revisiting the “acceptability” series

I notice that my post “Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Window dressing and Acceptability” is getting some attention. This is actually part of a series. I’ve created a page of links I call “Hard words about my people.” I want to make it clear that I consider myself an evangelical and a pentecostal. I’ve known many people who have abandoned both of these monikers. I don’t feel I can abandon them any easier than I can my nationality. This may be America, where the freedom to choose and change religions is a divine right, but in my mind that doesn’t make religion any more tenable or practical. I’ve always had to deal with shame flying my way from somewhere. I figure that its healthier to understand my people for who they are (in terms of their concerns and history) instead of writing them off and calling myself something new. “The grass is always greener.” Why should learning and change involve shedding my skin like a snake?


Leave a comment

Filed under religion and politics, theology

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s