A lot of people are unhappy with Obama's choice for the invocation. We need to pray for Pastor Rick during this time.-Waldo
Barack Obama’s choice of a prominent evangelical minister to deliver the invocation at his inauguration is a conciliatory gesture toward social conservatives who opposed him in November, but it is drawing fierce challenges from a gay rights movement that – in the wake of a gay marriage ban in California – is looking for a fight.
I'm guessing a lot of "fightin' fundies" won't be happy, either. I'm sure there will be plenty of webspace dedicated to how RW is "selling out" again.
Sigh...
Brian La Croix
I had to clean my office for my avatar picture. Maybe I should take pictures more often...
Yes, we need to pray for Rick and for Obama. This is an act of courage for both men, I think.
My Blog: williswired.com
Here's one from Ingird at "Slice of Laodicea." She's about as anti-RW as they come:
"Rick Warren to Give Invocation for Pro-Child Killing Obama"
There will be plenty of others...
Sad. Rick has an inroad to influence like few others have, and some people can only see negative from it.
I wonder if RW will be sort of the next Billy Graham to Presidents?
I think it depends on the president. I sorta doubt there will be one pastor to the presidents.
Rick Warren and Obama are friends, so the invite makes sense.
Obama benefits a lot more from this than anyone else. He'll get cover to continue policies that are the most anti-life we have seen in a politician at his level.
Brian La Croix: I'm guessing a lot of "fightin' fundies" won't be happy, either. I'm sure there will be plenty of webspace dedicated to how RW is "selling out" again. Sigh...
"Billy Graham did get to talk to many Presidents. Notice how much better the politicians have become!"
Maybe we should think about how much WORSE they may have been if he HADN'T been there!
Blessings!
Rob
Rob Stippich (Robs): "Billy Graham did get to talk to many Presidents. Notice how much better the politicians have become!" Maybe we should think about how much WORSE they may have been if he HADN'T been there!
Of course it is an argument ad absurdem to simply answer a question with a question. My argument is that many seem to give Billy Graham (and now Rick Warren) more credit than the facts support. Yes, Billy Graham spoke to millions. His own research, however, indicates that only 5 out of 100 decisions continued to maturity.
I'm simply saying we should not make the same mistake with Warren as some made with Graham -- believing that the church can move into victory riding on the coattails of some high profile leader. The Bible certainly does not support such a strategy and history has shown the many dangers of mixing religion and politics -- bad both for the government and for religion. Mine is not a judgment on anyone, just a note of caution.
Here's an example of what I'm talking about:
LONG BEACH, Calif. - Rick Warren has told a Muslim group in California that 'You don't have to see eye to eye to walk hand in hand.' And at the same gathering, Warren also admitted he's a big fan of *** activist Melissa Ethridge and has all her albums
It's one thing to be generous and civil toward homosexuals -- it is another thing altogether to promote their work.
Jack,
True - but the operative word is "potential." Everyone who disagrees with RW doing this prayer seems to be assuming that he has absolutely no clue and that he's selling out to the new baby-killing liberal in the White House.
Rather than celebrate the fact that this guy might actually have some real influence, they just figure it's not possible in any way, shape, or form. Rather than pray for RW and Obama's relationship to spark something that would draw Obama closer to Christ, he is decried as sell-out. There is no hopeful optimism - only angry words from people who will never be in a position to influence a leader like that.
(Maybe it's actually jealousy that is at the root of their anger?)
Were I given the opportunity, I would take it in a heartbeat. Maybe the president wouldn't listen to me or take my advice, but at least I would have had the chance. RW has been given that chance, and I think he is right in jumping on it.
I think of Peter Marshall as the chaplain of the US Senate. His prayers in the Senate and the influence he had on lawmakers was great, even if it hasn't lasted over the past decades.
Brian.
You could be right. You could be wrong. The fact is you completely ignore any "unintended consequences" because of a personality.
I admit, I don't have the same unfettered confidence in a personality -- other than Jesus Christ. I pray that Rick's influence is such that Obama will not be the fanatic supporter of all things abortion. So far, I see no indication whatsoever that Obama has changed any of his principles based upon his interaction with RW.
Your accusation that anyone who raises any kind of question as to this issue is acting out of "jealousy" is a low blow. It is a blow that is consistently offered anytime anyone questions anything about their hero.
My concerns are not based upon "jealousy" or any other emotion, but simply based upon what I've observed reading the Bible and experiencing history. Feel free to pray that my concerns are completely baseless and that RW will have a significant impact upon Obama -- the most liberal, anti-Israeli president elected in history. In fact, I'll join you in that prayer.
The apostle Paul gave us a great example in Acts 24 of how to work with political leaders: "as he reasoned about righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come."
That's what to do.
Good words, John
My fear is that most people tend to tell powerful leaders what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear. Perhaps RW will be more bold that others. Remember, Clinton had a swarm of religious leaders around him but they were more like yes men, than God's men for the most part.