I think the point made by Shields is a good one. The best corrective comes when we’re willing to correct “one of our own.” Or, better yet, ourselves.

I’m in the middle of a debate right now however on my own blog about the subject of “social justice.” I won’t go into it here, but I do want to say that I agree with what Tyler is saying. I think when we rush to condemn someone it often gives people an excuse, particularly on Twitter and on blogs to “pile on.”

Tiger Woods does his thing and across Christian blogs and across Twitter it’s all about the GRACE we should be bestowing upon him. That’s true. But the notion of grace goes flying out the window in many other cases.

It takes some effort to not make excuses for the people that you generally agree with and not vilify the people that you generally don’t agree with, but I think it is worth the effort.

I think that many Christians are quick to respond in order to distance themselves from unpopular opinions. This is done, I believe, not to stand up for truth alone, but to distance themselves from somebody who is under fire. I like how you found truth in Glen Becks perspective despite the immediate reaction of many to simply dismiss a provocative interpretation. I agree with your perspective and completely disagree with Beck’s approach and do not find any contradiction.

Just look at how the media loves to show people being “bad” and how often the good stories about love, life and goodness are not there.

Turn off the TV, put on some good music. Let the blowhards try to blow HIS house down, I’ll bet that Beck and anyone else won’t be able to do it.

For one, the guy isn’t even a believer. So why do we get all up in arms over one man’s opinion that doesn’t even hold the same beliefs Christians do? I don’t get that. And beyond that, the way many have responded has gone way too far.

Don’t listen to Glenn Beck and move on.

Maybe I’m not following the right people, but most of what I’ve seen re: Glenn Beck has to do with deconstructing the absolutely insane jumps he makes to make his assertions. It’s slippery slope, it’s guilty by association, it’s distorting the gospel message, it’s half-way lying and twisting quotes, shoot, when he tried to say that he didn’t say what he said, he went against his transcript. That sort of thing requires a response. I think Jim Wallis and Soujourners have done a very good job of crafting a gracious and yet strong response to Beck and his way of responding to Wallis is pretty tell tale of how he wants to proceed with this.