Rick Warren and the Candidates… What was your take?
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Mon, August 18, 2008
- Viewed 24
- (77) comments so far
Leave your comments here…
Thanks!
OK... how many of you got to watch the Saddleback Civil Forum on Saturday night? I watched as 'my good friend' Rick Warren gathered the candidates, and I have to tell you... I really was surprised.
No offense, Rick... but I really thought you would ask some pretty boring, safe questions. But I was very encouraged to hear him ask questions like, "What was your biggest moral failure; what Supreme Court justice would you NOT have appointed; and a straight-up question about abortion.
I came across feeling differently after watching both candidates, and I'm wondering what your take is... what did you think of the forum? Who was the real winner? (My personal take: the real winner was Rick Warren). And how does this change the way you think of each candidate? I'd love to hear your comments...
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
Phil DiLernia on Tue, August 19, 2008
While I don’t wear panties let me say that I did not see those comments here on the Forum soooo my apologies as I said.
Those comments were not profitable dialog. Hopefully you did not find my name on any of those posts.
God’s peace!
Phil
Wendi on Tue, August 19, 2008
Phil –
With all due respect, stating that acknowledging that there are complicating factors with regard to abortion (or any issue for that matter) is somehow evidence that Obama (and I) lack a biblical worldview . . . is naïve at best, pejorative really.
I just got back from Swaziland where the Aids/HIV rate is the highest in the world. Even though the crisis would turn around immediately if people would simply stop having multiple sex partners – to offer this as the one and only answer would be completely “unbiblical.” That is what you are suggesting here.
There are many issues that influence the abortion issue; crime, poverty, lack of education, familial practices, and many others . . . along with the availability of abortion. We could tell a young woman that considering an abortion that it is murder, plain and simple. Or we could acknowledge that she is the daughter of a prostitute, drug using mother who has had several abortions herself; that she is 22 and didn’t complete 8th grade; that she grew up in 5 different foster homes and has lived on the street herself since she was 15. Seems like the Pharisees said, “adultery is a sin, plain and simple, stone her.” Jesus used a different method to help her get on the other side of her sin.
BTW – it is interesting that we never get to know “the end of the story” whenever Jesus rescued someone from their sin. Wonder why?
Wendi
Phil DiLernia on Tue, August 19, 2008
Wendi:
With all due respect back at ya ...
But most abortions are not even closely related to the absurd one in a million scneario you point out. Stats in the USA 2 million abortions per year. Russia 10-20 million per year. China 50-100 million per year. It is used as birth control. Jesus would forgive then say “sin no more.” He would not explain it away.
Jesus also said if your eyes causes you to sin that you’re better off without the eye then to burn in hell. So let’s at least get as nuanced a picture of Jesus as you would have us have on abortion.
But lets for the sake of this discussion say we have that rarer case where someone was raped and now carrying a child. R U saying that abortion is even a possible avenue you would counsel her towards as one potential solution?
fishon on Tue, August 19, 2008
Leonard,
Simply this. Did Obama give you an answer to any questions you did NOT already know?
fishon
CS on Tue, August 19, 2008
Wendi:
I realize that our conversation has diverged in this thread slightly from the original purpose of the story, but your last post was so interesting that it gave me a few thoughts. I am putting these here in the hope of understanding from where you are coming.
“I just got back from Swaziland where the Aids/HIV rate is the highest in the world. Even though the crisis would turn around immediately if people would simply stop having multiple sex partners – to offer this as the one and only answer would be completely ‘unbiblical.’”
What is the “biblical” answer to solving this problem? Does the answer endorse or condone the practice of sin? If so, why would that be right?
“We could tell a young woman that considering an abortion that it is murder, plain and simple. Or we could acknowledge that she is the daughter of a prostitute, drug using mother who has had several abortions herself; that she is 22 and didn’t complete 8th grade; that she grew up in 5 different foster homes and has lived on the street herself since she was 15.”
It is truly horrible that that woman has had such a life. Are you saying, in this instance, that due to her environment and history, that it is okay to have an abortion due to these circumstances?
“BTW – it is interesting that we never get to know ‘the end of the story’ whenever Jesus rescued someone from their sin. Wonder why? “
I would say that while we never see the end of the story, in most cases we are given a complete enough picture of what they did. The rich young ruler, for instance, walked away in sorrow when Jesus asked him to give up his wealth. In contrast, we have Mary Magdalene washing His feet with her hair and tears. Only one of the healed ten lepers stopped and turned around to praise Jesus. God gave us enough information in the Bible to understand what, “Go and sin no more,” meant, even if we don’t have all of the details through the end of the person’s life.
—
CS
Dave Z on Tue, August 19, 2008
Fishon wrote:
“Just my humble point of view.”
Thought I’d point out that there is nothing humble in your remarks. On the contrary…
A visitor to this forum commented on the civility, but that disappeared as soon as someone saw an opportunity to bash Rick Warren. Sad.
Dave
fishon on Tue, August 19, 2008
My goodness, Dave Z,
I just have a different perspective and understanding of what Warren did; I voice it, and now am called a “bash[er].”
It is truely sad that the tolerant are now calling those who disagree with them bashers. Or maybe you are one that doesn’t mind that I may disagree with Warren, but I don’t say and state my opinion with enough sensitivity?
I guess that is kinda like the famous smiling preacher calling sin a mistake instead of sin, cause he doesn’t want to offend.
Lack of civility, I don’t think so. Radical Muslims who don’t like what someone says displays a lack of civility—-ask Salomin Rushdie——or maybe some of the guys who have lost their heads. Now that is a lack of civility.
Thanks for bashing my opinion and how I state it.
Lisa Johns on Tue, August 19, 2008
I’m just thankful that this type of open forum was not only done but that it was televised - if only the major networks had picked it up so that those without digital TV could see it. It was so refreshing to see the candidates speak for themselves about issues rather than commentators speaking what they think about the candidates. This was a good step toward choosing a president based on the issues and the person rather than the soundbyte.
DanielR on Tue, August 19, 2008
I think the forum was OK, the candidates are both politicians and they both answered about like politicians. I didn’t really learn anything new, both candidates have positives and negatives. It was nice that they kept it civil.
Civil, as opposed to some of the comments here. Some people just can’t seem to pass up an opportunity to take shots at other Christians. Me included. :-(
As for how the discussion has devolved, I’ve always found it disturbing how some people claim that the are no nuances or any factors to consider in the abortion question, that it’s black and white always wrong and should be illegal.
The fact is there are nuances and considerations; the age of the girl/woman, incest, rape, the health and life of the mother-to-be. I’ve seen several different assessments of when life begins based on different scriptures; from at conception, first heartbeat, presence of brain activity, fetal viability, at birth, to not until the baby’s first breath. Who’s right?
If we make abortion illegal based on Christian morals and bible scripture should that law apply to non-christians? Is it right that in many Islamic countries Muslims apply Shariyah law to non-muslims when it is based solely on their interpretation of their holy writings?
I don’t know if it’s that some people really don’t understand that there are factors and considerations that cause some women to consider and choose abortion, or if they just don’t care. I fear that for many it is just that they don’t care; not about the reasons, not about the circumstances, and not about the women.
Phil DiLernia on Tue, August 19, 2008
Daniel I luv ya but you’ve got to show me where in scripture it says life:
- is dependent on the age of the mother
- is at conception
- is at the first heartbeat
- presence of brain activity
- the beginning of fetal viability
- at birth
- baby’s first breath
????? What are u referring to? You said that they’re all in scripture so please inform me where they are.
Thanks
Phil
Daniel on Tue, August 19, 2008
Phil, if you’re really interested, research it for yourself. Google is great.
This isn’t about abortion, it’s about Warren and the candidates.
What if we spent as much time and energy into living faithful lives as we do bickering and playing kingmaker?
Leonard on Tue, August 19, 2008
I am not sure the intent of your question Fishon. I would say not really, neither did McCain. What I noticed was the body language, the speed at which questions were answered, the confidence in each candidate as they answered. I saw stumping on both candidates parts.
The issue here is not what I learned or did not learn. Follow-up questions would not have taught me something new either. The issue is that some did not like the format so they use their dislike to bash Warren. Someone might say, I did not like the way this format was set so Rick warren should be ashamed. That is a big jump.
If RW does not do it like you want, does that make Christianity the loser… It could be just me but when you post here at MMI it comes across combatively. That is not just me but other people think that way too.
I am all for you not liking the format, wishing Warren asked other questions, even feeling like as a pastor he had a responsibility to do so. I am all for you thinking and believing that RW did not seize a moment. But does that require words like disgrace, travesty, Christianity was the loser… Does it require you to say that require you to say I don’t get it because I don’t agree with you? Does it require you to be bombastic in your words and tone?
You seem to have a problem with those who disagree with you or who suggest your tone is too much.
fishon on Tue, August 19, 2008
Leonard,
I asked you the question because one of your defenses for the forum was that it was about information. I just wondered if you learned anything new?
I am truely sorry that I come across as combative. I real am. But if I believe something is a “disgrace,” I just don’t know what other word to use. I just checked the thesaurus and found other words: Shame, dishonor, scandal, etc; which one of those words would you suggest I use?? I am not being facetious; I am serious. I suppose the other option is not to post anything.
My lord man, if I had a problem with people disagreeing with me, I as a Church of Christ “Christian,” pastor would run out the Baptists and Pentecostals in the church I pastor.
Leonard, my biggest problem with the RW forum is that weak and new Christians tuned in and heard Obama give his answers and did not hear Warren, a Christian pastor, with the forum being held in a Christian church challenge Obama’s points, and then become confused because he let it go. They very well could take his silence for affirmation for Obama’s points.————-That is a very possible outcome for some. My goodness, look at the confusion and differences right on this small forum.
Enough; I don’t want to come off a being too defensive or combative—I am just stating my thoughts and opinions.
fishon
Leonard on Tue, August 19, 2008
Fishon, thanks for the reply, I understand the question. I did not learn any new information from the words but I did gather information from what was seen. my understanding of the purpose of the forum was to let each candidate speak openly without ratcheting up the rhetoric in debate. To let them respond to Ricks questions with their opinions.
I don’t think the best option is to not post but rather to own your thoughts as your. Word like I think, I feel, in my opinion, I was frustrated, it came across to me… This is much less combative than words that are statements like disgrace. I fully support you right to the opinion that you felt it was a disgrace, but you did not say that, you simply called it a disgrace. I fully support your frustration that people could get the wrong idea based upon Rick not asking follow-up questions, but you said the church was the loser. I respect your right to say your opinions but when opinions are given as fact… it feels like the rest of us who might not agree with you are locked into being wrong.
I liked the forum, understand that the follow-up questions were simply not in the cards as a part of the format, but when I said that I was told I just don’t get it.
Please hear me when I say, I hope you keep posting, but when we start a post with blanket statements that are almost vitriolic in their tone it leave little room for dialog.
This place is not necessarily for preaching but for dialog. Wendi and I agree on some very big things but we also disagree on some issues. I am sure that would be true for you and I, for others here as well. but we can dialog. We can even disagree and dialog.
I honestly do not care if I convince you of my “rightness” in most any situation, but I do care what you think, how you got to those thoughts, I respect your right to those thoughts and your process. It does not matter if you end up agreeing with me and I feel no need to have you and I be in uniformity. I do however feel a great need for you and I to be in unity.
If you had posted this I would have felt entirely different about your posts.
I did not like the forum, it left no room for RW to dialog and follow-up important questions to both candidates. Case in point was Obama’s answer to the abortion question.
I would not be bothered if you said it felt to me like the church lost because RW passed the opportunity to…
I hope this makes sense. I work primarily from passion so rarely does my first post actually get posted. I have had to learn that passion often comes across as anger. In our interactions here at MMI I gather you work from passion too. It has often come across as anger.
Have a great day and I hope you keep posting,
Leonard
sgillesp on Tue, August 19, 2008
Wow, I am so discouraged reading these comments. Are most evangelicals really going to make this decision based on abortion only? (And by the way, Phil, show me the scripture that answers the question about when life begins….) I am pro-life and it saddens me that this position is not better understood in our country, but after the last seven-plus years, I am further saddened that voters who follow Jesus would not be equally as concerned about continuing a war that was begun under false pretenses, about electing a president who personifies evil as “them” and pursues evil only militarily(!), and would not see through the smokescreen of telling voters exactly what they want to hear, in short, simple phrases, when the other candidate took his time and gave thoughtful answers. I’m really saddened by all this commentary.
Page 4 of 6 pages « First < 2 3 4 5 6 >
Post a Comment