In my bio for boldcupofcoffee I wrote that I am a "pro-life liberal", but what does that even mean?

I’m not liberal in the truest sense of the word but I use the term because I am more liberal than most Christians that I know. I don't prescribe to the whole ideology but I do find myself shifting to the left on a number of topics.

In part one I explained how I had come to accept marriage equality, what's next on my way down the slope?
Why I Trust the Bible even though I don't 'believe' parts of it
"Snakes don't speak, you don't actually believe that do you?"  I don't remember how I answered that question then but I now know how I should have.

My faith doesn't depend on a literal interpretation of a collection of books that humans have been involved in writing, editing, translating and canonizing. This idea frightens many Christians and, to be honest, I can sympathize. Humans have an innate bias towards certainty and nothing gives us more than following the commands of a literal, inerrant book. Questioning that ideology makes us rightly uncomfortable.

There was a point in time when I believed that God's inspiration created a situation in which He literally dictated the Bible to the writers. I thought that my faith demanded such a view, but, questions ultimately arose. Questions that undermine the historical authenticity of the scriptures or call into question the morality of God.

Some people seem to be able to reconcile these problems, but I can't. I became confused by the vengeful God I found in the old testament and I questioned the dubious ethics in which he operated. No amount of fancy words from an apologist could change the fact that God is recorded as requiring the genocide of entire tribes, or ordering rapists to marry their victims, etc.

Beyond that, I wondered about the age of the earth, the fossil record, natural selection, none of which seem to be supported by a literal interpretation of scripture but is supported by natural revelation.

Of course God could have created everything in six literal days. But that means that God also created the universe with the appearance of age and created the fossil record in such a way as to fool us (to separate the wheat from the chaff?). Is it such a terrible idea that the story of creation as told by ancient people through oral tradition contains some poetic and figurative language? Would those people understand God if he had explained exactly how he created the world? Would we even understand it now?

This may upset conservative evangelicals but the Bible is a pretty terrible science textbook and I can't bring myself to view it as such. That's okay, though, I believe it was meant for so much more than simply conveying scientific facts.

So, what am I to do? Discard my faith in a God that revealed himself to me because the Bible doesn't answer my questions? Should I pretend to agree with conservative interpretations even though it doesn't make sense to me? Should I just pretend to agree with something that I don't agree with? Is that all that faith is? Is Peter Boghossian right when he says "faith is pretending to know things you don't know". For some, that may be the case, but I can't authentically go down that road.

I believe that some miraculous events might have happened but my faith doesn't rest on whether they actually did. My faith doesn't require a global flood or a speaking donkey. On the contrary, my faith would be shaken if I had to admit that God killed innocent children in Egypt and yet is supposed to be all loving. If my faith rested solely on my confidence in the conservative Bible then I would be an atheist, but, I met God, so I am not willing to abandon my faith altogether.

Does this make me liberal? Maybe. If my reluctance to stake my faith on events that don't seem reasonable means I am liberal then that means I'm liberal. I think (hope) God will forgive me.

Make sure to check out Part 1: Marriage Equality and Part 3: Abortion

In my bio for boldcupofcoffee I wrote that I am a "pro-life liberal", but what does that even mean?
I’m not liberal in the truest sense of the word but I use the term because I am more liberal than most Christians that I know. I don't prescribe to the whole ideology but I do find myself shifting to the left on a number of topics.
In retrospect, the start of my slide into liberalism was probably my support for marriage equality. Since then, I have accepted some other liberal ideas and rejected some conservative ones. The process has been simultaneously both frightening and exciting because I used to believe that liberalism was bad and must be avoided at all costs.
For me, Liberalism was only one rung higher than atheism on the spirituality ladder. At least that was what conservative Christian culture has taught me.

It seems that the main issues that define both political and religious conservatism in North America today are marriage equality, abortion and Biblical inerrancy. I’ve come to embrace a nuanced view on them all.

Why I Don't Oppose Gay Marriage
I suppose that I never gave much thought to the idea of marriage equality before becoming a Christian. More than likely, I would have sided on the liberal side by default.

That changed upon becoming a Christian though, I felt that there were some views that I would have to change if I wanted to be true to my faith. After all, I had now inherited some beliefs that I ought to take seriously. Some moral values that I better stand for.

I trusted conservative Christianity to tell me what God had commanded in his inerrant book. To be honest, some of these ideas made me uncomfortable but I reluctantly accepted them only because I had met Jesus and I wanted to be faithful to his teaching. Christianity, as a whole, seemed to be pretty vocal about it so Jesus must have had a strong opinion on it, or so I thought. So, for a while, I tried to reject the notion of marriage equality for same sex couples.

Conservative Christianity will have us believe that gay marriage is an affront to God and should be repressed. Liberal Christianity wants to tell us that Gay marriage is a God approved sacrament and something that should be celebrated as a church body. While I wouldn't affirm either statement wholeheartedly, my libertarian sensibilities get the best of me and I have to admit that conservative Christians do not have a monopoly on the institution of marriage.

There is a difference between how the government legally defines marriage and what faith traditions view as marriage and they are not mutual. A Christian marriage is a covenant between two people and God that the government shouldn't have a say in. Our government should not have to issue a marriage license and they do not have to somehow approve of the marriage. This marriage is sacramental and defined by the tradition of those participating.

(Side note: I feel the church needs to get out of the business of being an agent for the government when performing marriages, but that's another story).

This is why gay marriage doesn't affect the institution of marriage as understood by some Christians; it's a different marriage (ignoring the fact that some Christians fully accept and perform same sex marriages). Our faith does not require our government to dictate the legalities of people who wish to commit to each other and enjoy the benefits of that arrangement. Likewise, if people, through a different faith tradition decide to marry we really don't have a reason to complain. The same religious liberty that we enjoy also applies to other people. We don’t live in an authoritarian theocracy.

So, I may side with conservatives that homosexuality might ‘miss the mark’ (just as my lifestyle does, which is important to remember). I would admit that much of this world isn't as God intended and I can support the liberty of individuals so long as that liberty does not infringe upon any other individual. Conservative media may tell us another story, but, the acceptance of gay marriage within our society does not, in any way, infringe upon our own religious freedoms. It only erodes our sense of entitlement and that may not be a bad thing after all.

I support the autonomy of individuals under the provision that their actions do not hurt or manipulate another person. So, while I support the rights of Christian churches to refuse to perform same sex marriages according to their tradition, I cannot support the prohibition of differing belief systems to perform the marriages that they want.

While this may not be a truly liberal idea, some may say I am well on my way down the slope into liberalism. Maybe they are right, maybe I’m okay with it.

Make sure to check out Part 2: The Bible  and Part 3: Abortion

In my vocation, one of the key roles I play is working with and alongside people. One thing that has stood out to me over the years is the abundance of cynicism and in turn the dire need for encouragement. Now, don't get me wrong. I believe that many, if not most, people can and do see a side of good and encouragement in the world, and in many cases do appreciate the good that comes their way or the way people speak into their lives. What lacks, so often, is the communication of that encouragement. It would seem that it is much easier to be cynical or critical than it is to be an encourager. It is something I try to remind myself and those I interact with, to develop as a skill in our lives. To be people who recognize and speak about the things that should be praised. Be it a job well done, recognizing that someone stood up for something noble, or simply communicating the appreciation we have for that person. It would seem to me, that the scale of speaking life into the world has been put off balance by the death being spoken.

This was the motivation for me to write the above quote and put it online. But something interesting happened afterwards. As people started interacting with it, I would come back and see the quote again and again. And as I reread it, I noticed something. Do you ever notice connections of words and similarities in sentences when you read them? Well, I do. And in this case something caught my eye. The words 'encourager' and 'courage': "Wait. It would almost seem like the word 'encourager' or 'encourage' has the word courage in it." Was it a coincidence or was there something to this? So I looked up the definition of the word 'encourage' and here is what I found:

The word encourage, literally and literary has the root word 'courage' in it. To give strength to something or someone and that it takes courage to be an encourager. It takes this courage because, the world's loudest are, more often than not, the ones who wish to tear people down: the cynics, the critical, the naysayers, the argumentative, etc (though I wonder if some don't even know they do that). So to be encouraging, in many cases, means to stand in the cross fire of hate, judgement, cynicism and criticism. It means we stand up for the little guy and being willing to mend the broken and bruised while on the battlefield. It means that we also risk the danger of putting a target on our back and though we wear the red cross of healing, that won't stop those who wish to take us out, to shot. 

Where are all the medics, the up-lifters, the cheerleaders, the encouragers? Rise up and speak up! It won't be easy, it takes courage to be an encourager, to build people up and give them strength. But even though it is hard, the world so desperate needs them. The healers, the hope carriers, the world changers. If you are an encourager, let me urge you to have the courage to be as tenacious as the critics. Because it is you that can off set the onslaught of negativity and hopelessness. It is you who can make the difference of life and death in a single persons world. Sometimes, the seemingly smallest of actions, will have the greatest and far reaching of effects in this world. And so, don't underestimate the power you carry and the life you bring as an encourager, even if it is a simple word to lift someones spirit or a passing compliment. Know that your gift to this world does much more then you could ever imagine and is needed more then you will ever know. Oh, could I tell you stories and the power you have. So I say it again: IF THE ENCOURAGERS COULD HAVE THE COURAGE TO BE AS TENACIOUS AS THE CRITICS, THE WORLD WOULD BE A BETTER PLACE