Saturday, August 07, 2010

Disney Land Christianity



Why doesn't Hinn just 'Jacket' in?

Two articles in the August "Christianity" magazine are notable.

The first article is about excess in some churches and is entitled “Money, Sex and Power”. Although the churches concerned are largely American Charismatic churches, it is usually not long before UK churches pick up the baton.

The article starts by dealing with the money and sex scandals that are now all too familiar, but my own opinion is that this is really a distraction from the main problem. Sex and money tempts people in all walks of life and a fall here can happen to anyone. When the Christian showman and “miracle” entertainer Todd Bentley came a cropper over his affair and divorce, some parts of the church reacted as if this was the only problem with his ministry. Some even tried to spin doctor it by making a virtue out of it: It was all down to poor brother Bentley’s “burn out”; poor guy, he was so over worked! Trouble was he was burning himself out peddling junk spirituality egged on by a gullible crowd who were baying for “more Lord, more…”. In fact as far as I’m concerned Bentley’s marital infidelity is the least of his sins and arguably could be excused as having mitigating circumstances. Basically fundagelicalism never learned from the “Bent Oddly” affair and never took the cue to take a good long hard look at itself. In fact by implicating sex and money fundagelicalism could get itself side tracked by putting it all down to a good old fashioned sin that is easily identified. But I’m of the opinion that the real sin is endemic to fundagelicalism itself. The problem will not go away unless fundagelicalism reforms itself.

The article in “Christianity” leaves the subject of power until last. This matter, I suggest, is much closer to the nub of the real issue than is sex and money. Under the subtitle of “The Abuse of Power” the article tells the story of a church where:

The issue was over the pastor’s teaching on a variety of issues including creation, tithing and the nature of spiritual authority. He insisted that these teachings were central to the faith and that dissenters from his line were in serious error that threatened their eternal destiny. It reached a head when one Sunday during a sermon the pastor launched into a personal attack on those in the church who disagreed with him. Naming them – and most were in the congregation that day – he called on them to ‘repent’ and then proceeded to pray for this to happen. During the prayer these people stood up and left the building. Within ten minutes other members of the congregation, some in tears and others heckling the pastor walked out. The meeting ended in chaos.

The article claims that this story is “the tip of the iceberg”, and like all such icebergs it is the “sea of faith” that is keeping it afloat: It is not a case of people occasionally (or even frequently) being tempted by the lure of power as they might also be tempted by sex and money. The problem is to be found in the underlying ethos of fundagelicalism, particularly charismatic and Pentecostal fundagelicalism. That ethos is one of a brash, positively affirming and assertive Christianity flowing naturally out of a culture that, as an affected reaction to its marginalization, is so totally convinced it speaks with the very words and authority of God. I suspect that the pastor referred to in the above quote was less tempted by sheer power per se than he was tempted by the common fundagelical delusion that he was the mouth piece of God. It’s not that this culture is necessarily peopled by the authoritarian, the arrogant, the gullible and the stupid, but the cultural mores of fundgelicalism helps feed authoritarianism, arrogance, gullibility and stupidity.

If the authoritarian, the arrogant, the gullible and the stupid start to populate institutions and sects whose ethos attracts them, then naturally enough one is going find them giving a very hyperbolic explanation of what they are doing. This brings me to the second article in “Christianity” by regular writer Jeff Lucas. In a column entitled “Mind your Language” Lucas acknowledges that many Christians give a fabulous account of their doings using a language of spiritual superlatives that raises the prosaic into an ethereal grandiose realm. Lucas kindly calls it “metaphor and shorthand” but a case could be made out for calling it “spiritual spin”. Lucas, in fact, gives an example that he himself is guilty of:

I used to describe prayer as a conversation, until, decades on, I came to realize that it could be misleading. ‘God spoke to me this morning’ I would announce breathlessly, perhaps suggesting that (a) I awoke to the sound of a booming voice that rattled the alarm clock and (b) I have an ongoing hotline to God and am enjoying happy little chats with him through each and everyday. In truth 99% of my praying is me doing the talking.


Lucas also says:

.. after a while we start to believe in the Magic Kingdom ourselves as I found out when I went to Disney land and actually approached Mickey Mouse and asked for an autograph. Only as I walked away did I realise that I’d just asked a sweating college student togged in furry fancy dress to honour me with a signature. I’d bought in to the myth myself.

Telling, truthful, candid, sobering stuff. But Lucas is taking a big risk: He could be in for some brickbats on “Christianity’s” letters page if the religious fanatics who speak for God decide to mobilize.

The following is an example of the output of one Christian sect very sure that it has an ongoing hotline to God, a line that needs no interpretation:

The all-inclusive Christ, who as the life-giving Spirit indwells our spirit, is everything to us. We must believe the clear Word in a pure way, saying, "Amen," to whatever the Bible says, and we should take care of our experience. There is no need to interpret. Simply take whatever the Bible says and believe it.

No need to interpret: That's right, no need to think about it, just get a direct download from the Almighty Himself and you're away; in fact no need to even bother to get the download as we have it already, so just come to us and we can tell you what to believe. One little problem though: A million and one fundagelical ministries, sects and cults, all with their proprietary and mutually inconsistent authoritative downloads, can't all be right.

Over confidence, over certainty, and spiritual arrogance are the inevitable products of the false belief that Christians somehow speak the very words of God, and this very naturally leads into the abuse of spiritual power and authoritarianism.

8 comments:

Unknown said...

Hey Timbo. How about doing the honourable thing and put that quote in its entire context. Tut tut brother, wrenching it out of context to try to make a weak point is looking increasingly desperate. Is that the best you can come up with??!!
Disney land, Benny Hinn, Todd Bently, considering the author in the same league and a candidate for future dihonour proves one thing for me and that is, you do not understand what you are reading.Perhaps you should read that portion again without your preconcieved ideas getting in the way. As always lot of love xxx

Timothy V Reeves said...

The above comment has been posted by what I believe to be a Witness Lee Publicist* (The same one who signed himself as XXX on the Christian web site "Network Norwich & Norfolk") Just in case he should have second thoughts and this post be deleted I have taken the precaution of transcribing it below to ensure that is retained as evidence:


Hey Timbo. How about doing the honourable thing and put that quote in its entire context. Tut tut brother, wrenching it out of context to try to make a weak point is looking increasingly desperate. Is that the best you can come up with??!!
Disney land, Benny Hinn, Todd Bently, considering the author in the same league and a candidate for future dishonour proves one thing for me and that is, you do not understand what you are reading.Perhaps you should read that portion again without your preconceived ideas getting in the way. As always lot of love xxx



*A Witness Lee Publicist" is a jealous defender and promulgator of the religious writings of the Chinese Christian, "Witness Lee". As you can see he is very jealous!

Timothy V Reeves said...

To Mr. XXX of Network Norwich & Norwich fame (Or should that be infamy? infamy, Infamy, everyone has got it in for me – especially Keith Morris!) :-

Just one or two things you need to let sink in Mr. XXX:

This Blog Post is not, repeat not, about the publicity organ you are affiliated with (or with its organ grinders, for that matter). My concerns are with the large scale patterns in the ethos of fundagelicalism. A single example of that ethos is neither here nor there – it is the general drift of the pattern amongst several examples that interests me. Concerning the last quote I used in my post, try Google=Bible+“needs no interpretation”; the hits on this search will give you a spread of didactic religious publicists who attempt to impose similar instructions on faith.

Once again: A single example only becomes a drift when several samples return the same drift. It is this wider outer context that I believe illuminates the real meaning of an otherwise isolated quote. Hence your comments attempting to enforce a context are inappropriate. Your religious publicity organ (grinder) doesn’t have any authority or control outside its borders, borders beyond which we start to observe these large scale patterns. Any attempt by this publicity organ (grinder) to take control and impose a context of its choosing by using moral duress, self-righteous fulminations or legal resort is an intolerable travesty to the integrity of research. So quit being the monkey Bro XXX.

Timothy V Reeves said...

NB Note to self:
The deeper meaning of large swathes of reality is unknown or at least profoundly ambiguous. Exploiting the sense of the epistemic insecurity and vulnerability that this engenders, religious publicists and pundits are inclined to remove ambiguity by “sharpening up reality” in favour of their proprietary religious views using some blend of gnosticism, legalism and fideism, often backed up with spiritual blackmail and intimidating threats of moral censure.

Unknown said...

Recently, I read the writings of many others who have said affirmatively that the Triune God is not for doctrinal understanding, but for our experience of the reality of our God. If our Savior were not the life-giving Spirit, how could we touch Him? According to fundamental interpretation, we touch Him through the power of the Holy Spirit. But what does this mean? It is meaningless terminology. What does it mean to say that the Son comes to us in the Spirit? The Bible does not say this. Rather, it says "Christ in you, the hope of glory" (Col. 1:27). Christ dwells in us and abides in us directly, not through any power. This is the revelation of the New Testament. But where is the verse saying that Christ lives in us through the Holy Spirit? There is no such verse. Neither is it so complicated in our experience. In our experience, the living Christ is in us. As we turn to our experience, we shall see that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are one. The all-inclusive Christ, who as the life-giving Spirit indwells our spirit, is everything to us. We must believe the clear Word in a pure way, saying, "Amen," to whatever the Bible says, and we should take care of our experience. There is no need to interpret. Simply take whatever the Bible says and believe it.

Timothy V Reeves said...

Bother XXX says....

Recently, I read the writings of many others who have said affirmatively that the Triune God is not for doctrinal understanding, but for our experience of the reality of our God. If our Savior were not the life-giving Spirit, how could we touch Him? According to fundamental interpretation, we touch Him through the power of the Holy Spirit. But what does this mean? It is meaningless terminology. What does it mean to say that the Son comes to us in the Spirit? The Bible does not say this. Rather, it says "Christ in you, the hope of glory" (Col. 1:27). Christ dwells in us and abides in us directly, not through any power. This is the revelation of the New Testament. But where is the verse saying that Christ lives in us through the Holy Spirit? There is no such verse. Neither is it so complicated in our experience. In our experience, the living Christ is in us. As we turn to our experience, we shall see that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are one. The all-inclusive Christ, who as the life-giving Spirit indwells our spirit, is everything to us. We must believe the clear Word in a pure way, saying, "Amen," to whatever the Bible says, and we should take care of our experience. There is no need to interpret. Simply take whatever the Bible says and believe it.

Timothy V Reeves said...

Let me make it clear that the foregoing comment has been added by Brother XXX and that he is not speaking for himself but simply quoting The Ministry he follows. My experience of The Ministry and its Blended (and Secret) Brotherhood suggests that anyone else quoting that same passage from The Ministry and then commenting on it in an independent capacity is in danger of being accused of quoting it out of context. In fact The Ministry publicised by Brother XXX sometimes invokes threats of copyright breach on those who may wish to evaluate its works using a fair system of quotes. That stratagem is very easy to construe as an attempt by The Ministry to influence or control evaluations and analyses of it that fail to publicise it in the way it wishes. So, many thanks to Brother XXX for quoting that passage as I can now comment on it without fear of being accused of context violation or being threatened in anyway:

The quote does little to support the manifestly false statement it contains about the Bible needing no interpretation. I would ask Brother XXX to account for this false statement in his own words. However, he is unlikely to do this as I suspect he feels more secure just offering more quotes and links from The Ministry. But then this is understandable given that Brother XXX appears to have chosen to play the part of the “monkey” for the “organ grinder”.

In order to extract meaning from God's word the activity of interpretation is logically obliged given that none of us are God Himself, and that an act of communication must therefore take place.

Since The Ministry is offering its own interpretation of the Bible for us to follow I read the last statement in Brother XXX’s quotation as: Simply take whatever The Ministry says and believe it.

Timothy V Reeves said...

PS As you can see from the first comment above Brother XXX may not be very good at reasoning, and he has a habit of not engaging the material he is presented with: But he makes up for this by intimidating with his fulminations.