Silencing the Silence

On April 25, thousands of American students will go through their entire school day without speaking. They'll carry a note or wear a sign around their necks which says something like, "I'm keeping silent today in support of all of those Americans who must keep silent about who they are." These students are supporting gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and trans-genderds (yep, that was an awkward pluralization!). This article covers the Day of Silence.
Last year I was doing some work for a public high school's theater department in Tampa, FL on the Day of Silence. While working with the cast, I asked a girl a question and instead of answering, she pointed to her index card and then wrote her answer down for me. I was touched and a little inspired.

Unfortunately, wherever we find thoughtful people working to make a difference, we're bound to find some ignoramuses (ignorami?) looking to screw it up. Which led me here. The article is long and it'll take a while to get to the point, but, near the bottom, you'll finally see that the Concerned Women for America are sponsoring the Day of Silence Walkout--in which they keep their children home from school for the day--and then following it up on April 26 with the Day of Truth in which they encourage young people to walk around spouting biblical truths about homosexuality.

Now, there's something to notice, here. First, they encourage their children not to be around when people with different views make a statment and then they encourage those same children to make their own statements the following day. You see, it's not about fairness and open discussion. Although they feel it's perfectly fine for their kids to state their own points of view, they're too narrow to allow their kids to hear others'. I bring this up because the embedded video makes a point about it being "time for an honest conversation about homosexuality."

I stumbled upon all of this while reading Salvo. Take a moment to look around - if you think you've got the stomach for it.

Streets Paved With Gold

So, imagine you're in TX and you see a motorcade barrelling down the highway. There's a couple police bikes in front and in back and they're flanking some nondescript black SUVs and a white Bentley. They're on their way to the airport where they'll be met by a private Leer Jet which will whisk its owners away from their TX mansion to their $2.5M Central Park apartment. Can you guess who it is?

An oil magnate, maybe.

Or, how about a hedge fund manager.

Maybe a folksy, TX born Hollywood actor.

Nope. It's Creflo Dollar, a "prosperity gospel" preacher on his way to a Sunday service with his NY congregation.

The Rev. Dollar (I know, I don't think anyone misses the irony) along with fellow prosperity evangelists like Kenneth Copeland and faith healer Benny Hinn (of the six, I swear that 4 are from TX and they're all from the American south) are being investigated by Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa (R).

It seems that it's odd for 501C not-for-profit organizations to rake in massive profits. And Grassley wants to know what gives. He's been hounding these six for about a year, now. Asking for receipts and such for all manner of luxuries (Kenneth Copeland owns three planes personally - and his organization owns a few more).

What gives, Grassley? So these guys (and one gal) are doing well? It's the American Dream, right? Wrong.

While all religious organizations are allowed to operate as not-for-profits under federal law, these six preachers are each at the head of what is essentially a corporation. They're diversified in the stock market, they own property all over the world, they each function as umbrellas with any number of smaller companies in tow, they own radio, TV, and other media outlets. They're the Disney Companies of the Jesus movement.

From a biblical perspective, it seems to me like these are exactly the guys whom Jesus was talking to when he went rampaging through the temple throwing tables on their sides. He called them, "You den of vipers."

Now, if you ask one of these men about the money, they'll tell you that they have large staffs and overhead. And that they support countless charities throughout the world. But that's not the way Paul did it. He walked from place to place and stayed at the homes of members of the church. And when he was imprisoned, he started what is probably the single most famous letter-writing campaign in western history. Jesus walked everywhere - well, except for that one time he rode a donkey.

Why am I so pissy? Because these are the guys who give Evangelicalism a bad name. Sure, I disagree with pretty much everything that evangelical Christianity represents, but this is different. These are moochers. They prey on the economically disadvantaged. They trick little old ladies to send in their pensions. I definitely think they would end up in Dante's bottom circle with Judas.

Keep watching, though. Things are just heating and we're gonna see some interesting stuff over the next few months as Senator Grassley heats up.

Persecution

I had a discussion the other day with some fellow atheists - or maybe we were agnostics - ah, hell, even we couldn't agree upon the right word. Anyway, that's not the point. The point is that during the conversation these atheists (or agnostics) were telling me that they suffer persecution. They went on to remind me that the vast majority of Americans believe in god and that a strong majority are Christians.

My first reaction was one of shock. Not at the numbers. Shock that they would call their public treatment persecution. I remembered my days as an Evangelical Christian and how persecution was something I was acutely aware of. I saw persecution in schools regarding the lack of public prayer. I saw persecution in the media as it was common to see devout Christians depicted as boobs and nincompoops on TV and in movies. I saw persecution in my local and federal governments at courthouses, police stations, etc.

Why did I see that persecution? In public schools it is unconstitutional to hold scheduled prayer meetings or vigils; but it's perfectly acceptable for a student to take a moment to pray privately. (I should also note that, since I went to a private, Christian school, this never applied to me.) TV and movies weren't especially holy, but neither was my life being threatened due to my beliefs by a couple hundred feet of celluloid. The courthouse that wouldn't mount the ten commandments didn't do so in order to protect my rights as well as the rights of the Muslim or Buddhist that appeared after me. Yet, I saw persecution.

And I've figured it out. I saw persecution because Paul told me to do so. So did Jesus. And so did (and this is probably the most important) John on the Island of Patmos. You see, these dudes weren't talking directly to us. They were talking to a small number of Greeks and Jews who were living underground with their brand new faith in order to avoid a stoning or worse. And they were right. As I'm sure you know, things didn't work out well for these guys: Paul was martyred (probably beheaded by Nero), John was crucified upside down, and, well, I think we've got the Jesus thing settled.

For the next couple hundred years, Christians continued to hide for fear of their lives. Famously, Nero would throw Christians into the Colosseum along with a couple of lions to test their mettle. And, although it's been pretty well disproved that Christians actually hid in the labyrinths under the cities, they did have to watch out for the Romans and the Mosaic Jews.

But all that changed with Constantine. Once he came along and brought Jesus to the Romans, the rules changed forever. Christianity began what seems like its inevitable climb to become, for a while, the single largest religion in the world. Today it's the second largest (blame it on Muhammad) with at least 1 billion people professing some sort of Christianity.

So, why do modern christians feel persecuted? Do they fear for their lives? Some, I guess, but so do some Muslims, Tibetans, gays, and blacks. Do they worry for a world populace that's going to hell in a hand basket? Yeah, but that's what they were expecting (I refer you, again, to John's Revelation). What about American Christians and their beef with America's laws? It may be illegal to hold a bible study in a public classroom, but that's exactly what the Puritans - the single most moral and righteously pious sect of Christianity ever to land here - were aiming for when they told Queen Elizabeth to stuff it. Marriage is defined as a holy act in every single state. "Under God" remains in our pledge (don't get me started) and "In God We Trust" still adorns our legal tender. Chaplains start every congressional session with a prayer and our president leads us in prayer on Christmas and Easter.

Do you get it, yet? I'll make it simple. Even though a staggering majority of American Christians have never endured real persecution (death, dismemberment of limbs, separation from family, desecration of God, etc.) they need to feel as if they have. To be Christian is to be separate from this world; to keep the lights on until the Kingdom of Heaven returns; to be in the world but not of it.

All of this brings me to my main question: From what will they be separate if they're able to change all of America's laws to reflect their own, often narrow, morality and values? To put it another way, who's holier: the preacher at one of the hundreds of churches in any American town or the preacher at the one underground Christian church in Saudi Arabia? Get my drift?

They Say "Stay"

According to the Evangelical Leaders Survey of 2008, a majority of Evangelical leaders believe that the US should stay in Iraq "until the job is done."

As you might expect, many of these leaders believe that George Bush was correct to invade Iraq and topple Hussein's dictatorship. Take a look at this:

I believe that the future will reveal that the President’s decision to go into Iraq was wise.

However, the survey also shows that Evangelical leaders aren't necessarily marching in lock-step behind the President.

Many of the leaders suggest that we should stick around now that we're there but also make a point to state that it was a mistake to go in in the first place. Most suggest that the intelligence was faulty and none go so far as to call the President's actions criminal. Nonetheless, there are many leaders who believe that our presence there is harmful. Take a look at this list of quotes from the National Association of Evangelicals' website:

“I am also very concerned that the ardent support by Evangelicals for the war in Iraq, and unquestioning support of President Bush has made Evangelicals appear as if we are ‘pro-war.’ The increasing battle cry among Evangelicals to fight radical Islamists is also troubling to me.”

“I think President Bush has totally miscalculated Islam, and must better understand its basic philosophy and doctrine before we can shape a winning strategy.”

“My biggest concern is the international long term damage done to the image of America.”

“I believe the war is a major recruiting tool for Islamic extremists, a continuing barrier to raising up reasonable voices in Islam, and a danger and deterrent in Evangelical outreach.”

According to the short summary article at the website, there are even some Evangelical leaders who believe that war for any reason is unbiblical and who feel dismayed that the Evangelical movement as a whole is considered pro-war.

Although personally, I feel that assuming a pro- or anti-war stance based on a 6,000-year-old collection of books is naive at best, it is encouraging to see leaders of this extremely influential religious movement making efforts to look at the situation reasonably.

Let's be honest. Neither McCain, Clinton, nor Obama will be able to get our troops out in less than four years and it will probably cost another half-a-trillion dollars. Still, this is a significant idealogical debate and I'm glad to see Evangelical leaders are struggling with it just as hard as the rest of the nation.

Growing Change

It seems to be becoming more insidious. At least, it must seem that way to established church leaders. More and more, they're having to look around and realize that the new American Christian church is more liberal, more tolerant, and less judgmental.

This article from the Washington Post discussed the resurgence of a book written in 2003 that is now on the New York Times Bestseller list. The book was written by an evangelical Christian who was searching for a God and a Jesus that he believed he found in the Bible but not in the church. When he wrote the book, Donald Miller only sold enough copies to pay the rent for a couple of months. Yet, five years later, it's being used almost as a pamphlet or tract by young Christians who are looking for a new identity.

Of course the book has its critics. The Washington Post:

One such critic, Shane Walker, says Miller presents Jesus as a "nice fellow who meets one at the campfire and swaps stories." He forgets to remind readers that Jesus is also a judge and avenger who "wants to save you from his just wrath," according to his review for 9Marks, an organization designed to help churches reestablish their biblical bearings.

Nonetheless, this book and others like it can't be dismissed by entrenched evangelical leaders. There is clearly a growing trend of Christians identifying themselves (openly) as politically liberal and socially tolerant.

In my view, this can only be a good thing for the modern church. Heads up, though. There will be a backlash as the older church leaders remind us of Christ's other message - the one in which he said that he didn't come to bring peace but to bring the sword. (Matthew 10:24)

So, I guess my point is this. Hurray for reasonable minds like Miller's but let's not drink the KoolAid yet. Jesus wasn't only crunchy granola--he was also Pattonesque and divisive.

Judgy, Judgy

I just had a good slap-in-the-face reminder not to pre-judge.

I was taking a look at some popular Christian web portals, forums, blogs, and such and found myself at The Christian Century. On the front page, I saw a thumbnail of Burton's Sweeney Todd and the headline of a review of the film:

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street
The opposite of entertaining

I admit, I immediately assumed that some non-movie-going, school-marmish, non-reviewer would be waxing long about how bloody, sinful, and detestable the movie was.

Boy, was I wrong!

First of all, the author (Steve Vineberg) made no remarks about the film's moral character. Secondly, he clearly had full knowledge not just of Burton's work, but also of Sondheim's and even Brecht's. Finally, although I basically disagree with his conclusion, his argument was well-written and well-founded.

It's a good day when people surprise you!

The Church and Homosexuals

A person who is a practicing homosexual cannot be a true follower of Jesus, according to the director of a network of church and ministry leaders in the Greater Charlotte area.

So begins an article on Christianpost.com. Dr. Michael Brown, head of Coalition of Conscience in Charlotte, N.C. (and whose comments are quoted above), is taking aim at Harry Knox, director of Faith and Religion for the Human Rights Campaign next week in a head to head debate on the subject.

At the core of Brown's remarks is his errant understanding of human sexuality and his--in my opinion--distorted interpretation of the Bible.

When confronted with the question of whether homosexuality is sinful, Christians typically turn to the same couple of Biblical passages (heads up, these can be downright severe):

Leviticus 18:22 "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."

Then it gets rougher:

Leviticus 20:13 "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

Of course, in the same passage, you'll find this little gem:

Leviticus 18:23 "Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion."

You get the drift. Here's the problem. One of the most fundamental tenets of the Christian faith is that the Old Testament (where you'll find the books of the law, including Leviticus) exists to point the way for Jesus and his New Testament. As a matter of fact, Jesus told his disciples that he would be fine with removing all the commandments (not just the famous ten) and replacing them with the two most important ones - namely love god and love your neighbor as yourself. But Jesus also told his disciples:

Matthew 5:17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

So, depending on which Jesus you decide to listen to, it may or may not be a Christian necessity to follow the law laid out in the Old Testament. But that's a mire. Jesus never actually referred to homosexuality, only vague ideas of adultery and deviancy as laid out in the Old Testament. Paul, too, the great letter-writer who almost single-handedly continued the early church past Jesus' death, only discussed general depravity.

So, where does that leave us? It leaves us with a topic covered loosely and broadly in the Bible and therefore open to wide interpretation. You might say, "it's not loose. Leviticus clearly prohibits homosexual relations." Well, Leviticus also prohibits doing any work at all on Saturday (which, somehow, mysteriously morphed into Sunday for Christians) while encouraging men to control and even punish their wives. You see? Many evangelicals have decided to hold onto the idea that homosexuality is sinful while turning a (rightful) blind eye to many other commandments. And there's a very simple reason - homosexuals scare them. I'm not saying that every Christian is a homophobe, but I am suggesting that we tend to fear that which we don't understand. And they've proven, time and again, that they don't understand homosexuality. Take a look at Dr. Brown again:

Brown said he believes "no one is born gay" and although one may experience homosexual feelings as part of man's fallen nature and personal life experiences, change is possible.
"According to Scripture, all of us are born with a fallen nature. The fact that something is natural does not mean it's moral," he said.

This is the crux of the evangelical argument - that homosexuality is a choice.
I truly believe that most Christians honestly believe this. Why would God create someone one way but demand that they become something else? It would be unfair and dispassionate. The only other way to understand this dilemna scripturally is to come to the conclusion I did. Moses, Jesus, and Paul got it wrong. And therefore the Word of God is not infallible and therefore:

Revelation 22:18 "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book."

That's the way it is folks. All or nothing. You either buy it all or you don't. I didn't and that's why I turned from my beliefs.

Younger Christians

Apparently, young American Christians aren't driving their fathers' churches. According to a new book called unChristian, the authors, Kinnamon and Lyons, have found that a large group of evangelical teens and twenties find their beliefs relevant and necessary while they hold a highly negative view of the institution of the American church.

The book reveals that “four out of five young churchgoers say that Christianity is antihomosexual; half describe it as judgmental, too involved in politics, hypocritical, and confusing; one-third believe their faith is old-fashioned and out of touch with reality; and one-quarter of young Christians believe it is boring and insensitive to others.” (Kinnamon & Lyons, unChristian, Baker Books, 2007, pp.33-34)

Michael Craven, president of the Center for Christ and Culture says on his blog:

This appears to be a growing sentiment among many younger Christians in America today. They love Jesus but they want little to do with His Church.

Couple this with the reports of many evangelicals making concerted efforts to include poverty, education, and health care in their "pro-life" agenda as well as expressing real concern with the stae of the environment, and you have the beginnings of a movement among American fundamentalists.

Certainly, not all church-goers agree. Nonetheless, this bodes well for the church and its image; an image, I believe, that has become bleak and intolerant in the wake of Falwell and his Coalition. As a matter of fact, according to the book,

Among young people (aged 16-29), roughly 49 percent hold an “extraordinarily negative” view of evangelical Christians and only 3 percent have a “good” impression.

This image will continue to be a problem for the American church until they make efforts to address the problems spelled out in the book. As it stands right now, though, it seems that many young Christians see the church the way I do, as a farty old man, scratching his ass as he mutters derisively about the way things used to be.

Isaiah's Highway

"And a highway will be there; it will be called the Way of Holiness. The unclean will not journey on it; it will be for those who walk in that Way; wicked fools will not go about on it." - Isaiah 35:8

This single line from one of the Old Testament prophets has spawned a movement of sorts aimed at US Highway 35 which cuts the country right down the middle from Deluth, MN to Laredo, TX.

Many evangelicals have begun holding prayer vigils on the side of the highway as well as "purity seiges" in the neighborhoods nearby.

In this NBC article, the author makes it pretty clear how he/she feels about this:

People drive on it every day, sometimes cursing along the way, but thousands of people consider Interstate 35 to be a holy road.

The article continues:

Christians said the Old Testament's book of Isaiah prophesizes I-35 will be the United States' "Highway of Holiness."

I'm quite sure that it's only a small group of Christians who actually believe Isaiah was looking ahead to a federal highway in the future US. For most, this has become a sort of rallying point for prayer and for evangelism.

In an NPR report recently, one Christian leader in TX asked which we'd prefer: young people praying along the highway or young people taking drugs along the highway. It's a reasonable question.

Unfortunately, another arm of this particular drive is the witnessing going on in a TX night-spot with lots of gay bars. Dubbed "purity seiges" these attacks involve small groups of "fired up" young people challenging local sinners to change their deviant ways.

It's one thing to offer unsolicited prayer for the community or for the nation. It's another to send two dozen 16-year-olds into a rainbow district and challenge the locals to repent.

I give the NBC report 2 of 5 stars for making the Christians seem unreasonable. But I also give only 2 stars to the local Christian groups for not confining their work to prayer and instead challenging people to change their wicked ways. Jesus would have been haging out at those bars, too, but when he said, "Go and sin no more," he had a little more credibility.

My New Blog

I've been gone for a while, but I'm back and ready to go.

Taking some inspiration from my wife's recent retread of her own blog, I've decided to focus my blog on something that means a lot to me: Evangelical and fundamental Christianity, especially in the US. I grew up as a Pentecostal Christian in Florida and didn't really re-examine my life until I was in my twenties. I spent a lot of time in fundamental private schools as well as leading music in youth groups and churches. Although I never officially became a member of any church, I was a music director/worship leader at a small and, then, new church in south St. Petersburg.

Now that I'm older and no longer a practicing Christian, I remain interested in Christianity as it affects local and national politics, society, class, race, the economy, and religious differences. I'm going to spend some of my free time investigating Christianity in the news as well as inter-personally.

I guess I hope to better understand those people who surrounded me when I was younger and whom I look at from a distance, now.

I absolutely encourage any comments you might have, whether they be questions, quibbles, debates, or a topic I might like to cover.

Enjoy!