Substantively?

How many times have we ridden this merry-go-round?!!

You make it seem as though you are making claims bolstered by reason, in whatever manner. But you are so outside mainstream, respectable academia and its methods on this one, and you should know it.

Please realize thatI respect you personally and enjoy your other writing very, very much, but cannot understand this unfortunate, unbecoming glitch in your thinking.

I look foward to the time when you are either willing or able to address this important topic substantively, with more light than heat.

I guess this has to with their innate differenes, huh?

Your racial stuff is laughable and without substance….

Homophobic? As in recognizing that homosexual acts are sinful?

Or do you deny that homosexual acts are by nature sinful?
__________

Sexist? As in recognizing that God made man and women different? And that their roles in society are different according to that difference.

Or do you deny that God made men and women differently?

The Catholic church got over racism in this country, a few decades ago, of course sexism and homophobia are still around, if one views exclusion of women from leadership/ordination and the church’s view of homosexuality as such. I don’t care about the former, no one is forced to be Catholic. The latter I particularly care about when the bishops, like here in California, campaign against gay rights.

Alaskan Pentecostals handle caribous, btw.

Ah, if only all people were Unitarian Universalists. The worst that could happen is that they’d come burn a question mark on your lawn.

I don’t know any “Assembly of God” people, nor can I keep all the sects in the USA apart. I imagine it might be scary to attend. I’m a fan of Palin’s mainly because she sticks it to Obama. McCain is no holy roller, so that’s comforting.

There you go again, Gerald. Thinking like CNN.

I’m consistently impressed with your inability to distinguish, Gerald. I’m not sure where you got the idea that all types of “Christianity” are created equal, nor am I sure exactly where your sudden “ecumenical” spirit comes from. Why is it that because I think Palin’s distorted Christianity is false, I should then disapprove of Wright? Are you not able to look at the details of two different forms of Christianity and make judgments about them based on what you see? Is no one who calls him or herself Christian able to be out of bounds? Does your sudden ecumenical generosity also extend to Fred Phelps?

The problem, perhaps, is that you cannot think past the TV media’s level of religious analysis which has been constantly talking about the “issue” of Palin’s “Pentecostalism.” (CNN for example reported on her “Pentecostal” views as if all Pentecostals think like Sarah Palin. They don’t.) Perhaps therefore you (and the gentleman I was conversing with in another thread about this issue) think it is Pentecostalism that I have a problem with. Not at all. I have a problem with nationalistic, idolatrous Christianity which infects just about every Christian church in the united states (as do homophobic, sexist, and racist “Christianities”). This is not an issue of “ecumenism” as much as you would like to summon the power of that word. It would be nice if you could think a little harder than CNN. At least give it a try.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/157541