Recent Threads

Tue Sep 11 00:17:45 PDT 2007

I'm no expert on Christian theology, but as an evangelical Christian who
would claim to possess a "biblical worldview," I think you're right that
there are definite differences on points of theology (often subtle) within
evangelical circles.  From my own experience in various evangelical churches
over the past couple of decades, there seems to be comparatively little
discussion of Satan.  Most evangelical Christians would acknowledge that
Satan is real, but there might be different views as to Satan's power, role
in the world, or other matters.  More common areas for differences of
opinion tend to be whether to emphasize grace or works more, the nature of
salvation/atonement, whether to baptize infants or adults, and sometimes how
pervasively one's theological views should affect other areas of a person's
life, work, or recreation.  Some church members have very particular views,
others gloss over or don't see different issues as important.  Churches
often have mottos for minor doctrinal differences, such as "unity in the
essentials, liberty in the non-essentials, and grace in all things," or the
like.  But theological differences aside, evangelical Christians from many
diverse backgrounds have had a dramatic impact within conservative and
Republican circles in terms of voting and often in directing policy or law,
since at least the 1980s.  

Monday, the IRS ruled in favor of Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the
Family, finding his political endorsements during the 2004 congressional and
Presidential election cycles were speech in his private capacity as a
citizen, thus preserving the 501(c)(3) non-profit status of the
organization.  This is a significant victory for Dobson, but presuming it's
an IRS letter ruling (likely given the limited question/scope of the
allegations submitted by 2 groups in 2005) it would have no binding effect
except as to Dobson and the Focus on the Family organization.  The full IRS
ruling should be available soon online, but in relevant part, according to
news sources, it states: "Our examination revealed that Dr. Dobson's
reported remarks did not occur in publications of Focus on the Family, did
not occur at functions of Focus on the Family, and did not involve Dr.
Dobson suggesting that he was speaking as a representative of Focus on the
Family."  We'll probably see more allegations and IRS rulings on similar
issues in the 2008 elections, likely from both sides of the political
spectrum.    

Steve Johnson - Law Student
stevej at ku.edu 

-----Original Message-----
From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 1:16 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Recent Threads

	I should note that the study defined "Biblical worldview" quite
narrowly; I couldn't find the exact text, but the Barna site reports
that "For the purposes of the research, a biblical worldview was defined
as believing that absolute moral truths exist; that such truth is
defined by the Bible; and firm belief in six specific religious views.
Those views were that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life; God is the
all-powerful and all-knowing Creator of the universe and He stills rules
it today; salvation is a gift from God and cannot be earned; Satan is
real; a Christian has a responsibility to share their faith in Christ
with other people; and the Bible is accurate in all of its teachings."
I am surely no expert on Christian theology, but I take it that many
people who think they have a Biblical worldview -- and obviously,
according to the study, about 90% of those who see themselves as solid
evangelical Christians -- may differ on some matters, such as the
reality of Satan.  Or am I mistaken?

	Eugene

________________________________

	From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of James Manning
	Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 5:03 PM
	To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
	Subject: RE: Recent Threads

	Thanks very much to all for your comments. I read and save them
all as part of my undergraduate studies, while completing my senior
thesis on evangelical Christian participants in conservative politics.

	I wanted to note that 7-14% having no religious affiliation, as
reported at UC Berkely, and the 10.8% figure at Baylor is kind of
cutting around the edges a much larger issue.

	A recent study by the Barna Research Group reports that "only
nine percent of self proclaiming born again Christians hold a Biblical
worldview." While at the same time, evangelical leaders like David
Wheaton, Josh McDowell, and Brannon Howse are reporting an attrition
rate of anywhere from 50-70% of evangelical Christian youth after they
leave their parents' households.

	This touches on one of the premises of my research.
Specifically, that there is the lack of competitiveness of ideas (that
originate in rigorously literal exegesis of scripture) in the modern
market of largely secular ideas. And that an attempt to overcome this
competitive failure is one of the driving forces behind evangelical
Christian political movements and legislation, that ultimately wind up
as policy under discussion in forums like this Email list.

	On a separate subject, I am finding that while Christian
Reconstructionists are indeed a very small portion of conservative
Christians, they are growing rapidly as intellectual leaders among
evangelicals, through entities such as Wall Builders and the Discovery
Institute.

	Further, I am discovering that, while there is a wide and
growing exegetical gulf between dominionist/reconstructionists like
David Barton, D James Kennedy, and Hank Hanegraaff and those that assert
Darbyite premillineal dispensationalism (Tim LaHaye, Pat Robertson, John
Hagee, et al), evangelical conservatives have absolutely no problem
showing up on the same side of the ballot box. That comes in spite of
escatological doctrines that are otherwise diametrically opposed to each
other.

	As an undergraduate, I do not mind so much that discussion tends
to stray at times. But I was surprised when the traffic on the list got
so lively and elevated that nobody noted the passing of Rev. D. James
Kennedy.

	James Manning
	Murray State University senior
	Memphis, Tennessee

	*******************
	excerpts from the thread follow below...

	Douglas Laycock <laycockd at umich.edu> wrote

	Michael Hout and Claude Fischer at Berkely report a number of
studies with similar results, showing that people reporting no religious
preference doubled from 7% to 14% in the 90s.  Why More Americans Have
No Religious Preference: Politics and Generations, 67 Am. Soc. Rev. 165
(2002). 

	Quoting Newsom Michael <mnewsom at law.howard.edu>:

	I wonder if there is a "surge" of people reporting no religion.
The Baylor study -- an extraordinary piece of social science work --
that came out a year ago shows that 89.2% of Americans have a religious
affiliation, and of the remaining 10.8%, the study characterizes them as
"persons without a religious preference, denomination, or place of
worship." 

	Douglas Laycock <laycockd at umich.edu> wrote

	It's not a reaction to the Christian Reconstructionists, who are
numerically trivial.  But many of the folks having the reaction can't
tell the difference between the conservative values voters and the
Christian Reconstructionists.

	________________________________

	Luggage? GPS? Comic books? 
	Check out fitting gifts for grads
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48249/*http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni
_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz>  at Yahoo! Search.

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
wrongly) forward the messages to others.