Book review: Points of Apostasy: Conservatives vs. The Bible
[image error]
by Richard Musick
Today's book forms a compromise for me. I am not political, and I want nothing to do with politics on my blog, yet curiosity about a book led me to agree to do a review. I said I'd introduce the book and its content without a rating, fearing any rating might be misconstrued as approval or disapproval of the book's political stance. So, here goes.
"If a belief, principle, or action is in accordance with the Bible, it is right. If it is not in accordance with, or is contrary to, the Bible, it is wrong." Do you agree?
"When I decide what position I wish to take on an issue, I decide based upon Biblical guidance. That is also how I decide how to vote on any given issue." Do you approve?
Musick highlights the George W. Bush administration to drive home his points. He delves into Bush's record and accomplishments, concluding that while Bush promoted himself as a Christian leader, he acquiesced to non-Christian values. Musick sites example after example, and calls Bush's form of Christianity "apostasy." Question: Is the Bible a clear, straight, and consistent plumb line by which to measure leaders and the appropriateness of their decisions? Are religious labels, whether used in condemnation or approval, appropriate terms for political judgment?
Now, after you've had a moment to form an opinion about the above questions, you might be surprised at the Christian values Musick wishes our government would uphold (taken from the chapter headings):
Don't deceiveDon't killDon't ignore the sufferings of strangersObey the golden ruleDon't corrupt the justice systemBeware of strong executivesDon't surround yourself with yes menDon't treat the wealthy better than the poorDon't have hidden agendasCare for the poorDon't do things secretlyDon't try to set up people who disagree with youDon't try to enforce double standardsDon't be a character assassinDon't excuse wrong acts by your friendsTreat strangers well
Today's book forms a compromise for me. I am not political, and I want nothing to do with politics on my blog, yet curiosity about a book led me to agree to do a review. I said I'd introduce the book and its content without a rating, fearing any rating might be misconstrued as approval or disapproval of the book's political stance. So, here goes.
"If a belief, principle, or action is in accordance with the Bible, it is right. If it is not in accordance with, or is contrary to, the Bible, it is wrong." Do you agree?
"When I decide what position I wish to take on an issue, I decide based upon Biblical guidance. That is also how I decide how to vote on any given issue." Do you approve?
Musick highlights the George W. Bush administration to drive home his points. He delves into Bush's record and accomplishments, concluding that while Bush promoted himself as a Christian leader, he acquiesced to non-Christian values. Musick sites example after example, and calls Bush's form of Christianity "apostasy." Question: Is the Bible a clear, straight, and consistent plumb line by which to measure leaders and the appropriateness of their decisions? Are religious labels, whether used in condemnation or approval, appropriate terms for political judgment?
Now, after you've had a moment to form an opinion about the above questions, you might be surprised at the Christian values Musick wishes our government would uphold (taken from the chapter headings):
Don't deceiveDon't killDon't ignore the sufferings of strangersObey the golden ruleDon't corrupt the justice systemBeware of strong executivesDon't surround yourself with yes menDon't treat the wealthy better than the poorDon't have hidden agendasCare for the poorDon't do things secretlyDon't try to set up people who disagree with youDon't try to enforce double standardsDon't be a character assassinDon't excuse wrong acts by your friendsTreat strangers well
No comments have been added yet.
