The Sinner's Guide to the Evangelical Right

[Are_grits_groceries]

Editor's Note: The following excerpt has been reprinted with permission from The Sinner's Guide to the Evangelical Right by Rob Lanham, Penguin Putnam, 2006.

"The real theological problem in America today is no longer the religious Right, but the nationalistic religion of the Bush administration." -- Reverend Jim Wallis, God's Politics.

Until the sixties, evangelicals were just as likely to be Democrats as they were to be Republicans.

Many evangelicals were on the front lines in the fight for women's suffrage, were vocal antiwar opponents, and led the fight for civil rights. Meanwhile, tent revival pastors fueled McCarthyism and covertly organized KKK meetings among their church elders. But the advent of the ERA Movement, the Roe v. Wade decision, and a godless culture filled with bra burnings and rock music created a unifying shift to the right. By the time abortion was made legal, many evangelicals found themselves curled up in the fetal position inside the headquarters of the RNC waiting for the world to end.

Following the election of Jimmy Carter, an outspoken Christian who was candid about being born-again, Time deemed 1976 "The Year of the Evangelical." Ironically, most evangelicals felt little kinship with this moderate Democratic president, given his support of ERA and his refusal to deny women the right to choose.

Evangelical leaders like Jerry Falwell and Tim LaHaye believed the time had come to get evangelicals mobilized behind a candidate that represented their values. That candidate was Reagan, the first president to come to power with the help of what has come to be known as the Religious Right. Reagan was also the first high-level politician to work opposite a chimpanzee (as he did in Bedtime for Bonzo), a noble tradition carried on today by Vice President Dick Cheney. ...


Fundamental Contradictions: Picking and Choosing

Anyone who's read the Bible knows some of its disturbing content could give "Grand Theft Auto" a run for its money.

War, murder, rape, slavery, men who wear sandals -- parts of the Bible should come with adult content warning labels. If you want a peaceful religion, even Ted Haggard of the National Association of Evangelicals says, "Choose Buddhism." Nevertheless, many evangelicals love the Bible so much they're willing to accept the whole darn thing, even the bizarre parts, at face value. They brag that they don't "pick and choose" from the Bible and refer to themselves as "Bible-believin'" Christians.

Yet the glaring list of passages that typical evangelicals ignore could fill Falwell's dessert refrigerator at the Moral Majority to capacity. Leviticus 19:27, for instance, prohibits shaving, a commandment to which millions pay no attention. Likewise, Leviticus 19:19 forbids the wearing of mixed fibers. Needless to say, Pat Robertson is clearly guilty of defying this commandment, given his collection of polyester flag ties.

And most glaringly, as progressive evangelical leaders like Jim Wallis continue to drive home, there are roughly three thousand verses in the Bible devoted to helping the poor, yet typical evangelicals spend more time griping about the costs of welfare or bashing The Da Vinci Code than choosing to help the less fortunate.

Truth be told, Bible-believin' evangelicals are more guilty of "picking and choosing" than the liberal Christians they often accuse of the same transgression. Here are some key verses Bible-believin' evangelicals pick and choose to ignore.

Key Verses Bible-Believin' Evangelicals Pick and Choose to Ignore:

On slavery: "Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh." (1 Peter 2:18, NIV)

On rape: "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver." (Deuteronomy 22:28, NIV)

On women wearing veils: "And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head." (Corinthians 11:5, NIV)

On illegitimate children being barred from church: "A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord." (Deuteronomy 23:2, KJV)

On Falwell's apparent love of McNuggets: "...put a knife to thy throat, if thou a man given to appetite." (Proverbs 23:2, 3, KJV)

Homosexuality: God Hates Fags (and Shrimp Scampi)

Since much of the Bible reflects archaic customs (the blood sacrifice of animals is commanded by God in many scriptures, for instance), deciphering which biblical laws Christians should abide by has become the jurisdiction of theologians and televangelists, the latter group being completely unreliable since they're often stoned from their own hairspray fumes. When faced with troubling or inconvenient laws -- like the Bible's promotion of slave owning or its ban on shaving -- most evangelicals say, "That's an irrelevant Old Testament-era commandment," and change the subject to activist judges. Still, when the Bible says God finds an act "detestable" or calls something an "abomination," evangelicals insist it must be avoided at all costs. According to most evangelicals, the big abomination is (no shocker here) homosexuality.
(there's more)



http://www.alternet.org/story/41031/

One of my favorites!

[JerseygirlCT]

1. Yup. Many of us more liberal-minded Christians have been saying

this for years and years.

Literal readings of scripture get you absolutely nowhere except where you want to be: hate, misunderstanding, bigotry. It definitely takes a bit more work and thought, but reading scripture with a heart open to the message, instead of as if it's a rulebook, leads to the hard work of seeking to find God in every person, and treating every person as worthy of rights and dignity.

[Catshrink]

2. I use the term "Old Testament" Christians to refer to Falwell, et al.

because so many of their intolerant spewages are from the OT. All that lovin' and carin' and feedin' the poor crap in the New Testament seems to get lost unless they need to use Jesus as a prop.

[MineralMan]

3. And don't even get started on that sect of Christianity

termed "Messianic Judaism." Now, there's a strange thing to behold.