tries to portray inspired Scripture as an archaic, man-made book of rules which should no longer be followed. Using as his text modern political correctness, he even brings the Apostle Paul on trial for his inspired statements about male spiritual leadership in I Corinthians 14:34ff. Preferring, seemingly, an allegorical or “spiritual” hermeneutic of Scripture to a more common-sense approach, he fires his main battery against people of faith with “Yours is a literalism of convenience, a literalism that is literal only so long as it allows you to condemn what you’d be condemning anyway and takes no skin off your personal [body parts].”
The pundit steps up to his pulpit and hammers home his point: “Just once, I’d like to read a headline that said a Christian group was boycotting to feed the hungry. Or marching to house the homeless. Or pushing Congress to provide the poor with health care worthy of the name. Instead they fixate on keeping the gays in their place. Which makes me question their priorities. And their compassion. And their faith.”
My response to Mr. Pitts would come from the King James Version: “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God.” Christian people are doing the things you mention, Mr. Pitts. People of faith founded most houses of compassion and the best hospitals. While you sit pontificating, Christians are out feeding the hungry, helping the poor and standing up for the disadvantaged. The problem is, you want them to just stick to their works of compassion without calling people to higher living? It doesn’t work that way. The same God who commands us to show compassion—“Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to care for orphans and widows in their distress,” also commands us to lead lives of purity—“and to keep oneself unstained by the world.” (James 1:27, NRSV). The God who inspired every word of the Holy Bible is a God of mercy. He is also a God of judgment. He hates sin. Hates it so much He sent His only Son to die on the cross for it. For this reason, Christians will continue to point out that wrong is wrong, and to show everyone what is right. We’re not perfect, but we do the best we can. That’s another topic--called grace—that you need to get a handle on.

Postmodern Atheists Rant on

In the Austin American-Statesman, James H. Dee, professor of Classics at the University of Texas makes a series of supercilious claims against the Bible in his writings. Being a person of the soil, I tend to look ahead to see what will result from such seeds that are planted. To your great fortune, Prof. Dee, there is a huge laboratory where you can see where your ideas will lead. It is called the former Soviet Union, an officially Atheist state. I once visited a city, about the size of Austin, in the Ukraine. My interpreter Sergei referred to it as a dustbin. This, however, is the sort of thing that people who followed James Dee’s philosophy, i.e., Marx, Engels, and Hegel come up with in producing an idealist society.
When you take the Resurrection out of the equation, what use is there for living? What good is doing good if the Bible and its promises are untrue? In the Ukraine, as of 1993, this represented the highest good to those who, like Prof. Dee, believed the Bible to be a pack of lies. Medical care lagged far behind the West. Social services, such as Hospice or Child Protective Services, were unknown.
Dee says modern—actually postmodern—archaeology will bring about a “Copernican moment” for Jews and Christians. Beat the Medieval Catholics up all you want to, Dee, but if you get sick, you better hope one of their hospitals will accept you as a patient. Better yet, if you need medical assistance, why not seek treatment in a facility where people think of religion in the same way you do? Find a treatment center named for, and following the philosophy of Madelyn Murray O’Hair. Or perhaps a more enlightened one founded by Voltaire or Nietzsche. Hate us people of faith all you want to, Prof. Dee, but I warn you: you’re not going to feel so good.
By the way, educators in Russia and Ukraine are busily incorporating the Bible into their school’s curriculums. I personally got to speak with the superintendent of one of Russia’s largest school systems, on his way around the country to ask for help in placing a Bible in the hands of every Russian school student. They tried your philosophy, Prof. Dee, and found it wanting.

Ralph Nader

Coming home from a date one night, my head was in the clouds, thinking about my girlfriend. The ninety degree turn to the left ahead jerked me back to reality. I was doing sixty mph. And, I was driving a ’63 Corvair, “Unsafe at Any Speed,” according to Ralph Nader.
Instinctively, I stomped on the brakes, then let off of them and cut the wheel to the left. I heard the tires screaming, and then cut the wheel to the right—an early, 1971 form of “Tokyo Drift.” The Corvair got me through the curve with all four wheels on the ground, and I drove home at a sedate 45 mph.
I was 16 at the time, but I learned a lesson or two. One, Ralph Nader doesn’t know squat. Two, it pays to keep a healthy skepticism about you. Especially when listening to liberals.