They Assume. Throw the Bible in Their Face!
On January 7, second-term Republican Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia and two friends prayed over a door. It was not just any door, but the entranceway beneath the Capitol that President-elect Barack Obama will pass through as he walks onto the inaugural stage to take the oath of office. "I hope and pray that as God stirs the heart of our new president that President Obama will listen and will heed God's direction," Broun proclaimed.
Standing beside Broun, Rev. Patrick Mahoney launched into a prayer originally delivered by Billy Graham at Richard Nixon's inauguration in 1969. "For too long we have neglected thy word and ignored thy laws," Mahoney preached. "...We have sowed to the wind and are now reaping a whirlwind of crime, division, and rebellion. And now with the wages of sin staring us in the face, we remember thy words." (Max Blumenthal, The Daily Beast)
[Note: I Borrowed this from dickday's post, LET US PRAY here on TPM. I recommend you read that too.]
Here on the Left, we would like to see the masses loose the coils of their addiction to religion. Let's be honest. It's probably not going to happen on any wholesale level. Have you see all those Big Box franchises out there? There's too much money there to be able to eliminate it. I would offer that some people need it. But there is another tack that we should consider, and there are voices out there who can toe this line. Throw the Bible in their face.
As I make this suggestion, I offer that it is based on a single assumption. One can manipulate the text from the Bible to support any position one likes. I grew up immersed in religion. I have been to church more times in my first twenty years then an overwhelming majority of people will attend in their entire life. I say this only to prevent people from assuming I was some passive critic who read The Book once. I have been through it plenty.
When we challenge the intrinsic sanctity of the above-described event, we are outside the sphere [or circle if you prefer] of influence to reach anyone attempting to let the Word into their heart or daily life. I propose we can reach some of these people. But we have to use their language to be heard.
The most powerful statement of St. Paul is his admonition for people to "test the spirits" Not everything done in the Lord's name is from God. That is an assumption. We all know what happens when we assume. So let's challenge these Representatives on their suggestion that what they are doing is from God.
My question for Rep. Broun is whether this a tradition he has practiced all his time in Congress, or is it only now that he feels it is necessary. I would suggest that people consider his failing to have done this sooner has resulted in a great many demons entering Congress. I would thank him for putting up this "spiritual barrier", if you will, because now we can be certain what comes of this Congress has a better chance of being from God compared to what has before occurred. Afterall, we are now " reaping a whirlwind of crime, division, and rebellion".
We should not leave impressionable people to languish under the spell of mortal men. We should challenge them to ask whether the deeds that have been done are reflective of someone who is Christian rather then assume those who perform those deeds are Christians merely because they say that they are. Test the Spirits! Encourage them to challenge the arguments made without demanding they abandon their faith and they may come to see those people from another perspective, perhaps the same perspective shared on this site by many, that these Representatives are charlatans. It is easier to expose the charlatans then to destroy their faith. They are trained to protect that faith. Trained to prove it.
This tack can also be used with the Nationalists, those people who assume: the Patriot Act was patriotic; Oliver North was an honorable man because he wore a uniform; and that Fox noise is "Fair and Balanced" because they say so. I would suggest that recent efforts to reveal FOX noise for the propoaganda arm that they are of the Far-Right Republican party have succeeeded. But it was only possible when we spoke their language and asked, "How is that fair and balanced?" These questions work, "How is that Christian/about freedom and equality/fair and balanced, etc.?" If we only put these questions out there, I suggest we will be more effective and maybe people will be less likely to assume. God Bless America!





I completely agree with your idea of meeting them on their own turf. Excellent blog! What I propose, however, is to discuss how someone can be "faithful" to the spirit of scripture - while nevertheless avoiding the literal interpretations so many fundies make use of. Your method is to use that literal "word" against them. And bravo! That's a good method. Because the fundies will never agree with my method - which comes from a prominent philosophical school of believing academics seeking to use the tools of modern scholarship but for purposes of using how the Bible interprets itself in order to learn how to interpret the bible.
I was actually wondering if that method would work for the Constitution. Which is another reason I was thinking of posting on that topic.
I think I'll just copy this comment to your blog. (which unfortunately got lost in the shuffle yesterday due to dd's similar but shorter and more humorous blog as I recall)
January 16, 2009 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
If there was one thing Jesus was proposes, IMHO, it was that we should question the establishment. He tore up the Pharisees every other sermon. I believe that it was the present day Pharisees putting oil on the door to Congress. The Bible-obsessed attitude of the Fundies will be their downfall. I believe we can win their souls either with or without the Bible because I believe their faith in ONLY the Bible is misplaced on so many levels.
January 16, 2009 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, for sure, Jesus taught to question authority. Especially authority that did not wash feet! :)
You have a good point. The bible "speaks" to the "clean of heart." Those who approach it with an ideology do not have a clean heart. And heart of love and empty of preconceptions.
January 16, 2009 6:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
last sentence: A heart of love...
January 16, 2009 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
You have a good point Gregor, more than a good point actually.
It seems I am always stuck with hypocrisy as far as the weapon of choice. Family value guys--almost always guys--goin to gay or straight prostitutes.
There are other types of hypocrisy. Without cornering yourself by saying that rich people are always bad, harking back to the rich man in the NT who gave all his riches away; overreaching is sinful and sinful in a manner which hurts many, many others.
A CEO who pays himself 68 million dollars during a time when his company was not in very good shape.
That cannot look good to a real follower of the bible. Either book.
I will just continue to rant and take away from your message.
Your message is good enough.
January 16, 2009 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks DD. In the NT talents went to three men, bury it, double it, or multiply it. Those are the options. The Truth, to me, is that the parable was NOT about money, but a lot of people see it that way. I think they are Fundamentalists. I'm not sure if I would call them Christian without aditional information.
January 16, 2009 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. It's not about money. bush... he didn't even bury it!
January 16, 2009 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink