Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

God’s Harvard: The New Grooming Ground of the Evangelical Movement

By Hanna Rosin, Harcourt. Posted August 23, 2007.


A small Christian school outside the nation’s capital is dispatching the next round of evangelicals to the front lines of science and politics, where they will battle for control of the nation.
08232007story
08232007story

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Hanna Rosin

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

When I first began covering religion for the Washington Post, more than ten years ago, deflecting conversion attempts became a routine part of my work. Although they are unfailingly gracious, evangelicals are not so good at respecting professional boundaries. What did it matter that I was a reporter doing my job if I was headed for eternal damnation? To a population of domestic missionaries, I presented as a prime target: a friendly non-Christian who was deeply interested in learning more about their beliefs.

The first time someone tried to share the gospel with me, I naively explained that I was Jewish and born in Israel, thank you, thinking this would end the conversation. This was a big mistake. In certain parts of Christian America, admitting I was an Israeli-born Jew turned me into walking catnip. Because God's own chosen people had so conspicuously rejected Jesus, winning one over was an irresistible challenge. And the Holy Land glamour of Israel only added to the allure. Preachers told me they loved me, half an hour after we met. Godly women asked if they could take home a piece of my clothing and pray over it. A pastor's wife once confided to my husband, "You're so lucky. She looks so ... Biblical." Once, at a Waffle House in Colorado with some associates of the influential Christian activist James Dobson, a woman in our company stared at me so hard it became uncomfortable for me to eat. Finally, I looked up at her. "When I look at you, I see the blood of our Savior coursing through your veins," she said.

"Thank you," I gulped. "More maple syrup?"

Explaining that my family had been Jewish for many generations and that, by converting, I'd be breaking a deep, rich tradition only encouraged them to break out the big gun. I've heard it so many times that I can recite it by heart. Matthew 10:36: "For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -- a man's enemies will be the members of his own household. Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me." This didn't stick with me, either. Clearly they had not met my mother, or any Jewish mother for that matter. The Jews haven't endured for nearly 4,000 years by giving their cubs up so easy.

Biblical verses, like turtlenecks go in and out of style. During the nineties I heard Matthew 10:36 on nearly every reporting trip. This was a paradoxical decade for evangelicals. The Christian right had become a fixture in American politics and the nation was about to elect George W. Bush, the closest thing American evangelicals have had to a pope. At the same time the Christian home-school movement was booming -- a relic of the age of separatism and retreat. Evangelicals were poised to move from the fringe to the elite power circles of American society, but they just couldn't seem to make the jump. Unless they learned to polish their act and stop telling people to renounce their mothers, they would never make it.

I first visited Patrick Henry College in September 1999, a year before the school opened its doors. The "school," that afternoon, consisted of founder Michael Farris, a Christian homeschooling activist, manning an excavator on a construction site just off a Virginia highway exit. Farris was affable, his usual manner with reporters, as he laid out the plans for his revolution. The school would enlist the purest of born-again Christians in a war to "transform America" by training them to occupy the highest offices in the land." Year after year, it would churn out future congressmen, governors, and federal judges, until they finally had the majority. "Few students will know more about the political ramifications of reinforcing homosexuality through special rights than ours," he told me. One day, he bragged, he would introduce the ultimate graduation-day speaker: "President So and So, an alumnus of Patrick Henry."

It all sounded a little far-fetched. After all, he hadn't even laid the first brick.

Then Bush ran for president as a born-again former alcoholic, and won. Suddenly Farris seemed much less delusional. In the early winter of 2005 I visited again. The central building, Founders Hall, was now an impressive Federalist structure. Inside, the walls were covered with posters for an upcoming production of Oscar Wilde's An Ideal Husband. A Whiffenpoofs-style singing group occupied the grand staircase. After talking to some kids having lunch, I concluded they were some of the most anal, competitive teenagers I had every come across. They input their daily schedules into Palm Pilots in fifteen-minute increments -- read Bible, do crunches, take shower, study for Latin quiz, write debate briefs. After Jesus Christ they bowed down to the "1600's" -- the handful of kids each year who'd gotten perfect scores on the SAT. The atmosphere was much more Harvard than Bob Jones.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: politics, christian, religion, evangelicals, science

Hanna Rosin has covered religion and politics for the Washington Post. She has also written for the New Yorker, the New Republic, GQ, and the New York Times. She lives in Washington, D.C., with her husband, Slate deputy editor David Plotz, and their two children.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Conjunctive irrelevance
Posted by: Col. Jackleg on Aug 23, 2007 12:55 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Patrick Henry College and a Jew railing about its condemnation of her heritage and the prospect of salvation for herself and family. If it wasn't for a Jew rug-peddlar that encountered a "charismatic" while en route to Damascus, the entirety of the Jesus thing would have been relegated to obscurity. Hanna can thank Paul of Tarsus for her plight and as she reads the Letters of St. Paul in the N.T. she will see that her genealogical heritage spawned evangelical Christianity, her roots in Israel and Queens notwithstanding.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Conjunctive irrelevance Posted by: armorypk
» What? Posted by: Col. Jackleg
» RE: Conjunctive irrelevance Posted by: halweiner
» Clean up the Air Force Academy Posted by: Col. Jackleg
A Little More History
Posted by: Urstrly on Aug 23, 2007 4:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It might be useful to remember that most universities in this country (excluding our state schools and Columbia U) grew from Christian origins and that Princeton developed largely because it deemed Harvard and Yale insufficiently moved by the Great Awakening. Brown was Baptist. A parishioner died from a heart attack listening to the evangelist Jonathan Edwards preach his famous Sinners at the Hands of an Angry God. So evangelical Christianity has had its sway on our nation for longer than we like to admit. The old evangelicals simply excluded Jews and then reluctantly developed quotas, whereas the new ones want to convert them.

Hannah Rosin does readers a great service by relentlessly reporting on the new evangelicals' beliefs and activities, because they are most dangerous when they hide their agenda. It is terrifying how many young people carry around this sort of Jesus-is-watching-me mentality, because it is little more than internalized fear and ignorance. But Rosin should acknowledge that Israel itself has its ultraorthodox, who foment wars they are exempt from fighting and cling to a fundamentalism not unlike the Patrick Henry crowd.

I don't think secularists will ever crack fundamentalism, but I put some hope in progressives like Jim Wallis, who hear the message of Jesus in a very different way. And as my own Unitarian Universalist minister Galen Guengrich sometimes reminds us, Jesus didn't want to start a new religion, he was simply trying to be a good Jew.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A Little More History Posted by: Badger1492
"christians" deserve their coming armageddon and the hell they would put us in
Posted by: KaptainSpiffy on Aug 23, 2007 4:35 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
'my kingdom is no part of this world'. by supporting earthly governments a christian actually mocks christ.

Lord, lord! did we not prophesy in your name? pfft! get away from me, you workers of lawlessness. ask the mountians to cover you in the day of his wrath, etc.

stupid humans. we seek to impose our will on others when christianity asks the opposite: to understand no one really sees to offend you but does so either in ignorance or by our own chosing to be offended; and to forgive and otherwise leave one another the hell alone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

oh give me a break
Posted by: halweiner on Aug 23, 2007 4:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now you're blaming her for Saul of Tarshis? Wow. I only faulted her for raising her children in Washington, DC. Now THAT's child abuse, given the current neighborhood. Up here we have drive by shootings. Down there they have drive by wars.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: oh give me a break Posted by: Domokun
We're Not in Swampwater Anymore
Posted by: catullus13 on Aug 23, 2007 5:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article makes the excellent point that the latest generation of evangelicals are no longer characters from a Flannery O'Connor story. They are tech-savvy, media-aware and heavily focused on the fundamentalist political agenda. It's getting more and more like "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" -- you can only tell who's a pod person by the small details. I've met some of these young fundies and in many cases you really can't tell at first that you are dealing with a pod person.

We have a long, hard fight ahead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Murderers? Posted by: openhouse
» evangel Posted by: openhouse
» RE: Murderers? Posted by: 1gma
Ewwww...wookie duh bawd, bawd peepuh, eshorsizing dey're fuhst ammendment!
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Aug 23, 2007 5:30 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please. It's a school. Compared to the national average,

1) Are these children literate?

2) Can they do basic math, heavens forbid (HA!!! get it), algebra?

3) Do they graduate?

If so, the rest of the people not vested in teachers' unions should be borrowing from what they're doing right, and choosing what other aspects to dispense with.

Focusing on issues of religion that one takes personal exception to is a hallmark of irrelevancy in a free and liberal society.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Well, in the name of ____________... Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Well, in the name of ____________... Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» You're coming unhinged. Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: You're coming unhinged. Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» that wall you yell at? Posted by: ABetterFuture
» Answers to your probing questions. Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: A terrifying future Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» You really don't know, do you? Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: You really don't know, do you? Posted by: SatanicJamboree
They're putting on Oscar Wilde's "An Ideal Husband"?
Posted by: defrag on Aug 23, 2007 5:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nice irony, on more levels than they seem to realize.

Progress? - maybe they're a little more open-minded than British theatre-goers were in the years after Wilde's trial in 1895.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How can you really educate with delusion?
Posted by: edraven on Aug 23, 2007 5:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does PHC teach science?

I am so tired of people telling me they talk to God - - or ask questions of God and get answers - - or tell me that I'm going to a place that they made up. Yes, I know that present day Christians didn't invent Hell. That occured a long time ago, but they believe it.

Try reading the Bible, it is really dumb.

Ed Graham

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Actually, Posted by: hurricane hugo
» RE: Actually, Posted by: SatanicJamboree
Ex-Christian fundamentalist looking for direction
Posted by: deni_haven on Aug 23, 2007 5:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There was a time when I would have been proud if one of my children would be accepted at PHC. I was steeped in this same extreme mindset. Like many PHC families, I had a strong conviction to "let the Lord decide" how many children we should have. Despite health concerns, my husband had a vasectomy reversal and we have had four more children. We've homeschooled all of them from the beginning. We became isolationists because nobody else "got it" - not even the "Christians" at the "Bible-believing" church we attended. So we also home churched. My children would all fit right in at PHC.

I've been reading articles by Chris Hedges on Alternet for some time now and that, plus some other reading has changed my views about God, the Bible, salvation, etc. I don't take the Bible as literally now. I no longer unquestioningly support George Jr. and I loathe the "Religious Right." I don't accept the patriarchal family structure of the Old Testament.

It's become a source of contention in my family because everyone thinks that mom has "backslidden" and "gone liberal." We don't know anyone who is not a fundamentalist - which means I can't talk to my friends about my changing outlook. This has really disrupted our lives - much like what Hanna Rosin anticpates would happen if she were to convert from her Jewish tradition to become a Christian.

I'm getting depressed and my husband is anxious. I don't want to ruin my family by distrupting the foundation of our beliefs and lifestyle. But, I can no longer live this way and teach my kids to do the same. I am confused about what to do now.

I have one friend who, after living this kind of life and home-birthing, breastfeeding and homeschooling 11 children for her patriarchal husband, got overwhelmed, depressed and suicidal. In the past year, she has been "enlightened." She returned home to her mother and her lesbian lover and now she has her own lover. Her family is devastated. Her children are hurt and angry that their mother has rejected everything that they hold precious and is now in danger of Hellfire.

I don't want that to be my story. I want to stay with my family and grow together. It is hard. I need direction. Email me at denihaven@hotmail.com with your sympathy and serious suggestions for my situation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Here are my suggestions Posted by: Jasonix
» RE: Here are my suggestions Posted by: deni_haven
» Leafsong - what is truth? Posted by: deni_haven
In the mean time.
Posted by: douglashoyt on Aug 23, 2007 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If there is time travel, maybe someone will go back in time and kill Paul of Tarsus and Mohamed.

In the mean time, we should encourage the "Christian evans" to abstane from sex to save themselves for Christ. In one generation, we should see a remarkable decrease in these insane types.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

and you're Jewish out of tradition?
Posted by: schnoggi on Aug 23, 2007 6:19 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the author states that she adheres to another should-be-extinct fascism, er, religion, because her family has an unbroken tradition? sorry, you're just as mindless and stupid. throw stones, lemming.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Getting past the smell of Christianity
Posted by: peacelf on Aug 23, 2007 6:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you Hanna Rosin for the very real, honest look at evangelical Christians.

I am an evangelical Christian of a different stripe, and like you I am probably condemned to hell for my beliefs.

Eight years ago, I began re-reading Christianity in response to some discussions I had with my parent's Baptist minister who, at my parent's request, tried to "bring me back to Christ."

My readings ranged from early church history, gnosticism, the new discoveries of "gospels" in Nag Hammadi, Egypt and finally what schoalrs call "the historical Jesus." Beyond that, I combed through layman books on quantum theory and astrophysics in search of God. It was there that I discovered that some quantum physicists were entertaining the idea of a creator, a God that ties the universe together.

Like the prodical son, I had left Christianity with a curiosity and a thirst for knowledge and truth, but returned to Jesus with fresh eyes, eyes unencumbered with the weight of the "fear of God" lurking over me. I walked through hell fire in search of the true Jesus and the God he served. It was a transformation made in heaven and my return to Christianity much more meaningful and sweeter.
I am a different Christian because I have combined science, the historical Jesus' teachings and many other religious and philosophical ideals that wouldn't be possible under the watchful eyes of "born again" Christian peer pressure. The research of Jesus scholars greatly affected my understanding of Jesus' mission and message. Scholars like John Dominic Crossan , Elaine Pagels and many others, deconstructed my myth-based Jesus and transformed him into someone I could grasp and hold onto. I saw the light of Jesus through the eluvium of 2000 years.
That Jesus was/is a radical revolutionary who nonviolently challenged the corrupt and greedy power of (Roman) empire.
Since my reconstruction, I have come to understand that science and empirical study have a place in the universe, in that quest for truth. I also believe we humans have the (godly) power to manipulate and change our environment to suit our needs and/or destroy our planet, the end of times.

Dom Crossan argues that there are two kinds of eschatology: apocalyptic and sapient. The apocalyptic eschatologists dominate the discussion today. Those would be the same type that Rosin interviewed in her article. They believe that Jesus is going to return and take all "born again" people up to heaven and destroy the earth, condemning well over 2/3rds of humanity to Hell. This is a highly pessimistic view of eschatology that seems much maligned from the historical Jesus of the love, compassion, nonviolence buried in the New Testament.

The Sapient Eschatologists believe that the "end of times" has already begun when Jesus started the "Kingdom of God" movement 2000 years ago. And, that there is no second coming, only the transformation of society from a greedy corrupt empire into a community of love and peace; in other words, a utopian community. Jesus' very behavior WAS the transformation, and that, if we would learn to love God with all our heart and soul and love our neighbor as we do ourselves, share what we have with others, then we would have become a card carrying member of the Kingdom movement. The end of an era comes when violence, destruction of life and the planet end, and a new era of love and peace and community begin ON EARTH.

Jesus lived that message. Paul evangelized it, lived it and carried on the message beyond Judea into Europe. Unfortunately, that message was buried under the toxic sediment of political power and corruption, so that fewer and fewer people can stand the smell of "Christianity." However, once you get past the smell...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nice job! Kaneh bosm! Posted by: garry minor
» RE: Nice job! Kaneh bosm! Posted by: peacelf
Chistianity is not equivalent to Fundamentalism.
Posted by: medicis on Aug 23, 2007 6:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thinking and questioning are antithetical to fundamentalist - anything.

I prefer the former and despise the latter.

Fundamentalism rests upon the twin pillars of personal fear and thought-lessness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Agreed Posted by: american
» Thinkers Posted by: openhouse
Chew on this
Posted by: willymack on Aug 23, 2007 7:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just think about all the temples, churches, and cathedrals throughout "christiandom". What a huge investment in time, labor, and faith! Now, think about all the wars, torture, pestilance, starvation, and hideous atrocities committed against unbelivers and people of other faiths, associated with christianity-mainly by, but not entirely- by the catholic church. To me, this makes all those magnificent edifices nothing more than palaces of monumental stupidity, humbug, and hypocricy, and a gruesome reminder of the dark side of the human psyche. Now, let's suppose that irrefutable proof that the jesus myth is a fiction was uncovered today. How much do you suppose this would change the status quo? My guess is that it wouldn't change a thing. Until we're able to face this fatal flaw in our mental makeup and overcome it, there will NEVER be a lasting peace on this planet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Chew on this Posted by: Lauren
Excuse the expression, but...Jeez!
Posted by: jesme on Aug 23, 2007 7:41 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Read the comments here, then compare them to Rosin's description of the folks at PHC. Which bunch comes across to you as narrow-minded and intolerant? Not the fundies, who seem to be genuinely engaged with the culture, and eager to consort with those who don't think like themselves. You may not agree with them, but they seem like well-meaning, highly intelligent people who conduct themselves in a perfectly reasonable manner.

Then read the gibbering hatred spewed forth by many of the commenters. I especially like the guy who wishes he could go back in time to murder Paul and Mohammed. There's enlightenment and tolerance at its best!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You know, there is a difference Posted by: hurricane hugo
» Wrong-ola Posted by: eddie torres
edpaz
Posted by: edpaz on Aug 23, 2007 7:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When will the Christians begin following their teachings. Didn't Jesus Christ say something about "rendering unto Caeser"? Our forefathers came to this country for "Religious Freedom" not a religious dictatorship. That's exactly what they were trying to flee. The founders were right, "let religion abound" but keep it out of government. As Ghandi said "I like your Christ, it's your Christians I don't like."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: edpaz Posted by: leafsong1
Christiane Amanpour's "God's Warriors"?
Posted by: sausage on Aug 23, 2007 7:47 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've been watching CNN's Christiane Amanpours' God's Warriors series of special reports. Tonight's episode, God's Christian Warriors, concludes the three night series.

I've already come to a conclusion about religious zealotry: it is a mental illness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» CNN is biased Posted by: american
So why are you harboring the little Nazi, Hanna?
Posted by: tomkara on Aug 23, 2007 8:29 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One might hope that living with others would broaden the young lady's weltanschauung, but it seems you're loaning her books by evangelicals, so who's educating whom? I hope in the course of time your Patrick Henry student remains with your family that somehow you'll be able to detect a few cracks in her sadly boilerplate mentality and find ways to get on her the road to tolerance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Maybe Posted by: hurricane hugo
2 great documentaries
Posted by: mcstewey on Aug 23, 2007 8:40 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article was ok, but if you want to learn more about the increasing influence of the evangelical right on our political system check out, "Jesus Camp" and "With God On Our Side." Both are very even-handed and get directly to the point.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BoldCHRIST DID NOT EXIST
Posted by: atomic on Aug 23, 2007 8:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Religion is poison. The personal relationship people say they have with god where they talk to him all day and he gives them clues or instructions back to them, is psychotic.

What's frightening about this story is that it reveals a whole faction of our youth have been brought up and diverted by evangelical religious leaders into some sort of army.

What's even more scary is that these individuals are very intelligent and have either bought the bible as absolute history or they understand the way to get ahead is to use religion.

Either way it's completely scary. An army of psychopaths with law degrees. Check out this movie.

http://zeitgeistmovie.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: BoldCHRIST DID NOT EXIST Posted by: Ocean tides
A Choice of Gods
Posted by: jim_altman on Aug 23, 2007 8:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The other Niebuhr, H. Richard, penned a book in 1929 called "The Social Sources of Denominationalism" in which he charted the development of a variety of Christian movements against socio-economic status. What he found was that as the people within a movement progressed up the social ladder, their denominations evolved more sophisticated means of interacting with society. The rise of the political influence of evangelical universities (Patrick Henry, Regents, Liberty, etc.) reflects the climbing wealth and social status of evangelicals. What Niebuhr's theories also suggest is that rise of the evangelicals is just another chapter in the great American mainstreaming process; just a few extra ingredients in the giant social blender of ever-blander American modernity. Witness the social habits of America's evangelicals and you see the same pansexual, drug-addled proclivities of society at large. It's Ursula K. LeGuinn's "Lathe of Heaven" in slow motion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

God's Governance?
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Aug 23, 2007 9:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who are we kidding? If these new evangelicals were truly following the path of Jesus,they would'nt be shooting for government spots or positions of control. The agenda they support is more akin to the anti-christ than true christianity.
Columbus was a 'God Fearing Man', look whatt he brought to the new world. Racisim,genocide and slow motion death by industrial pollution. It's been going on for more that 500 years with no signs of stopping. All in the name of Christ. A name that means Love. Who's nature is Peace. Who's way is Compassion. There's no governance that acts like that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Breeding fundamentalists and fanatics
Posted by: pzzp on Aug 23, 2007 9:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All faiths have their systems for breeding "religious" persons. Al Qaeda have their camps where Muslim fundamentalists are bred. In America they are bred in schools as the one described. The process may be more civilized, guns are not issued, but the goal is the same: to promote religious tribalism. This tribalism eventually colors the future activities of the subjects, be they political or otherwise.

On a universal scale, it is a great battle between diversity and homogeneity, inclusionism and exclusionism. Perhaps it's in our genes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Paul was clueless, clueless about an earthly Jesus
Posted by: JoAnne on Aug 23, 2007 9:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Paul had nothing to say about the life, times, acts, people and places of Jesus who walked the sands of Palestine. Paul's writing began a scant 20 years after the account of the crucifixion of Jesus. The issue is however, that account as well as all accounts earthly of Jesus, was penned years SUBSEQUENT to Paul's writing by the gospel writers, starting with Mark.
To understand Paul one needs to think like Paul at his point in history.... And an important time in history it was, as just subsequent to this time was the time that Jesus LANDED ON EARTH, so to speak, via the pen held in the hand of one fictional-writer, Mark.
For Paul there was no Bethlehem, no wise men, no Joseph, Mary, Lazarus, no wedding at Canna, no nothing of the of an earthly Jesus. That was purely the writings of the gospels. Paul's Jesus was not the gopel Mark's Jesus, nor the gospel Matthew's Jesus, nor the gopel Luke's Jesus, nor the gospel John's Jesus. Paul's Jesus was borne of the late Hellenistic period, and totally in line, at the time, with a mythical Jesus whose abode was in the heavens. It wasn't until Mark penned the incredible story of Jesus about 70a.d. that he, the earthly Jesus, came to life.
Neither did Paul have anything to say of his encounter with GOD, the dazzling Light, on the road to Damascus..The alleged account that was the cause of his conversion to Xtianity. That account was LATER recorded only in the books of ACTS, written about 110c.e. One would certainly think that somewhere in all those letters to Paul's budding Xtian churches that he would have expounded liberally on his meeting of.... GOD!!!And liberally would be a vast understatment.
As further consideration that Paul's knew nothing about Jesus on earth, his letters contain over 200 clueless-telling passages that indicated hat if he had known nothing of the earthly Jesus, as written by Mark's, et al.
To get a better grasp of how devasting this to the historicity of Jesus , please read, and feel free to submit questions to Earl Doherty's at his excellent comprehensive website: www.jesuspuzzle.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another, more dangerous myth
Posted by: truthteller on Aug 23, 2007 9:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is that George Bush was EVER elected President - either time! With due respect for the author, please, please quit lending the legitimacy of being 'elected' to this criminally fraudulent administration. Brother Jeb and that bitch Katherine Harris stole FL for him in '00 - and Nader had nothing to do with it, disenfranchising tens of thousands of African Americans as "felons" did.

Ohio was stolen in a dozen different ways, all well documented in works by Greg Palast, Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman, Mark C. Miller, and RFK, Jr. Probably somewhere upwards of 300,000 votes were either denied, not counted or flipped for Bush.

So, please do not give this illegitimate President ANY legitimacy. The problem is a Democratic Party that won't call these thieves what they are, and a corporately owned press that is in collusion with them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Damnit, you stole my post! Posted by: hurricane hugo
The Bible is just a continuation of ancient Midde Eastern myths
Posted by: sfdenizen on Aug 23, 2007 10:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bible stories have antecedents in the ancient Sumerian, Mesopotamian, and Akkadian myths (like the Epic of Gligamesh). The Old Testament represents a historicial piecing together of Hebrew tribal history with creation/flood/messianic myths borrowed from more advanced civilizations of the ancient world. In the New Testament, Jesus as God-King born of a Virgin has striking parallels to similar God-Kings/Mothers in Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Greek myths.
21st century people really need to let go of literal beliefs in our ancient myths and see them in a historical and scientific light. Many of the ethical teachings of the myths are still relevant (don't lie, steal, murder, horde - be kind, generous, grateful, etc.), so we can still glean meaning from them in that way, but as far as "facts" about the natural world and our place in it are concerned, they have no more weight than children's stories.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I see the backlash has begun
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Aug 23, 2007 10:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The danger for the fundies is this: by trying to force their beliefs down the throats of others, they open their beliefs up to attack. At this point I don't think they can win the debate.

There's more than enough evidence that Christianity came into being by cobbling two other religions together-- Judaism and Mithraism. Both had significant followings in the Roman Empire. Add in pieces from Egyptian and Zoraster religions (not to mention the polytheism of the Greek and Roman religions) and we get Christianity. This is a debate the fundies shouldn't want to get into.

Paul and later missionaries were brilliant at taking elements of existing religions and using them to convert specific tribes and groups to their new religion. The real future of religion will be to cobble Christianity and Buddism together to form a new faith for a new millenium.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What does it mean
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Aug 23, 2007 10:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...to carry on a running conversation with God in your head all the time?

It means you're schizophrenic. The. End.

plur

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That was the best line in the piece Posted by: eddie torres
That was so very offensive!
Posted by: american on Aug 23, 2007 10:54 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You write, "At the same time the Christian home-school movement was booming -- a relic of the age of separatism and retreat." First, relics don't boom. Second. what is this age? Separatism? Do you intend to say isolationism? Retreat? What age is that? You could have said any of a thousand things about the Christian home school movement.

You write, "Evangelicals were poised to move from the fringe to the elite power circles of American society, but they just couldn't seem to make the jump." 30% is not fringe. And if they are 30%, why were they not in the power circles? But...at any rate I thought that they were in power. That's what the press has been saying. They and PNAC, The “Heritage” Foundation, Catherine Harris and the SC put Bush to office. PNAC got the war and the Evangelicals the prospect of repeal of Roe vs. Wade and a few other promises. I mean am I missing something? I thought we all knew what was going on?

You write, "Farris was affable, his usual manner with reporters, as he laid out the plans for his revolution." People's usual manner with reporters is affable - like Bush with the White House press corps at the beginning of the PNAC-incepted Iraq war "revolution," say? You are insinuating underhandedness about his delivery. I accuse you of using effect-and-cause fallacy to slyly discredit this individual with such a framing.

You write, "After talking to some kids having lunch, I concluded they were some of the most anal, competitive teenagers I had every come across." How about kids at Andover or Wharton? C'mon.

You write, "To them, a "Christian" keeps a running conversation with God in his or her head always, Monday through Sunday, on subjects big and small, and believes that at any moment God might in some palpable way step in and show He either cares or disapproves." Wasn't David doing the same thing or believing the same way in the Psalms?

You write, "I firmly believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old, or whatever the current scientific consensus says." "Or whatever..." That is your belief. Is it okay for people to believe differently? Or is that not your point?

You write, "I am naturally democratic almost to a fault." That doesn't mean you are fair.

You write, "When I told my friends this, most of them would give me a quizzical why-are-you-harboring-Nazis-in-your-attic look." WOW! That sure is offensive. (So they didn't say it- they just looked it, right? YOU interpreted that look as a Nazi's-in-the-attic one, however.) I am amazed you can get away with that in our "PC" society. If your friends are so unfair, why are you still friends with them? What if a writer said, "When I told my friends I was harboring a Zionist, most of them would give me a quizzical why-are-you-harboring-Nazis-in-your-attic look."

You write, "Sometimes in the mornings I'd find her upstairs in her bed, reading her Bible and taking notes. "If they're all like this," one of my friends said, "we're in trouble.'" What is you and your friend's problem? On TV, the Jews bob back in forth in front of the wailing wall in Jerusalem all the time. I never hear any media commentary on how radical that is. What gives? Are you unbiased? Or are you patently anti-Christian?

And you keep on talking about your friends. I think this is you talking.

You write, "'Yes," she answered. "But I'm not jumping up and down with joy about it.'" She is being authentically unemotional, perhaps; but you are unabashedly callous and biased.

My argument: It is ok to have an admitted Jew critique a Christian school and its students. Balanced reporting dictates we have the other side.

PS: Are you yourself religious?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: That was so very offensive! Posted by: SatanicJamboree
God's Harvard
Posted by: calm on Aug 23, 2007 11:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We can expect to see a huge amount of relgious shows on TV now. The Ruling Class are gonna try and sell us all a "conscience". The Ruling Class will try and have us show a bit of compassion towards the Rich Folks as the civil unrest surges within our communities. The Ruling Class will hope that we have a greater sense of conscience towards them as opposed to what the Ruling Class showed the Working Class over the past 50 years.

It is "Take-Away" time in America.

70 million American's are gonna be lining up for social security benefits by the year 2010.

How in hell is the Ruling Class gonna meet all the promises made to the Working Class over the past 50 years? It is quite impossible. If we are said to be near bankruptcy now, just think how bad it is gonna be as the baby-boomers retire?

I was born in 1948. All through my working career I was quite envious of how the Upper Class flaunted their wealth and was quite angry with the inequality within the "System" which we all lived under.

But, I shrugged off my urge to strike out or to cause civil disorder because I excused the excess wealth of the Establishment with my constant reminder that at least the Ruling Class will look after me in my old age.

Well, that ain't gonna happen now! Every damn promise the Ruling Class made to me is gonna be broken. For a lifetime, I've been told that the Capitalist system was the best thing since sliced bread .... but it was a deliberate lie!

The futurists within the government are quite aware of the anger within our communities. That is why the Patriot Act and anti-terrorism laws were introduced. The Ruling Class are gonna call every protester a terrorist and every union or support group a terrorist organization.

All the anti-terrorism laws are being introduced because the government knows full well that martial law is on the horizon.

There are lots of people going to bed at night hungry and dreaming about criminalizing the Rich Folks in the same way that the Poor Folks have been criminalized during the past 50 years. The Rich Folks are running scared and with the knowledge that the Poor Folks wanna hang them all on lamp posts!

Calm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: God's Harvard Posted by: DaBear
» RE: God's Harvard Posted by: calm
I always thought HELL must be a pretty cool place-
Posted by: WitchyNy on Aug 23, 2007 11:31 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I mean comsider who is there already-Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Ben Franklin, all the Native Americans, Karl Marx,
John Lennon, all the Buddhists, all the Pagans...

If Bush is going to HEAVEN-I sure as HELL ain't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Whatever the current scientific consensus says" Part 1
Posted by: jbrooks885 on Aug 23, 2007 11:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"I firmly believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old, or whatever the current scientific consensus says."

The unabashed honesty with which this piece was written is admirable, powerful, at times suprising, and, in the case of the above quote, revealing.

Let me preface by stating that I was raised in a left-leaning, free-thinking household that valued compassion and critical thinking above all else. I was also raised in the Episcopal tradition, and I retain my loyalty to the Episcopal church. While my faith and beliefs are ever in flux and undergoing maintenance, the fact of my Christianity never fully fades from view, as close as it may have come at some points in my life. I believe that Christianity to can be harnessed to nurture peace, understanding, and culture progress, including in the areas of gay rights and universal health care. I also believe that religion and science can and should be autonomous as well as mutually enriching.

Having said that, I have spent a great deal of time recently trying to figure out exactly what we're up against, which has led me to (often painfully) expose myself to fundamentalist thought and evangelical propaganda.

Liberals are losing the culture war. That's a fact. The very exist of the term "culture war", a right-wing construct, is enough evidence to proove the point. More importantly, though, the religious left is losing the battle for religion, and this is largely due to its willfull ignorance and indifference to the actual threat posed by fundamenatlism and right-wing evangelical movements.

I was shocked, absolutely shocked, to read this: "I firmly believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old, or whatever the current scientific consensus says."

This is where we're losing. I realize that in my study of "Intelligent Design" and other creationist propaganda, one of the ways in which I fall short is that I have not the scientific background nor understanding to discredit what I'm sure, instinctively, must be misinformation. But I don't know the first thing about geology and I have not more than superficial understanding of evolution. But I believe in it still. I believe in it because science, in its current paradigm, seems to have been demonstrably accurate about how the universe functions, and thus I have no basis of attack to refute evolution nor any desire to do so. But the creationists sure do and they seem to know a lot more about Darwin than I do.

What difference is there in a statement like "I firmly believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old, or whatever the current scientific consensus says" and, say, "I firmly believe in whatever the Bible tells me"? In point of fact, there is no difference. Both are statements of faith, and both statements demonstrate massive vulnerability and naivety.

The difference, though, is that the fundamentalists have found a way to exploit this and use it against us. They have effectively catagorized evolution as a religion and, at least in how they have framed the notion of "religion", they are absolutely right. For most of us, myself included, evolution is something we subscribe to blindly, without really understanding what it entails, and certainly without admitting that it is still an imperfect theory full of holes and unanswered questions but convincing and logical enough to be the cornerstone of contemporary biology.

The problem we have is that most of us are willing to throw ourselves behind the Richard Dawkinses of the world; those who claim religion is dangerous, irrational, and outdated and would just wish it away or, worse, assume that these idiotic fanatics just don't matter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No history = no ethics = useful idiots
Posted by: eddie torres on Aug 23, 2007 11:46 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great line from one of Patrick Henry's godbots: "If I want to get into politics, no history is a good history."

Compare this with Will Heaton, hired at age 23 as Bob Ney's chief of staff, and now charged with federal conspiracy:

"Heaton's lawyers said in court documents that Ney preferred to hire inexperienced staffers because they had not received extensive ethics training and lacked the maturity to question him." (link)

So, "higher learning" institutions like PHC are funneling legions of aides and staffers to the GOP because they are good at having no history, no maturity, and no ethics training.

Heaton did not receive jail time in his sentencing today, but here are a few key lines to keep in mind when thinking about Patrick Henry College:

"Young aides often are in awe of the powerful people who do business in Congress, Heaton said, and 'they forego their moral duties in order to respect that authority'."

"American citizens should be able to trust those who work on their behalf. I violated that trust." (Heaton)

"If we can't find people who can stand up to authority and don't let power corrupt them, then we'll all be in serious trouble." (From the judge).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Compare and contrast: fundies and scholars
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Aug 23, 2007 1:40 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Essentially, what you are looking at here is two different mentalities that span all the religions - let's just look at Chrisitianity, Islam and Judaism as examples.

First, you've got the fundamentalist fronts for power-hungry wannabe dictators. In this category are the evangelical Christian indoctrination centers, the Israeli kibbutzim, and the Islamic Wahhabi religious schools. We could also include Scientology and Mormonism in this general category. This is just straight-up brainwashing, using psychological techniques that have existed down the ages but which only recently have been given a scientific basis by the CIA and their academic allies in psychology departments.

It's the use of driving, repetetive stimuli added on to isolation of the subject, with punishments and rewards doled out based on the subject's compliance with the authoritarian regime. This is precisely what the APA refused to condemn in their recent weekend gathering - because that's the basis of the CIA torture programs.

As Big Brother says, it's not enough that you do as you are told - you must believe, with all your heart, that doing as you are told is the right thing to do.

What about the other tradition in all of these religions? Here we have what's known as scholarship, often aligned with refusal to submit to the various whims of maniacal religious authoritarians.

For example, you've got Gregor Mendel (Augustinian monk), who discovered modern genetics, and Georges Lemaitre (Catholic priest), who played a major role in development of cosmology and the Big Bang.

Jewish and Islamic religious-scientific traditions also have a long history, despite their constant persecution by the Roman Catholic remnants of the Roman Empire. It's worth noting that the Roman Emperor Diocletian ordered the destruction of all chemical texts in 298 AD because he feared that alchemists really could produce gold!

For more on the Judaic-Islamic scientific tradition, see the invention of the astrolabe, as well as Arabic numerals and algebra, etc. etc. etc.

Most of the history of science taught in Western academic institutions over the past two centuries has deliberately ignored these basic facts, in favor of promoting the 'Greek-Roman heritage of Western Civilization' - which, quite frankly, is just a load of bull. A lot of that had to do with promoting the notion of Western racial superiority as a justification for brutal colonial practices.. but hey, that's another topic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Rapture
Posted by: vertical on Aug 23, 2007 1:52 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Rapture is comming, and it is because the God stupid are going to make it a self fullfilling prophecy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Rapture Posted by: DaBear
Intriguing piece
Posted by: DaBear on Aug 23, 2007 2:19 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But I have to say this very oh so Jewish schtick of needing to cozy up to the enemy, while pretending they aren't at least proto-fascist if not outright facist, is unnerving to me. The Jesus Camp filmmakers were of the same schtick and it's just... interesting to be sure but I can't help but feel soiled somehow having been exposed to that stuff. I say that as a convert-Jew so while I understand the author's activity, I shudder inside because I came out of that dark country and never looked back. I have very little interest in Xtians, especially the fundie-fascist ilk, and all I feel having read this piece is... I need a shower. Which is pretty much the same post-rape sensation I've had since 1999 when the fundie's seized power. This PHC place is just a dark smoldering cesspool from which the brownshirts of tomorrow will rise. When they do, I'm outta this hellhole for good.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Heaven in earth
Posted by: scorcher9 on Aug 23, 2007 3:26 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the Spanish world in the most humble hamlet
there is a church since their begginings.

You bet that hardly schools,and hospitals.

Guest who nails the cutests girls ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Channelling... Posted by: zipper696
» I wanted to give your post a 5, Posted by: hurricane hugo
The Future vs. Evangelicals
Posted by: LeaderofMen on Aug 23, 2007 4:53 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You can always tell just how much fundamentalists have insulted a civilization by how many of their citizens are capable of joining in with the rest of the world.

The Middle East: filled with religious fundamentalists. Yes, plenty of them. Look at how much they've contributed to the rest of the world. How literate is their culture. How many books do they publish?

Like what you see there? Get read for it to happen even more so right here.

To wit. How many of our kids are capable of graduating even from HIGH SCHOOL? How many can read? Why do so many in our nation hate science or even know what the Enlightenment was? How many of our citizens have actually taken a civics course? Why is it so easy for our jobs to go overseas? How is it possible that our politicians are nowhere near representing US? How many fundamentalists are in the Bush admin? Rove was able to round up a voting bloc for god's sake. A VOTING BLOC! Of fundamentalists - who were perfectly willing to vote for a raving alcoholic moron just because he professed that Jesus told him to go to war. That God tells him what to do.

Mythology already has saturated this nation at the highest levels. What they apparently want is to transform our nation into a theocracy because... what they have right now is NOT ENOUGH. Think it's enough already and they can't do it? Think again. They're in Patrick Henry, churning out Christian morons to do the work of a mythological god for purposes that can only parallel the worst that Europe suffered during their religious purges before this nation was founded. They're at Liberty University churning out half-witted lawyers who can't wait to replace English Common Law with the Old Testament. Think they can't do it? Think again. Who is at the helm of the SUPREME COURT? Think! Who is at the helm right this minute: fundamentalists who love Jesus more than you love your mother.

It's already happened. We're just waiting for the other shoe to fall. And fall it will because they've already broken the back of this once great nation. Once. Great. Not anymore. Because the Jesus myth is far more important than their miserable reality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Wounds Posted by: openhouse
» I'm sorry Posted by: Valona
pennagal
Posted by: pennagal on Aug 23, 2007 6:48 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is an excellent read!

I was reared in an evangelical church but I survived it and learned to think for myself. I think we have a lot to fear from a selective reading of the Bible and literal interpretation -- or indeed such an approach to any work of scripture. The absolute ignorance most Bible readers have of its origins is appaling. All holy writ is supect, no matter which religion it espouses. Organized Christianity has been selective about which writ it considers holy over the centuries; unfortunately Christianity is not alone in that approach.

If anyone really believes in the teachings of Jesus, then the first one I recommend to them for serious consideration is "render unto Caesar..." Religion and politics do not mix -- they are like oil and water. Unfortunately, humankind needs to be reminded of that in every successive generation.

BTW: After his conversion, Saul of Tarsus, AKA Paul, earned his income as a tentmaker when he was not being financially supported by the faithful. But he was on the road to Damascus at the behest of the same folks who crucified Jesus in a Judiac version of the Inquisition.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I Can't Believe A Modern Society Is Having This Discussion!
Posted by: Chromedome2000 on Aug 23, 2007 7:50 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Come on people, you're debating the works of an ancient, uneducated society that had absolutely no idea of what made the world tick around them. We have learned much since that time but yet there are those of us either through greed or ignorance (or both) that would like to keep us that way. No rational human being could possibly believe in any of the multitude of gods man has conjured up. Guess what? We know for a fact that no gods exist, never have, never will. Religion is the elite's way of keeping the poor in line, nothing else. It is evil incarnate! I wish I had an answer, but as long as a profit is to be made from religion, we will always have it. Religion has killed more people than any other single agent and will continue to do so for years to come. It strives to keep us ignorant as the powers that be don't want an informed public. Hell, consume, consume, consume, who cares. Leave the Earth in shambles for generations to come (if they're able to survive with what we've left them). Wait and die waiting for the Rapture 'cause it ain't coming people. Millions have already. I guess basically the problem is, there is no cure for ignorance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One woman's take on these creatures
Posted by: wireup on Aug 23, 2007 10:09 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am a Jewish atheist and all I can say is every time I read something about these very very dangerous lunatics I cringe. It doesn't matter if they reside in Afghanistan (the Taliban) or in America, they are all cut from the same cloth - insane fantatics who think THEIR religion is the the ONLY religion and if you don't embrace it whole heartedly you go to hell.

Peronally, I can only wish and hope they meet their god TODAY and leave the rest of us in peace!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bart
Posted by: davy on Aug 24, 2007 1:34 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bart asked his friend, "O hi Sally, where have you been all summer?"

"O high Bart, I've been at bible camp learning to be more judgmental."

As an X pat (thank God) I notice more and more how you yanks love to beat the hell out of each, especially over religion, soon you may look like the factions of Islam. I'll pray for you, Hah! bet that pissed you off. Why not live yer religion and shut up about it. Didn't Jesus say something like, "You shall know them by their deeds."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

From a PHC grad
Posted by: Valona on Aug 24, 2007 7:31 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hi. As the title for my post says, I am a graduate from Patrick Henry College. I found this website and Hanna Rosin's article because I have a Google alert set up for the name of my college. I find this "discussion" interesting for its sheer venom and for the wide-ranging differences of opinion. The one thing you all seem to believe in common is that we "fundies" are evil. And why is that, exactly? Why do we threaten you so much? Is it because we would dare to tell you to your face that you are wrong about some things? And yet, I daresay that if just about any two of you started speaking directly about your beliefs, you would find that you contradicted. You probably wouldn't like each other very much in person.

Is it because we believe you are going to Hell if you don't believe in Jesus? We believe exactly the same thing about ourselves, only we know that Jesus is a person and he has died and overcome death to save us from that fate. In this world, we are all broken. We are all living together as best as we can, despite our natural inclination to look out only for ourselves. We Christians believe in love, not hate. We fail at loving all the time, but that's the whole reason why we need Jesus' sacrifice to let us into Heaven. As Paul says in the Bible, we try to do good, but we fight against our very bodies in the attempt.

Don't hate us. We don't hate you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: From a PHC grad Posted by: Suzon
» RE: to the PHC grad Posted by: WyrdSister
» RE: From a PHC grad Posted by: Chromedome2000
» We don't hate you Posted by: ReallyBearish
» RE: From a PHC grad Posted by: TheNamelessCity
» Whatever Posted by: Valona
» RE: From a PHC grad Posted by: leafsong1
The Concensus
Posted by: WyrdSister on Aug 24, 2007 11:06 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The concensus here in this discussion, and in real life, is very clear and if I may, make an open statement to Christians everywhere who actively engage in this practice:

STOP PROSELYTIZING!

No one likes it. It's incredibley intrusive and insulting.

I understand that "spreading the word" is apart of your schtick, but its an antiquated practice. Adapt to modern times and let people make their own decisions without judgement and condemnation. It's just not for you to say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Can't stop! ;) Posted by: Valona
» Your arguments are simpleminded Posted by: ReallyBearish
» simpleminded Posted by: openhouse
» RE: simpleminded Posted by: ReallyBearish
» History Posted by: openhouse
» Bunk History Posted by: ReallyBearish
» Bunk History Posted by: openhouse
» RE: Can't stop! ;) Posted by: picket
» RE: Can't stop! ;) Posted by: WyrdSister
» My reply is at the bottom Posted by: Valona
» Proselytizing ? Posted by: openhouse
» RE: Proselytizing ? Posted by: WyrdSister
» lord Posted by: openhouse
» RE: Posted by: WyrdSister
Two observations
Posted by: sweet_byrd on Aug 24, 2007 12:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have two observations here:

The first regards Sarah Chambers, the "charismatic, funny, and adventurous" young lady who stayed (and bonded) with the author and her family. She sounds like a lot of other inspiring young women out there. I think a lot of people (myself included) on the left are so accustomed to evangelicals who are obnoxious, self-righteously judgmental, one-dimensional, boorish and rude that it comes as somewhat of a surprise to find, an evangelical person with good manners. We have become so polarized that we have forgotten that people can disagree without being disagreeable. This is a shame, since I suspect that there are many persons of the evangelical persuasion whose (as my grandmother would say) "mothers taught them up right" who are unjustly tarred with the same brush as those who loudly and rudely flaunt their lack of deportment. It is a shame that obnoxious, rude people have been so much more visible in the evangelical movement than thoughtful, polite people such as Ms. Chambers.


My second observation has to do with this quote:

"During my year and a half on campus, I never heard any student argue that homosexuality is not a sin, or that abortion should be allowed in any circumstances. I heard people criticize Bush, but only from the right. After the 2004 campaign, I heard a rumor that someone had voted for John Kerry. ... If it was true, no one would admit it publicly. At Baylor University in Waco, Texas, a much older Baptist institution ... the student newspaper defended gay marriage in 2004. Such a transgression is unthinkable at Patrick Henry"

Many commentators (rude and otherwise) on the right have commented about the "liberal orthodoxy" at many colleges and universities. Not only is this one-sidedness unfair, they say, but it leads to a hotbox environment, in which ideas are not challenged, and therefore for those ideas to fall or become stronger. It is a disservice to learning itself, they say, and I tend to agree with them. People who are not exposed to a wide variety of opinions lose something vital (albeit non-formal) in their education. I firmly believe that no political orthodoxies ought to be taught in any college or university for precisely this reason. Sure, there will be colleges that tend to lean toward one side or the other, but when the environment becomes too unbalanced, it is bad for the learning environment and harmful to the students. And I cannot see how a conservative hotbox rather than a liberal one is any better -- liberals tend to give at least token mention to other points of view.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

though I disagree with you, I don't hate you. But if you scream at me, I'll scream back.
Posted by: sweet_byrd on Aug 24, 2007 1:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please see my comment below entitled "Two observations" -- the first is particularly on point. I, and I suspect many, many others, have strong associations between "evangelical", and "rude person who seems to advocate violence, doesn't respect me in the least and screams at grieving widows". I am lucky, in that I know some very kind, thoughtful, intelligent, polite people who are evangelical, so I have something to contrast that image with. I think it is a shame that the rude evangelicals have "set the mold" so to speak for how the rest of America thinks of you. True, this is primarily a PR problem, but it is a very real one. The rest of America's mental image (if I may generalize a bit), is of a screaming, frothing, person who seems to take joy in the mental image of the rest of us spending an eternity in hell.

I know that is not the way that evangelicals think of themselves, or would want others to think of them. I don't even think this image reflects more than a distinct minority of evangelicals. But it is a strong image, and a very real one.

The nice thing about PR problems is that they can be fixed. Disavow demeanor and rhetoric that are boorish. Make your points, but make them with the love that you claim to (and I believe most evangelicals really do) have in your hearts. Put the polite, thoughtful people in front of the cameras instead of those that come across as rude and hateful. Give us an accurate picture of who you really are, because the image that is currently out there does the rest of you a grave disservice. Show us that you can disagree with us, but in a manner that does not seem to relish an inevitable eternity in torment. You might find that a lot of the left's position is based more in the perceived need for self-defense than in any actual hate of you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» camouflage Posted by: openhouse
God and Country.....
Posted by: picket on Aug 25, 2007 12:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is another excellent article written about Patrick Henry College by Hana Rosin 6/27/05 in the New Yorker Magazine.

PLEASE... I really honestly cannot understand why GWB is so admired by these students. Can a PHC student tell me what GWB has done that makes him a conservative Christian[not Alito and Roberts, Supreme Court additions, the Dems helped him do that].

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I blame the Native Americans and their immigration policies
Posted by: Bambi on Aug 25, 2007 3:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well, it's likely we wouldn't be dealing with the insanity of nutbag fundamentalists if the First People had spotted trouble sooner. If only they knew that those outfits with the pointy hats and buckles on the brains were signals of insanity - and waited for the French and some of the Scandinavians.

The French and some of those Vikings have seriously healthy attitudes towards other cultures and sex. This country might just be full of of reddish folks who have good health care, wonderful art, drink lots of wine and use tobacco in a ceremonial way... sans chemicals.

Instead of McDonald's, we could get Indian Tacos on fry bread.

sigh...thinking about these things make me happy

Bambi

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sixties Bashing and all that.
Posted by: talkville on Aug 26, 2007 8:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In 1963, Abinginton School District v. Schempp, made the acceptance of religion acceptable in public (and private) institutions legal. This fact ought not to be taken lightly. Religious studies and theology became part of academic curriculum in all our universities and colleges. The history of the university is curious-- a monasticism gone "secular". These institutions produce our "thinkers" and our "best and brightest". Especially since the '60's and especially in "the Human Sciences", this decision by the court has had a definite effect. The masks of the Sixties bashers (those who say it was nothing but a 'wild-eyed and un-realistic and idealist' left) is just that: a mask. Deeper under the surface, the real effects of those years have been down-right reactionary. The Establishment is not dumb or stupid. They know what they're doing and we are the proof-- living and in flesh and blood. Despite the "civil rights movement" and "women's liberation" since those days, the actual effects are MORE discrimination, MORE racism, MORE exploitation of the woman. Not less. Today, the AARP'ers are transferring power to the next generation; this is where we are. There is more inheritance, more wealth in less hands, and less power in each of our lives. We are now a declared imperial power in the globe. We ought not expect no resistance to our hubris.

We still insist on proceeding from a god or gods to the human to the world. Capitalism (emphasis on the -ism) speaks it loudly. To live as the god(s) is to be Dead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PHC must also mean...
Posted by: zipper696 on Aug 26, 2007 1:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Patriotic, However Cowardly". Since clearly these enthusiasts for the rule of GWB have failed to abandon their studies and hasten to the recruiting office.
Perhaps they have taken an Earthly lesson from the war records of GWB and most of his cabinet...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

religious tribalism is nationalism
Posted by: davidg on Aug 26, 2007 6:24 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What it looks like to many Canadians up here in Canukstan is this Corporate Christian tribalism that has grown so cancerously is more about partiotism run mad than religion. Religion is the theatre of Manifest Destiny; but the patriotism is mystified ultra-nationalism. Thoughts?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This Propoganda Hatching Camp magnifies the danger religion poses to civilization
Posted by: Doug Indeap on Aug 26, 2007 8:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As ably discussed by many authors, including Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Christopher Hitchens, religion has long burdened civilization by impeding the pursuit of knowledge, fostering irrationality, fomenting conflict and violence, and promoting immorality in the form of dogma. With the development and spread of modern killing technology, religion (and the irrationality and fanaticism inevitably accompanying it) transcend from burdening civilization to threatening it altogether.

At this point in history, more than any other, as a matter of survival, we need to find ways to safely transition from cultures steeped in irrationality (including particularly religion) to more reality-based cultures--without provoking a fanatical backlash in the process. Whether civilization will succeed in making this transition is hardly assured.

In this context, operations, such as PHC, designed to not only fight secularism, but to infiltrate, undermine, and otherwise bend all manner of public and private institutions to support and spread religion, serve only to exacerbate the already grave danger and impede efforts to progress to a safer future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Perhaps you misunderstood :) - problem of pain
Posted by: Valona on Aug 27, 2007 10:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
hehe, I am hurting from something quite prosaic, actually. Emotional, relationally-related pain. I was using it as an example of all the pain in the world altogether, how each of us will be hurt at some point in time. How faith in Jesus does not take away pain, but redeems it.

In answer to the person above who wrote about the terrible torture some folks have inflicted on others - there is absolutely no way to make sense of that. No way. It is wrong and evil, and evil is by its nature senseless. But Jesus is the only way to live past it. How can you blame the God of the universe for pain when he himself chose willingly to undergo the same thing for our sake? We know nothing about pain that God doesn't know.

And yes, it is OK not to soar sometimes. To say otherwise is to deny the truth of terrible feelings. Again, Jesus was a "man of sorrows, acquainted with grief."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Questions
Posted by: Valona on Aug 27, 2007 10:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why must you think that only those who have decided against Christianity have questioned their faith? How do you think we Christians live?

The three biggest questions I have so far felt deep in my heart:

- How can the Bible be the infallible word of God if it was written by men?
- Is it truly possible to believe intellectually that God created the world?
- How is it fair for all people to have inherited Adam's sin?

In answer to the first question, I traced the formation of the current biblical canon and found that it has been almost essentially the same from the first century A.D. As the most simple explanation, the church fathers chose books based on whether they were written by men who knew Jesus directly. But even that wouldn't convince me on a gut level until I had read much of the Bible thoroughly and found it proved in my life the way it had been proved in others through the centuries.

To answer the creation question, I switched my college major to history and read for three years on everything from woolly mammoths to geology to biology to the Little Ice Age in the 14th century. I read both evolutionary and creationist sources, as well as older histories from before the distinction was even made. This question, in fact, is a personal fascination of mine. I am thoroughly convinced in my own mind at this point, although I continue to read more and fill in the story.

As for inheriting sin and the responsibility for sin, perhaps only a philosophical question will suffice for me... If I was in the Garden of Eden instead of Adam & Eve, would I have chosen any differently than they did? Probably not.

When I feel pain, it arises from the human condition... but the growing peace I feel along with it does not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» ummm, dude (or lady)... Posted by: hurricane hugo
» RE: ummm, dude (or lady)... Posted by: Valona
Patrick Henry College....
Posted by: picket on Aug 28, 2007 9:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Valona....

Do many students at the college discuss the theology of Rushdoony?

I found this article extremely educational in understanding why homeschoolers 90% of student body at Patrick Henry College chose this college. Rushdoony is considered the Father of the Home School Movement . The teachings of Rushdoony are not really mainstream Christian beliefs.... in my opinion, for example views re slavery, death for certain crimes, war, free trade.. but now that I have read this article I have a better understanding why the students would vote Republican, and be offered internships and high level political employment in Washington, DC

If I were voting for a politician I would want to know if he/she held to this belief system [Rushdoony] especially when they are writing public policy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

~~~NEW stuff from the Maker of All Things~~~
Posted by: CaptainChurch on Aug 28, 2007 10:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To: ALL intended recipients ~~~S.O.S.~~~

Please help me save young [ & old] lives, now NEEDLESSLY lost!
Help spread these [volunteer sites] planet-wide and express real
empathy!~~~
~~~~~SUICIDE VACCINE~~~~~[It works, which is the only point, Eh?!]
http://CaptainChurch.proboards57.com
http://s2.excoboard.com/exco/index.php?boardid=24582
http://s2.excoboard.com/exco/index.php?boardid=15311
http://b4.boards2go.com/boards/board.cgi?user=ChurchCaptain
~~~On sites above: "A New fact about Jesus Christ" and "666 finally
explained"~~~
*
http://groups.google.com/group/TeenAnswers
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BestTeenAnswers
http://groups.google.com/group/answers-for-teens
[~~~All groups:::5 permanent monographs & no chat~~~
like, "Who are YOU?!?" , "The useless War of the Sexes" and "LOVE is
the Real Thing".]
http://www.bev.net/users/homepages/JamesSorrell [My first web
page-2003]
Jim Sorrell [CaptainChurch]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

God does NOT exist
Posted by: vomeggido on Aug 30, 2007 9:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
God as we have been told does not and never did exist. Because if God did exist he, she and/or it would have stepped in by now and given us another burning bush (I wish!)

Its such a stupid lie and deception that has tricked billions into following an invisible entity that supposedly has our best interests at heart.

It is probably the cruelest con job ever exacted onto humanity and anyone who still believes in the crap is a primary reason we cannot get our shit together as a whole.

There is a point of origin to life and whether this starting point has any serviceable intelligence, compassion or power to protect- remains to be seen.

I for one do not believe the origin of creation is any kind of a puppet master- but through the ages this story has been bent to shape that illusion and continues to do so without a shred of truth other than hearsay.

Thankfully I have grown up and now think for myself. I am accountable for what I do with my life- rather than what some white robed entity roaming the skies in judgment would think of me and my actions. And since adopting this belief system I have found that I make fewer mistakes and find myself in possession of a level of integrity which most people do have have nor can comprehend.

I highly recommend it for everyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]