Showing posts with label evangelical christianity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label evangelical christianity. Show all posts

Friday, 24 August 2007

The bond between God and power

reposted from The Economist

Evangelicals in America, Aug 23rd 2007, From The Economist print edition

Once looked down upon, American Evangelicals have now risen triumphantly to the heights


Eyevine

ON PALM SUNDAY 2002 George Bush and his entourage were flying home from El Salvador. Not wishing to miss church, they decided to improvise. Before long 40 worshippers were crammed into Air Force One's conference room. Condoleezza Rice, then National Security Adviser, led the worship, Karen Hughes, then Mr Bush's counsellor, gave the lesson and the service ended with everybody singing “Amazing Grace” and hugging each other.

In the first half of the 20th century, H.L. Mencken, a freethinker, dismissed Evangelicals as backwoods bigots and Richard Niebuhr, a theologian, said that theirs was a “religion of the dispossessed” (or, as one sociologist put it, of the “disadvantaged ranks of the stratification system”). Even as late as the 1990s there was a widespread perception that Evangelicals were poor, uneducated and easily led.

How did these supposedly ignorant buffoons arrive at the heart of the American power structure? Michael Lindsay, a sociologist at Rice University, who has interviewed 360 Evangelicals who have made it into the American elite, including two former presidents, answers this question with a rare degree of skill and learning. The past 30 years have seen a revolution. Evangelicals have almost drawn level with other religious groups in terms of wealth and education. And they have penetrated almost every area of the American establishment. Look at the top of many a professional tree and you can find an arboreal gathering of born-again Christians.

The role of Evangelicals in the Bush administration is particularly notable.

But any European who thinks that they will simply disappear back into their caves when Mr Bush retires is in for a disappointment. Billy Graham has been a spiritual adviser to every president since Dwight Eisenhower.

Bill Clinton cultivated Evangelical leaders, such as Bill Hybels, the founder of the Willow Creek Community Church in Illinois. He also mentioned Jesus more frequently in his public utterances than Mr Bush has, at least so far (5.1 times a year compared with 4.7). Over on Capitol Hill politicians of all parties attend prayer breakfasts and Bible classes.

Evangelicals have become much more visible in the boardroom as the South prospered and people became more willing to mingle work and faith. Prominent business figures such as John Tyson, a chicken magnate, and Wayne Huizinga, a serial entrepreneur, now talk openly about their faith. Evangelical businessmen form networks such as the Business Leadership and Spirituality Network. And a growing number of bosses are trying to incorporate Evangelical principles into the operation of their businesses. Chick-fil-A, a fast-food chain, refuses to open on Sundays and holds devotional services at its corporate headquarters every Monday. And Interstate Batteries, a Texan company, helps its employees to go on missions.

Evangelicals are even invading America's two greatest bastions of secularism—Hollywood and academia. Mel Gibson forced Hollywood to wake up to the power of the Evangelical dollar with his formidably successful “The Passion of the Christ”. Phil Anschutz, an Evangelical billionaire in Denver, finances Walden Media, which had huge success with two films: “The Chronicles of Narnia” and “Amazing Grace”. Evangelical colleges, such as Regent University and Biola, support state-of-the-art film studios. Act One, a Los Angeles programme, trains Christian screenwriters and executives (even if the notion of a Christian Hollywood executive seems a contradiction in terms).

Evangelicals have been purged from the ivory tower more thoroughly than any other religious group (and have often made up for the fact by denigrating the life of the mind). But even there, they are now on the march. Evangelical colleges have been expanding rapidly—they increased their enrolment by 60% between 1990 and 2002, a time when the general university population was static—and are trying to improve their academic profiles.

Evangelical high-flyers have been making it into the Ivy League: in a recent year a quarter of Princeton's students were attending Evangelical meetings.

The Pew Foundation has invested money in a cadre of first-rate Evangelical academics, and other patrons have created scholarships for Evangelical students. Mark Noll, one of America's finest historians, is also a proud Evangelical.

Mr Lindsay demonstrates that the arrival of the Evangelicals is changing both the American elite and the Evangelical movement itself. It is bringing the elite much closer to ordinary Americans (Peter Berger, another sociologist, once joked that, if Indians are the most religious people on the planet and Swedes the least religious, then America is a land of Indians governed by Swedes). But it is also creating new divisions within the Evangelical movement between a cosmopolitan establishment and the populist masses.

“Faith in the Halls of Power” is not a perfect book. Mr Lindsay's prose style suggests that he spends too much time reading his fellow sociologists. His failure to discuss the American armed services is bizarre given the number of Evangelicals there. But he has nonetheless written an impressive and admirably fair-minded book: anybody who wants to understand the nexus between God and power in modern America should start here.

Read More...

Friday, 6 April 2007

the idea that God murdered his son for the salvation of the world, is unbiblical, barbaric and morally indefensible

Cross purposes

Penal substitution, the idea that God murdered his son for the salvation of the world, is unbiblical, barbaric and morally indefensible.

by Giles Fraser


April 4, 2007 5:00 PM | Printable version

Easter is a time for stringing up the innocent. And this year, once again, the sacrificial victim is the dean of St Albans, Dr Jeffrey John. Of course, we all know the reason why he's hated by conservatives in the church. No, not because he is gay, but because he's honest. And it's this same honesty that has got him in trouble again. For, once again, what he has been saying is nothing other than a truth known by most people in the pews: that the idea of God murdering his son for the salvation of the world is barbaric and morally indefensible. It turns Christianity into "cosmic child abuse".

The technical theological term for this nasty perversion of the Easter story is penal substitution. It was dreamt up by Anselm in the 11th century and later added to by Calvin. The argument goes like this: human beings have sinned against God and thus insulted him. Under medieval conceptions of law, human beings must be put to death for insulting so grand and mighty a personage as God. There is a way out, however. In order to escape death they can make some sort of "satisfaction" to compensate God for the insult against him. The problem is, no human being could pay off the size of debt required by so grave an insult as an insult against God. Therefore human beings are doomed. Except - ah, here, apparently is the wonderful bit - God graciously allows his son to take our place, paying off the debt by giving to Jesus the punishment that is properly ours. Thus satisfaction is achieved and human beings are spared hell.

Jeffrey John is quite right to think of this as sick. Speaking on Radio 4 tonight, the good Dean will say this:

"Even at the age of 10 I thought this explanation was pretty repulsive as well as nonsensical. What sort of God was this, getting so angry with the world and the people he created, and then, to calm himself down, demanding the blood of his own son? And anyway, why should God forgive us through punishing somebody else? It was worse than illogical, it was insane. It made God sound like a psychopath. If any human being behaved like this we'd say they were a monster."

Hear, hear.

The two theological problems with this account are that it refuses to believe that forgiveness can ever be a proper response to sin and furthermore that the resurrection plays no part in the story of human salvation. This makes it a heresy.

The first problem means that penal substitution is profoundly unbiblical. Much of the Bible speaks of forgiveness. Debts are to be unilaterally wiped away. It's what has inspired Christians to campaign for the unilateral eradication of third world debt. Jesus clearly follows this tradition. Not an eye for an eye, but the forgiveness even of enemies. Unfortunately, conservative evangelicals don't agree with Jesus. They see him as a dangerous liberal. Instead they think all debt has to be paid off in full. And their message of Good Friday is as simple as it is nasty: sin can only be paid off by blood. Its no coincidence that where Christians believe in penal substitution they also strongly believe in capital punishment. Thus the cross, originally a symbol of the horror of capital punishment, turns into its greatest cheerleader.

The second problem is that conservative evangelicals don't really believe in the resurrection either. Sure, it's there in the Bible so they want to believe in it. The problem is that all the salvation work goes on during Good Friday. According to them, it is on the cross that Jesus pays off the price of sin. And therefore it is on the cross that we are saved from God's wrathful anger. According to this theology, the resurrection has a bit part in the story of human salvation. Secular atheists may balk at the miraculous aspect of the resurrection, but its message is life-enhancing: the triumph of good over evil, life over death etc. Conservative evangelicals refuse this message in favour of salvation by punishment. Well, not in my name.

reposted from: CIF
my: highlights / emphasis / key points / comments

Read More...