(no subject)

[nolly]

What kind of "New Testament" are these folks using? What "Christ" do they follow?

The day after Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, Repent America issued a press release. In it, they implied that Hurricane Katrina was a judgement from God on New Orleans, particularly on Southern Decadence, New Orleans' annual queer end-of-summer bash.

Eh, they're just some tiny fringe group, right?

Well, Agape Press, the American Family Association's news service (and nobody can claim that the AFA isn't right in the heart of conservative Christian activism) posted an article misleadingly titled New Orleans Residents: God's Mercy Evident in Katrina's Wake. They don't just imply, either:

The pastor explains that for years he has warned people that unless Christians in New Orleans took a strong stand against such things as local abortion clinics, the yearly Mardi Gras celebrations, and the annual event known as "Southern Decadence" -- an annual six-day "gay pride" event scheduled to be hosted by the city this week -- God's judgment would be felt.

“New Orleans now is abortion free. New Orleans now is Mardi Gras free. New Orleans now is free of Southern Decadence and the sodomites, the witchcraft workers, false religion -- it's free of all of those things now," Shanks says. "God simply, I believe, in His mercy purged all of that stuff out of there -- and now we're going to start over again."

Last I checked, this isn't what Christianity is about. I thought Christianity wasn't about exploiting human suffering, and what I read in Scripture seems to bear this out:

Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
(Matthew 25:34-45)

Show everyone that Christianity is not about exploiting human suffering. Take a stand.

Repost this. Don't just link it, copy it and repost it. Ask your friends to repost this. Find out where they really stand when they don't.

Borrowed from bovil, with modifications by orangemike, and a slight change of my own.

Comments

[lirrin.livejournal.com]

Where I really stand is "not Christian", so I won't repost as it isn't my place. ;-) I do heartily agree with the sentiment, however.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

I understand, and appreciate the acknowledgement that "Chritianity" and "fundamentalism" and not synonymous.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

Also, I should not attempt to write when I have a splitting headache, since my typo rate increases greatly.

[snippy]

Like lirrin, I'm not Christian and I don't think it's appropriate for me to judge or lecture Christians.

I appreciate your post, though. It made me think of how Muslims are all tarred with the terrorist brush.

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

No, I won't be reposting somebody else's reaction to somebody else's reaction to a far from simple situation, thankyou. I am quite capable of speaking for myself on such matters, I have done in the past, and will continue to do so in future. And I object to the heavy pressure tactics being used to spread this particular meme (see final paragraph). Freedom of speech includes the freedom not to speak.

I'm a Christian. I disagree with quoted pastor on a number of points. On his main point - the notion that God has taken action in judgment against New Orleans - I'm simply not qualified to say whether he's correct or not. Offhand, I suspect he isn't either, but I would be inetereted to see if there's any documentary evidence that did repeatedly warn of coming judgement, how long his been saying it, who he communicated those warnings to, what specifically they contained, and what responses he got. Not that I would have the time to do the analysis of such evidence justice, but the good reverend should be aware that just saying "I told you so" really doesn't meet the required standard for verification of a prophecy; nor is it a necessary or helpful thing to be saying right now, even if happens to be true.

As far as our response to the situation and our caring for the survivors goes, *IT SHOULDN'T MATTER A JOT* why the event happened. "While we were still sinners, Christ died for us." *THAT's* the example we are called and authorised to live by. My authorisation to act as God's policeman against sinners appears to have got lost in the post.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

I did not post this in lieu of speaking for myself.
I have posted my owns words before, and I will likely do so again.
I posted this because there is a strength to many voices speaking together, and I wanted to add my voice to that chorus. If one were to look over the history of my LJ, zie would see that I rarely participate in this sort of meme. This was a deliberate choice.

Perhaps I should've spent more time tweaking some of the wording; I did not intend heavy pressure -- I can't speak for bovil's intent.

I'm not familiar with Bill Shanks (the quoted pastor) specifically, but I know that there are many who have been preaching similar sentiments for years. He probably communicated his warning primarily to his own congregation and other like-minded groups.

I don't think this was a direct judgement from God for numerous reasons:
1) Based on my knowledge and study of the Bible, I don't think He's much on smiting cities these days.
2) When God does smite a city or nation, He doesn't leave much doubt about who did it or why.

I agree 100% with your final paragraph, and I believe that's the intended point of this post -- it's certainly what I got from it. The truly Christ-like response is not to point fingers and say "They got what was coming to them". The Christian response is the help those in need.

[bovil.livejournal.com]

I can speak for my intent.

I did intend to put pressure on people.

I'm appalled that some Christians believe the things in these articles. The groups in question have claimed to be the mainstream of Christianity and the mainstream of American politics.

While I will never be Christian (that can be laid far more at the feet of these modern Pharisees than it can at the feet of my parents who raised me in an athiest household), there are many Christians in my life whom I respect greatly and who don't agree with those sentiments.

I want to see the folks who aren't Christian but accept there can be goodness in Christianity to say so. I want to see the Christians who don't accept this sort of insanity say so, so perhaps they can avoid being tarred with the same brush as the Christians who preach hate and destruction are.

It's not for me to say what's Christ-like or not, but I do like nolly's conclusion.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

I figured you intended some pressure, but didn't know whether it came across (to some readers, or all readers) more strongly than intended, or if you intended it that strongly.

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

Hi bovil. OK, having calmed down...
(I'm gonna have to post this in two parts - it's gone over 4300 characters. Sorry for any redundancy or excess waffle.)

The trigger point for me was at the very end of the meme: "Ask your friends to repost this. Find out where they really stand when they don't." (Emphasis mine.) That read to me as an incitement to commit harrassment.

And what shocked me was seeing that instruction obligingly relayed by people as mild-mannered and level headed as nolly and smallship1, and thinking "do they actually realise what they're saying?!?"

In the interests of full disclosure: After posting here, I put a more polished version of my rebuttal on my own journal. You'll find it, and subsequent discussion, here:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/pbristow/189912.html

And my calmer follow-up after sleeping on it is here:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/pbristow/190117.html

My current position: If you want to encourage folks to stand up and be counted, that's fine. But you need to be much more careful about how you draft a statement, and how you pitch it, if you want people to spead it around and state it as their own position; Otherwise it will either go off like a damp squib (because not enough people can agree with it as it stands to want to support and propgate it), or... it can actually take off (because people who already agreed with your point of view are reading it the way you intended, and happily passing it along), and end up doing tremendous harm because people who *aren't* already thinking along the same lines will interpret what you've written completely differently. The general public may laugh at it, leaving your opponents feeling emboldened in their own position; They may ignore it, with much the saem effect; or worst of all, they may take offense at some part of it that completely surprises you, and that side-issue ends up dominating the dicussion instead of your intended point, allowing your opponents to get away scot free whilst also damaging the reputation of anyone who supported you.

For example: There was no clear statement of exactly I was meant to be taking a stand *for*; it seemed to be all in terms of standing *against*. It wasn't clear whther what we supposed to stand against was the idea that God judges people (sorry, I'm not going to stand against that one, as it would render the entire Gospel meaningless at a stroke!), or against the idea that homosexuality is a sin, or against the idea that abortion is (in some/many/all - delete as applicable) cases a sin... or against the idea that such matters should be being discussed (and possibly gloated on?) right now when the focus needs to be upon caring for the survivors.

Now, I can interpolate your probable meaning as one thing, because my background has exposed me to the debate over "are we christians here to act on God's behalf in matters of judgement, or in matters of mercy, or both, or neither?" many times before. But if I had pasted your meme into my journal, it would have been read by all sorts of people (both christian and not) who don't have my background, or yours, and who would all have picked up on different things as being the focus of objection. One might as well just spread a meme saying "Christians should all just stop being assholes." Almost everybody would agree with that statement, but we would all mean competely different things by it. (A few would object strenuously to the implication that "all" christians currently *are* being assholes, while others would take offense at the use of the "a" word. Oh, the joys of addressing a heterogenous audience... =:o} )

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

(part two)
------------

The Agape Press article itself was simply reportage of what one person - The pastor in question - was saying; but the tone of the text leading into it was critical of Agape Press, rather than (or maybe as well as) the pastor. Now, there may be grounds to be critical of Agape Press on the basis of their overall editorial policy, or of editorial comments they've made elsewhere, but I didn't notice anything to be critical *of them* about in the single article referenced. I would hope, however, to see it balanced elsewhere in their output by equally straight reporting of dissenting views. So the question is, was your meme *meant* to be critical of Agape Press, or just of the pastor they quoted?

That kind of lack of clarity is fine in a personal journal post, but not in something you're asking not only your own friends, but also their friends and so ad infinitum, to post in their own journals. The added twist of an implied "...or face the Spanish Inquisition to answer as to why you didn't!" was... Well, as I christian, I can't say "unforgiveable", can I? =:o} How about: Very annoying, and difficult to forgive without a 24 hour cooling off period. But I seem to have managed it now. =:o}

Again, apologies for rambling at such length and possibly belabouring the obvious.

Pax?

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

D'OH! And after all that... I've just seen that it wasn't your wording nolly used anyway, but someone else's modified version. Gah, I think I'll give up now.

To summarise the summary of the summary: Y'all tried to do a good thing; I just don't think you did it very well.

Shutting up now. My brain needs food and sleep.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

You're right. I should have proofread a little more closely; I didn't intend to intensify bovil's original text so much, only to use the version that was from a Christian POV. I can offer excuses -- I was tired and had a headache, but didn't want to let this go an posted much longer, since I'd already been sitting on it for several days due to a vacation -- but ultimately, my post, my responsibility.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

I suspect Dobson and the AFA have not gotten as much press on your side of the pond as they do here. (and that's a good thing) To me, it was pretty clear -- "Stand up and say 'The AFA does not speak for all Christians!'"

Here, they speak very loudly and intrusively. Their attitude is, "If you aren't with us, you aren't a Christian." They chose to promulgate this person view, to spread and publicize this quote, and they did so approvingly.

I was raised very conservatively, in small rural towns. I'm a preacher's kid, a Christian, and a sometimes-Bible class teacher. I withheld judgement on Dobson for a while -- until I heard him blame women for getting raped.

Re: What kind of "New Testament" are these folks using? What "Christ" do they follow?

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

thank you; well said.

i won't be reposting it because i am not a christian, and because i don't do memes to express myself :). but i think it's high time that christians took back their religion from those who have been distorting it way beyond recognition, and this sort of post is a step on that path.

Re: What kind of "New Testament" are these folks using? What "Christ" do they follow?

[nolly.livejournal.com]

I rarely do "repost this text" memes, but in this case, I wanted to add my voice to the chorus. There is a power in speaking in unity. I have posted my own words before, and I wil do so in the future, when I have words to share. Right now, I am overwhelmed and processing my reactions.

Re: What kind of "New Testament" are these folks using? What "Christ" do they follow?

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

makes perfect sense, and no criticism was implied.

Re: What kind of "New Testament" are these folks using? What "Christ" do they follow?

[nolly.livejournal.com]

None taken. (bovil's original text is arguably more appropriate for non-Christian's to post; since I am Christian, I used orangemike's modified version. Not that I expect you to post it, but I figured leaving the pointer for others to read later would be good, and this seemed a reasonable branch to hang it on.)

[trysha.livejournal.com]

One could also point out that Burbon Street did not flood as they said, and the french quarter - where mardi gras is the wildest and where southern decadence happens - was mainly unscathed compared to the rest of the area.

If God were going to strike down a sinful city, wouldn't he be damaging the parts of the city that are the "most sinful" the hardest instead of letting them get the least damage?

[nolly.livejournal.com]

Indeed. See also my response to pbristow -- if God were to issue an OT-style smiting, He wouldn't leave room for doubt about it.

[jkusters]

It is good, in my opinion, to see Christians firing back at the whackos that speak in their name. Thanks for this.

JOhn.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

And thank you for realizing that not all Christians are wackos.

[ijs-koningen.livejournal.com]

I'm nominally Christian, meaning that I was raised as a Presbyterian but don't go to church and most certainly don't want to be in any group with the Promisekeeper/Focus on the Family/Operation Rescue nutjob wackos.

I definitely agree with the sentiment posted (even if the last para is pretty heavy-handed).

I'm no biblical scholar, but I seem to remember the parts about loving thy neighbor, considerething the poor, forgiving your enemies, etc. Not so much kicking people in the teeth while they're down as a good thing.

[metaphorge.livejournal.com]

I don't really self-identify as a Christian anymore, well, at all, but I applaud the sentiment.

Jesus done got hijacked by a bunch of terorists.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

Jesus done got hijacked by a bunch of terorists.

Amen.

[karl-lembke.livejournal.com]

Incidents like this always leave me thinking a number of Christians need to review the Third Commandment.

"You shall not take (= carry or use) the name of the Lord in vain."

In other words, don't use the name of God to justify an evil act, and don't bring his name into things in such a way as to make him look stupid or petty.

For example, God doesn't want people blowing themselves up in the middle of crowds of children in his name. Nor does he care if some kid decides to dye his hair neon blue.

Violation of this commandment, by the way, is the one which God says he won't forgive.

This really ought to be food for thought for all would-be Christian spokes-critters.

(Not Christian, but I read.)

[nolly.livejournal.com]

Indeed, and you might find bovil's original wording more to your taste, or closer to your own perspective.

[necturus.livejournal.com]

I do sing in a church choir, but I don't consider myself really Christian, so I can't say that Repent America's statement is or is not Christian. But it strikes me as medieval, the sort of explanation Christians and Muslims alike offered for calamities like the Black Death or the Mongol invasions.

It represents a return to ignorance, superstition, and blind faith, and a repudiation of the last five centuries of history.

[moonfroggy.livejournal.com]

i am really glad you posted this, it is good to see christians who understand what christianity is about

i am not a christian i am pretty much an athiest so i won't be reposting this, but i do really want to thank you for posting it

[nolly.livejournal.com]

You may find bovil's original text more to your taste.