Evangelicals will rise to replace old Protestant establishment

Well, whoever that Creationist Evangelical on the Supreme Court (God forbid) will be, it won't be Congressman Mark Souder, who resigned today. Like so many Republican Christianist hypocrites, he seemed to believe that strictures against adultery did not apply to people who were born again, and again, and again.

Fund NASA, explore space, find a few nice planets and we can send the evangelicals to one to do their own thing. Thats the way the British did it in the 1700's and it worked out well for them.

Posted by: alex35332 | May 18, 2010 9:35 AM
______________________________________

Kolob, the planet where Mormons believe God lives would be perfect. They could take along the evangelicals, Donohue Catholics and stop by the Philippines to pick up Spidermean along the way.

An Evangelical? I hope not. The Court is already dominated by Roman Catholics.
The Vatican and its followers, including those on the Supreme Court, have been locked in from childhood into Dark Ages Dogma.
Worried about an Activist Court? An Evangelical would increase the Right Wing Activists on the Court from six to seven.

Woe is We, the actual majority, squished by Corporations and Catholic Pro-Lifers even with the Present Court.

"Millions of American faithful still attended mainline denominations, but they began to have their doubts. Mainstream Protestantism became secularism at prayer. '
My doubts were not because of whatever secularization of prayer is, I never saw it at my Presbyterian Church, but because of the corruption ever thing Jesus stood for by the (ill)Religious Right lead by the Evangelicals. How could Christianity be real, when its most vocal members are so corrupt?

"the Protestant Establishment of the United States vanished from most of our lives. There are still bishops and academics living in houses and appointments paid for by stealing the investments of the Victorian faithful, but nobody much listens to what they say. "

Really, its the mainline churches doing the stealing? What about the 100 or so TV Evangelicals who trick poor people out of their money so they can live in Mansions. As far as I know, they are all Evangelicals, and mostly members of the (ill)Religious Right

It amazing that Mr Reynolds accuses the mainline (read in liberal here, because I betting he doesn't include the >200 year old Baptists) of ignoring Jesus, when the (ill)Religious Right political beliefs are an almost perfect copy of the Satanic Church's doctrine, on everything except sex. The idea that you do not help all the poor and the rest is straight line Satanism. Look it up, compare the Satanic Ten Commandments to Newts Contract on America.

Pray, (no pun intended!) what the hell is BIOLA?

Please keep your stinkin religion out of politics.

I'm sorry Mr. Reynolds, but your payroll leash is showing ... the evangelicals are currently in the process of self-destructing, or, in some respects, deconstructing. Its monolithic image, so painfully crafted by Christianity Today and the media, is an illusion.

To suggest that the Protestant Establishment committed suicide is part of the spin crafted by giddy conservatives, but the simple reality is more basic - things change, and no one is king of the hill for very long, because the god-thing is not about hill-climbing and kings. Yes, the Protestant Establishment got to the top, and did remarkable things while there, but everything that goes up has to come down, and, frankly, even before reaching the top, whatever that is, the evangelicals are in a headlong slide downhill, all to the good, for them, and for us.

You're point of view was articulated in the mid-70s, but the last tens years have seen just how hollow is the notion of "conservative churches are growing; liberal churches are declining." It's simply not true!

But your tradition has relied on cheerleaders, and I guess you're one of them. So, holler away, if that's your hobby. But mouthing pious platitudes helps no one, and only adds to the confusion of your own tradition.

I love this "Biola" character trying to represent Evangelicals as tolerant. That's funny. Almost as funny as the way the far right has corrupted the true meaning of the word Evangelical.

Evangelicals will rise to replace old Protestant establishment??

No they won't!! Why? Their theology and history are just as flawed as the old Protestant establishment.

To wit:

Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley, Roger Williams, the Great “Babs” et al, founders of Christian-based religions or combination religions also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of mythical angelic visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).

Current problems:

Adulterous/pediophiliac preachers, "propheteering/ profiteering" leaders and atonement theology

The notion that the an evangelical on the Court "will be tolerant members of a diverse nation," flies in the face of the fear, hatred, racism, homophobia and xenophobia that accompany evangelicals on every trip into the public arena. This represents a triumph of optimism over experience.

"Evangelicals represent mainstream and historic Protestantism. "

Yes and no. They represent many of the features of Victorian Protestantism. However, they are much softer on divorce, adultery, contraception, gambling, drinking, and of course dancing and the theater. In other words, they have followed the cultural trends in this country, just not as quickly or fully as the mainstream Protestants.

At the same time, they have tied their fate to the racial and mllitarist politics of the Republican Party. Demographically, this is a huge mistake, and it is the fatal flaw in Reyonolds' argument. I don't care how academically qualified they are, the militant racist defenders of a shrinking white minority will not be appointed to the Supreme Court by Presidents who will need a majority of color to elect them. And homophobia won't help with the post-boomer generations.

Of course, if the evangelicals sever their connection to the Republicans, the game changes. If they start to follow the teachings of Jesus, forgiving sexual sins and decrying the piling up of wealth, the game changes completely. Jim Wallis is among the many who point the way, but hypocrisy is a powerful force, and closeness to power is seductive. Reynolds recognizes this in the mainstream Protestants, but (surprise surprise) not in himself.

There is no such thing as a "born-again Christian" in the Bible. Jesus literally said "You must be born from above." He wa referring to a spiritual birth. "Christian" was a hateful epithet created by the Greek-speaking pagans to make fun of those who preached about the "Anointed (One)" (Christos in Greek).

A real Evangelical is one who tells others about the good news (what evangel really means) of the free gift of salvation that Jesus gives you.

Jesus NEVER got involved in the politics of his time. He came to set up a spiritual kingdom in people's (spiritual) hearts.

Also, Jesus never demanded anyone accept his teachings or else.

Biola University has always been a conservative one. I don't care who is a US Supreme Court justice as long as he or she is for equal rights under the law for ALL American citizens, whether born here or naturalized.

While the words "seperation of church and state" are not in the constitution, the body of it states that there shall be no test of religion for any federal office, either elected or appointed.

I don't call myself by the epithet "Christian." Jesus followers beginning in 30 AD called themselves "Believers" (literally "Faiths) and they called their church "The Way." Paul, the Apostle, even called it "The Way."

Society's current obsession is over race and gender politics, not religion. Looking for balance in sexual and ethnic origin overrides any religious affiliation.

Perhaps religion might make a comeback in the future as a consideration but it will not be in the near or intermediate future. Religion as practiced by Americans just ain't that important anyway. With all the Catholics sitting, Roe has not been reversed.

Reason means soil and water cannot transform into brains which animals have.

Reason means there is a Supremely Intelligent Being for any such transformation to occur.

Can atheist idiots please detach themselves from the word "reason". It's so sickening to hear.

You guys are not capable of logical thinking.

The days of God is different from the days of man. As Eintein pointed out, time is relative.

The Bible is not for idiots. They don't understand that days can mean chronological order and not just a literal day.

I suggest atheist idiots read comics. No brain is needed to do that.

Catholicsim is a false religion. It's a devil's religion. It has a long history of burning Bibles.

Religious morons put the country into the mess it is in today. They keep us and the entire world divided by nonsense. Its what they do. Hopefully one day reason will prevail.

Catholics do not believe in a literal interpretation of the bible.

Evangelicals do.

The Universe wasn't made in a week, 8,000 years ago.

I will never vote for a leader that believes in Creationism or Intelligent Design; they will make poor choices.

so why did the Protestant President that believed in a Permanent Republican Majority place 2 catholic justices on the bench and not nominate Protestants?

Do the idiots know that the "Enlightened Europe" were self-destructing thru many wars even before WW1 and WW2?

Without Christian America, "Enlightened Europe" could had long been a wasteland.

That's the result of idiocy. Godless idiots always self-destruct.

Waht is even worse is they have never learned and they don't have any clue what's coming a few years from now.

"Paradise Lost". Does it sound familiar? The more accurate description would be "Paradise Annihilated".

That's the price of being godless idiots. Part of America (liberal evolutionists) will suffer the same fate.

That's the prophecy.

“When the Protestant Establishment quit thinking, Evangelical Protestants picked up the mantle . . .”

I’d argue that many members of “the Protestant Establishment” actually started to think and therefore became less Protestant, contributing instead to the growing numbers of agnostics and atheists in the country. Good on them.

As for the “mantle” to which Reynolds’ refers, it is not thought, but a rigid ideology used to justify and placate one’s own fears and prejudices. Evangelicals are welcome to it, though Catholics, Muslims, and Mormons will demand their fair share, I’m sure.

The DNA is the blueprint or the master design of any living thing. Imagine this, the Theory of Evolution was introduced even without the knowledge that there is such a thing as DNA.

It's like a person teaching you about the evolution of computers when they never heard of the term CPU or central processing unit.

It's so sickening to hear these atheist idiots posting on this section that they believe in science. It's like hearing a fool stating that he has genius IQ level.

You feel like throwing up.

Fund NASA, explore space, find a few nice planets and we can send the evangelicals to one to do their own thing. Thats the way the British did it in the 1700's and it worked out well for them.

Since Isaac Newton introduced his scientific discovery of the Laws of Gravity, nothing have changed after more than 400 years. That is science.

With Darwin's Evolution, nothing is permanent. The idiots always proves themselves wrong. With the same idiotic science, they proclaim that there is no Intelligence in nature and therefore there is no God.

How these idiots even passed elementary grade without the ability of basic logical thinking ability is mysterious.

These atheist idiots had a chance of governing themselves and it's called communism. The idiots imprisoned themselves and those who wish to escape their land were shot like animals.

They now claim that they represent 14% of America. Wow!! I never knew America is this dumb.

ugh...Same argument applies to the Taliban, are you as anxiously awaiting their command of your planet?

For the sake of the ignorant, it was Evangelical Christians who pushed for the ratification of the First Ammendment.

Freedom of Conscience is a primary doctrine in their articles of faith.

As usual , the idiots don't know this.

Is it possible that a wolf can turn into man like werewolf. For the idiots, that's possible. Just change the wolf into a chimp and add to that the phrase "milions of years". For the idiots, they call that science.

Many atheists base their faith on the belief that life started from so called "primordial soup". 80 years have passed and the soup theory is being debunked by other evolutionists. This new theory will be proven wrong again by other evolutionists years or even months from now, for sure. It never misses.

On the other hand, the Bible proves itself to be truer everyday as we see more people behaving like fools and on their way towards what the scripture calls Doomsday.

Very Intelligent Design

The DNA is a strand of billions of base pairs. Part of it's function is to replicate itself. It's like a very minute printer printing itself in 3D form. No human printer is close to achieving such a feat.

Do the evolutionist idiots understand this? And yet these idiots claim that there is no Intelligent Design in all of these processes.

Idiots can't discern intelligence. Atheists are idiots and can't detect what is intelligence.

"Primordial Soup"? Maybe their brains think like a soup. Malfunctioning soup brain.

With the examples of Judge Roy Moore, deposed as elected Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court for his contempt of the constitutional principle of separation of church and state and Senator John Cornyn, former member of the Texas Supreme Court and Evangelical understander of why people might want to rough up judges with whose opinions they disagree, I can really see a future for American democracy if evangelicals get to inflict their personal theologies onto the lives of 300 million Americans.

Evangelicals won't stop until they've erased most of the Constitution and transformed America into a Christian version of Iran.

It will be a wasteland of antiquated thought, devoid of free will and freedom, hostile to women, and violent in its assertion of absolute authority.

The failure to have a protestant on the court is merely a statistical anomaly. No group would reject or object a nominee because they were Protestant. Thus this is not a bias issue but an issue of probability.
Name one of the 14% of Americans who are non-believers, however, and the country would go insane -= led by Protestant leaders and with almost no religious voices urging tolerance.

John F. Kennedy? Before JFK could get elected, he had to publicly say that being Catholic wouldn't affect his choices. Evangelical politicians these days tell you the exact opposite about themselves.

What happens when the law and the Constitution go against evangelicals' interpretation of the Bible? Would an Evangelical justice truthfully say they would ignore "God's word" and go with the law & Constitution? If the answer is "no", should they be on any court at all?

a. Didn't Jimmy Carter consider himself an Evangelical? Even more, didn't George W. Bush, who appointed two of the retrograde Catholic Supreme Court injustices, repeatedly call himself a "compassionate" "conservative" "born-again" "Christian"?

b. Given the dismal record of Evangelicals in actively promoting intolerance around the world and the rejection of science, how on earth, or in heaven, can Dr. Reynolds delude himself that any Evangelical prominent enough to be considered for the Supreme Court would be likely to be "tolerant"? (Of what?) His "winsome" John Thune is a member of The Family, notorious for its advocacy of stripmining the Treasury and the futures of America's workers on behalf of the wealthy, of encouraging the legalized murder of gay men and women in sub-Saharan Africa, and of course for significant amounts of sexual hanky-panky, including payment by Evangelical senators of bribes to subordinates to cover up the pimping of their wives.

Professor Reynolds may not have noticed, but increasingly God or Thor or whoever has been smiting the parts of the U.S. most infested by Evangelicals with tornadoes, floods, hurricanes, droughts, as though someone is getting really annoyed with some people taking his/her/its/their name in vain to promote anti-social behavior.

The posts below clearly show me why religion should be banned and that any court justice should be atheists. Just read the trash below and you wounder how anyone could get justice in America.

The ideal Supreme Court would have no evangelicals. The same could be said for the United States in general.

What an unfortunate article.

Doesn't this man realize what bigotry he is showing in repeatedly and heatedly denouncing mainline Protestant churches?

His anger and acusations are uglier than he seems to know.

Does his Biola University provide a genuine, full liberal education or just indoctrination?

What are its academic ratings?

As far as I'm concerned, the religion of the members of the Supreme Court is irrelevant. Religion should have NO place in that institution.

Great. First the majority of the justices still belong to a church that permits their clergy to molest little boys and refused to report them. These Catholics couldn't condemn their church and leave it? Now you want and think that evangelicals will soon become the majority. Great. A church full of hypocrits - gay men who condemn and rail against homosexuality, straight men who are porn addicts and philanderers, closet gambling addicts who rail about the immorality of gambling, and parents who teach their children abstinence only but whose children have soaring rates of oral sex, STDs, and teenage pregnancies. I hope what really happens is that other "isms" get on the Court - atheism, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, anything but Christianity which is apparently excellent at telling others how to live but not living that life themselves.

And by the way, the prophecy says that the Jews will be converted to Christianity after Doomsday. Maybe because they have seen the prophecies of Jesus Christ being fulfilled right before their eyes.

Here is a prophecy that no atheist can annul.

"You know that the saints (true Christians) will rule the world, don't you? And if the world is going to be ruled by you, can't you handle insignificant cases?" (1 Cor. 6:2)

God has already declared that this world will be ruled by the true children of God. With liberty and justice for all.

Where have all the atheists gone then? You know the answer. They had flocked to the second Sodom. They self-destructed.

The evolutionists who thought they were fit were not fit afterall.

In a way, there is some truth to what Mr. Reynolds is saying. Not only will they fill the Supreme Court, they will rule the world.

The atheists will be roasting in hell. What a pity. THat's because God's words can't be broken.

Since at least the end of World War II, science has been where it is at. No seminaries of any denomination--Christian, Jewish, Marxist, etc., etc.--have contributed in any way to society since then--or, arguably, for a long time before.

Modes of thinking that start from "TRUTH" and bend reality to fit, though sadly prevalent is some parts, are not what will get the world to the next century. Evangelicals, mainline Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Eastern Orthodox, Islam, Buddhists, Hindus, Capitalists, Marxist and the rest of the TRUTH-before-reality crowd are the folks who have gotten us to where we are. Changing the flavor of irrationality--Mainline Protestant to Catholic/Jewish to Evangelical--is not going to fix anything. Perhaps, John Mark, you should also consult demographic trends. Rather than Evangelical, the 2050 count might well be Spanish speaking Mormons.

Perhaps rather than an evangelical being nominated to the court, maybe we will see an actual atheist or agnostic. If the surveys are correct, America is becoming less religious, and perhaps an atheist will not suffer the same fate Robert Bork did for his refusal to profess his piety.

That's my idea of religious balance on the court.

The religious beliefs of Supreme Court justices should be irrelevant, and would be had we adhered "religiously" to the concept of church/state separation. As it is, the Court is dealing regularly with issues such as abortion, where it is forced to choose sides in a religious turf war.

But while the constitution requires that there be no religious test for public office, conservative religionists continue to make this an issue.

Fine. Each seat on the court represents approximately 1/11th of the court's makeup. Since non-believers make up the most rapidly growing "faith group" in the country and currently number about 15 percent, at least one seat, if not two, should be reserved for an atheist or at least an agnostic. And if the religionists are not willing to agree to that, then it's time for them to stop whining about no Protestants being on the court.

How about we put an athiest and a Muslim on there? Imagine the outcry.

Its not gonna happen. Talk about religious diversity....boo hoo Protestants..

With any luck, in 50 years most Americans will have accepted the god myth and will have moved away from duplicitous religious organizations. As now, evangelicals will be nothing more than a fringe group constantly trying to impede education, progress and tolerance. Any "university" with the word 'bible' in it ( B ible I nstitute O f L os A ngeles) must be treated with great skepticism. We are not a theocracy.

The religion of the justices doesn't matter. Unless, that is, they plan to establish religion using their rulings, contrary to the First Amendment. I'm confident that Obama's nominees won't, so I don't care what religion they are.

Evangelicals...on the Supreme Court... Really...you think that a narrow minded, theocractic, man walked around with Dinosaurs believing, if you're not a believer you are wrong, old white, racist bigot is gonna get appointed to the SCOTUS....Really...Good luck with that....better hope God starts listening and granting prayers cause I don't see it happening....REALLY!!

Frankly, most Evangelicals do not belong on the Supreme Court, if they believe that their beliefs override their duty to American law.

Which seems quite common.

Evangelical positions are always phrased such that they clearly see our American law and liberty and democracy as merely a means to be manipulated to an end, and not as a sacred trust to uphold of itself.

The revisionist history and constant deceit and manipulation, the political positions that our rights and Constitution are only for Evangelicals or those who agree with them, the decades of undermining those freedoms and claiming only Evangelicals are entitled to them... (And the fact that this hardly promotes clear legal thinking)

The obvious and insistent and aggressive 'Evangelical Agenda' is simply inconsistent with the duties of a Supreme Court Justice.

For there to be an Evangelical on the Supreme Court would seem to create a distinct conflict of interest between their religious claims to being an Evangelical and the duties and oaths and responsibilities inherent.

That's actually OK. But the bench is no place to evangelize.

DR/R

$the death of the protestant establishment in usa is nothing to mourn they tried to beat idea with power$

$faithfull graduate are studying all night long to make it to the gov$

thru the entire history of juchristianity ,how any christian establishment made it to the gov ?did the idea or the theology and ideology of juchristianity made it to the heart and mind of people then people naturaly took it to the gov,national and international?do the entire establishment of juchristianity carry its own laws and gov?

or beat idea with power ?or shovel it in people throat?

look dr,
i do not mean to disrespect your creed ,
i,d hi ly welcome the idealism of your religion and for sure i,d hug and kiss the (faithfull gradutes)that you breeding but look DR ,
juchristianity is always parallel to secularism(secularism supply methodology as far as system and gov)
and to let the (IDEA)flow naturaly you will need serious assistance from diferent establishments including secularism.(look the evidence is plain and clear,you are sending your faithfulls to the secular school of laws and gov,your IDEA or theology lack *LAWS* and lack *GOVERNMENT*you will always not only buy it from secularism but beat by any possible power to get to the power?

then you will end down to the hide and seek trap of the people by the people and for the people?

this is so sad!

you are not going to sucssed in what the entire establishment of juchristianity as a WHOLE failed to establish thr the entire history of 2010 years.

good luk.

"Their 'liberal' intolerance and quotas for 'different' people will not be missed."

I would hardly call the the WASPs of the previous century "liberal" by any definition. Perhaps, though, you have different criteria for what constitutes liberal thought.

And that is very scary, indeed.

In 2050 we will all have JET PACKS!! JET PACKS, people!!

Who's gonna have time to worry about what some mentally-impaired evangelical on the SCOTUS thinks? In 2050, it's gonna be all about the JET PACKS!!

YEARGHHH!!!

For someone who claims to be so intelligent, you are not very observant.

President Bush (senior) picked a right-wing black man for the Supreme Court to moderate any of his critics by accusing Thomsas's critics of being racist, which is what they did.

And President Bush (junior) got conservative Christians on the Court by picking conservative Catholics and then accusing their critics of being anti-Catholic.

This is just cynical Machiavellian politics. Protestant Presidents appointed all of the Supreme Court Justices and a Protestant Senate approved them.

There are currently no Protestants on the Supreme Court because it played well into the hands of the Protestand Presidents and Senate NOT to appoint any.

Now that there is a hub-bub over this, I feel sure that the hated and maligned President Obama will make sure that his next appointee is PROTESTANT.

So the "problem" will be fixed soon, and you can relax.

"When they reach the Court--and they will--Evangelicals, like Catholics and Jews, will be tolerant members of a diverse nation, because they too will have had the experience of moving from the outside to the inside."

Like the tolerance you demonstrate in your present insider agendas against Mexicans, gays and Muslims?

An evangelical theocracy in the US is your wet dream, Reynolds, but don't count on it yet. Your hybrid mix of intolerant evangelical religion and an ultra-right-wing Party of old white racists is going to be split and defeated by other Huckabee "Christian" teabaggers like Perot did to Bush/Little Danny Quayle in the 90's.