A friend posted this picture on facebook. I "liked" it, and re-posted it on my "timeline."
It's interesting: the simple statement of these facts, that Obama has done some good things, violently offends people whose entire political "principle" is he can't do a single thing right. But the hatred "conservatives" (including many "Christians") bear Obama goes beyond politics, and beyond reality.
It seems commonsense to me that Presidents are human; and like every other human being, are never all good nor all bad. That seems simple reality. Richard Nixon was probably one of the most flawed men, and one of the sleaziest politicians, who ever became President. Even so, he did some good things. However mixed his motives, he was first to have the courage against hardline conservatives to recognize communist China (after building his entire career on sharing their rabid hatred of Communism).
To deny that Nixon ever did a single thing right would be to ignore facts. It would say more about the person making such a statement, than about Nixon. It would tell me, for one thing, that person had little love for truth, and was not trying in the least to make an honest judgement.
It would also tell me that person's heart was so filled with hatred that violent lies had become his religion. It's interesting, again, that people of that spirit can only see others as they themselves are. Delusional haters can only perceive any contradictory statement of fact as violent, partisan attack.
More than a few "conservatives" in America today have worked themselves up to that level of Obama-hatred. More than a few of them call their violent delusional hatred "Christianity."
May any who can still hear the Spirit, hear Him cry "Repent !!"
Amen.
2 comments:
Some people (Christians are what I have most interaction with, and the situation is becoming quite discouraging) seem to have a different definition of truth than might seem obvious. They don't think of truth as what is true (and observable on the whole). They think of it as "believing" particular things with certainty. You're supposed to believe or at least say you believe things you are told to believe. And this you do until you have effectively lost your mind for application to honest living. Even as I say those last words, I know (yet again, on top of what I was already going to say) we in large part can't access words to communicate what it is to be honest and true. Some people still "get it" -- but it's not more Christians than others. [If "we" (a lot of folks in what is traditionally my culture) redefine "honest living" to mean not being a drunk or something else on a list (no matter how admittedly important this is), there is still not an expectation for honesty itself.]
I used to visit a blog that was fairly active, but I became increasingly frustrated that people were committed to the kinds of attitudes you're addressing in this post. One day, I was stunned when someone posted a long explanation of what Jesus had said (quoted verses and all) about hypocrisy with the moral [to the eyes of the writer, not of what Jesus was saying] in the story being that you have to believe in Jesus (which seems simple until you know what else such people demand as apparently part of the same thing -- for instance, hating Obama IS loving Jesus, and in their case, there were often "prophesies" to latch onto, even if previous ones had fallen through). The point being, they didn't seem to even know what hypocrisy actually is, the definition, the concept, the conviction that leads to self reflection and the hope of correction. They thought hypocrisy was not being on their bandwagon (but said it was not believing in Jesus).
That was years ago, now. I recently started reading at a different blog, this one of a long-time pastor (in a different state from my location); I liked something he wrote that had been linked to. But as I started browsing around his other articles I was aghast. It's like, what world is he living in? He has a book supposedly elucidating prophecy about Arabs (which, prophecy in general and the specific topic, I hadn't known was something he was doing and which I haven't looked into to see if he conveys any insight). On his site, he claimed CNN, ABC, and on and on, don't care about what is going on with ISIS, aren't shocked or outraged. This is another tenet of the faith, that "the media" (as in regular news) is evil. At least he included FOX (usually, this is almost the mouth of God, but I guess he's going even more hard-core -- like for some online or talk radio crabbing factory). Well, I can't speak of ABC or FOX (although I used to watch FOX), but I am certain CNN is clear on the fact of the evil of ISIS. I am finding your writing refreshing.
{Disclaimer: I'm not necessarily saying it was a good thing to open up to China, but I agree Nixon like anyone should be evaluated on specific actions and not treated like he was one hundred percent evil. His spin-offs, on the other hand (people who were tinged by his corruption, some even doing jail time, commentators and writers and investors and so on), shouldn't be treated like gurus either.}
Thank you so much for your insights. I especially have to agree wholeheartedly with this one:
"You're supposed to believe or at least say you believe things you are told to believe."
There's a very prevalent set of "politically correct" attitudes and opinions Christians are expected to subscribe to. You highlight one of the biggies: distrust, indeed hatred, of "the media." Ironic, to my understanding, since Jesus even rules the media: or at least those whose standard is telling truth...Who Jesus says He IS. Same case with science...which Christians are also supposed to hate.
Post a Comment