Suffering from 'evangophobia'
By TERRY MATTINGLY
Scripps Howard News Service



[oas:jacksonholestartrib.com/features:Middle]
The panic may strike in the shelter of a Starbucks, when a customer realizes that a quote from evangelical superstar Rick "The Purpose Driven Life" Warren is printed on some of coffee cups.

This would cause any latte-sipping liberal to mutter "Oh my goddess" and worry about legions of Focus on the Family donors invading Wiccan book clubs in Unitarian sanctuaries from sea to shining sea.

Does thinking about this give you sweaty palms? If so, writer Robert Lanham of New York City believes you may be suffering from "Evangophobia."

"It's a healthy fear. ... The evangelical right isn't the new counterculture. It's the new mainstream culture," notes Lanham, in his book "The Sinner's Guide to the Evangelical Right."

"Worst of all, many evangelicals aren't content watching The 700 Club and attending laser-light projections of the crucifixion at the local mega-church. They want to transform the culture you consume to fit their standards. ... And compounded by the fact that evangelicals often share similar goals with conservative Jews, Catholics and Bill O'Reilly, we may soon witness a ratings' sweeps plotline where Will marries Grace after attending a gay deprogramming class."

Lanham realizes that evangelical politicos haven't won many national victories on the hot-button issues that worry him the most -- gay rights and abortion. Nevertheless, he is convinced that alliances between conservative believers and secular conservatives have resulted in "trickle down" policies on taxes, health care, environmental laws and strategies in the Middle East.

"Fundamentalists of every kind," he said, "keep clinging to beliefs that can be very destructive. They are advocating religious teachings that divide people, rather than bind them together. ... They are always on the attack and if we don't buckle down, the next thing you know, they will be running the country -- again."

It helps to understand that Lanham grew up in a non-dancing Southern Baptist home in Richmond, Va. Things got even worse, he said, when he was a teen-ager and his parents joined the kind of Pentecostal flock that "used live camels in the Easter pageant."

Virginia Commonwealth University beckoned, where Lanham majored in English and religion and soon discovered that his activities on Fridays and Saturdays were trumping beliefs he had been taught on Sundays. Before long he was writing "The Hipster Handbook" and his fiction trilogy "Pre-Coitus," "Coitus" and "Aftermath."

The new book on evangelicals contains more of what Publisher's Weekly called his unique brand of "caricature assassination." Thus, there are angry mini-profiles of alpha males like Dr. James Dobson ("The Evangelical Pope"), Tim LaHaye ("The Evangelical Stephen King") and the young Joel Osteen ("The Evangelical P. Diddy"). Along the way, he mocks the doctrine of the Trinity, rips into the Gospel of John and, with a note of sadness, confesses that liberal mainline churches have become fading enclaves for "old people and pansies" who use hymnals.

Lanham stressed that he really doesn't hate evangelicals, conservative Catholics, Orthodox Jews and other traditionalists. He does, however, believe that most evangelicals are guilty of "dumbing down the faith" and consuming shoddy Christian consumer goods that deserve ridicule. Thus, his list of modern evangelical commandments includes statements such as:

-- "Thou shalt live in the suburbs, eat at the Olive Garden and wear clothes made from polyblend fabrics."

-- "Thou shalt become aware of pop culture trends eight years after the fact and co-opt these trends for Christian culture."

-- "Thou shalt own a support the troops car magnet, a fish bumper sticker and/or an embroidered flag sweater."

-- "Thou shalt not speak ill of they neighbor, unless thy neighbor is gay. Then it's okay."

The key, said Lanham, is that he -- along with many others on the religious left -- cannot accept the ancient belief that the Christian Gospel is the unique pathway to salvation. This is the kind of doctrine that he believes creates fear and division.

Also, in the wake of the Sexual Revolution, there is one issue that towers over all others today.

"It does seem that the evangelical right has set out to repeal the values of the Woodstock generation," he said. "The key issue is gay rights. I decided that I couldn't stand back and let the James Dobsons of this world continue to attack gay people. That's the issue that has made people like me want to take the gloves off and fight back."

(Terry Mattingly (www.tmatt.net) is senior fellow for journalism at the Council for Christian Colleges & Universities.)

Maybe we need to start a thread titled "Why Atheist Fear Christianity"

Because their god is a terrorist and they follow him with their free will, so they completely support all his actions and his demands? I mean he only killed millions of people because of his sadistic ways and that's only part of it.

I have a healthy fear of Osama bin Laden and his followers as well.

Would this story read any differently if a catholic had posted it!?

Nah, that would blend in too much with the 900 other threads that have been posted on anti-christianity. Its sad that people mix religion with christianity (and this goes for christians also). Jesus wasnt crucified by atheists and the so called "worldy" population but by the very followers of the LAW (that thing Jesus broke 2000+ years ago), "the religious". Some people just dont want to accept that fact and like to twist it to try and destroy the foundations of the faith. I feel it safe to say that just because you dont want to believe it, doesnt make it any less true. But then again now that Ive pondered on your statement I believe your right. Seems there is an element of Fear attached to the intentions of these types of threads. I look at it like this....Insult is the first sign of losing an argument.

I think people that attempt to insult dialog show their fear, that what they hold dear can't stand up to scrutiny or criticism. When, if there was nothing to scrutinize or criticize, one would hardly have anything to dialog about along those lines. And what's telling is the evangelical movement is bold in it's resolve to impart it's bias and discriminations as gods will, but when that behavior comes up for debate, it's something we're not suppose to talk about!

The reason many people fight that kind extremism is so that we the people enjoy our right to freely speak against extremism. Fear the day when extremism intimidates us so that we shut up!

I believe that it SHOULD be talked about, I dont agree with ANYONE that has hatred towards gays, other religions, atheists, disabled, etc. Christ did not teach on hatred towards others. If someone that calls themselves a so called "christian" yet shows hatred towards someone else or criticizes them negatively, I would serious question their faith. If there should be hatred towards anything it would be the sin committed NOT the person who is commiting the sin. For a christian to show hatred or be a respecter of persons and call himself a christian is a contradiction and needs to be exposed. I agree that this should be exposed to everyone (especially fellow christians) but from your previous posts I question your motive more than what is being said in the article and I believe that is what IAMSON is thinking also. And forgive me if im wrong on this

Judge not lest you be judged. Perhaps if you weren't predisposed to projecting negativism because I happen to be an Atheist that posts Theist and Non-Theist threads, it wouldn't look like you and Son have a problem with the dialog you claim to have no problem with.

Dont even try and make yourself out to be innocent. Casting blame gets you nowhere. I find it rather hard for someone that has an "accept Jesus as your saviour and win a free psp" banner in their avatar and creates countless threads attempting to defame or belittle a religion whether it be a theist or atheist discussion to be projecting "postivism", but forgive me for thinking that you meant this NEGATIVELY!!! . Judge not lest you be judged. If your gonna advise someone else to do this then I would make it a habit to practice it yourself.






spelling errors have been edited

With a clear Conscience, I can honestly say I agree. This would thread 901 on anti-christianity opened by GW. How many has she opened on Athiest Fundamentalists, I wonder?

Existence of God
You may be a fundy atheist if....

You became an atheist when you were 10 years old, based on ideas of God that you learned in Sunday School. Your ideas about God haven't changed since.

You think that the primary aim of an omnibenevolent God is for people to have FUN.

You believe that extra drippy ice-cream is a logical proof against the existence of God, because an omniscient God would know how to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, an omnipotent God would have the ability to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, and by golly, an omnibenevolent God wouldn't want your ice-cream to be extra drippy.

Although you've memorized a half a dozen proofs that He doesn't exist, you still think you're God's gift to the ignorant masses.

You believe the astronomical size of the universe somehow disproves God, as if God needed a tiny universe in order to exist.

You think questions like, "Can God create a rock so big that He cannot lift it?" and, "Can God will Himself out of existence?" are perfect examples of how to disprove God's omnipotence and ultimately how to disprove God. When someone proves to you the false logic behind the questions (i.e. pitting God's omnipotence against itself), you desperately try to defend the questions, but then give up and go to a different Christian site to ask them.
Related to the above, you spend a great deal of your spare time writing to Christian websites asking them these very questions.

You declare on a public forum that you are "furious at God for not existing."

You spend hours arguing that a-theism actually means "without a belief in God " and not just " belief that there is no god" as if this is a meaningful distinction in real life.

You consistently deny the existence of God because you personally have never seen him but you reject out of hand personal testimony from theists who claim to have experienced God as a reality in their lives.

For the complete list, see: Athiest Fundamentalists, Definitions of

Enjoy!!

OMG! hahahhaahaha That IS SO FUNNY! And the WEIRDEST analogy I've heard yet.



As someone who worked for Starbucks in the 80's when they only had 9 stores in Seattle, I can assure you I KNOW Howard Shultz personally quite well.

He's a LIBERAL Jew as far as I know, and is nothing even close to fundamental anything--except about his coffee and his stores, which is normal for a tycoon of business ... why did this author choose that analogy? Totally bizarre. Of all the products the author could have chosen Starbucks was one of the strangest. haha. (funny that a jew still insists on marketing Christmas Blend during the holidays.... you'd think it would be "Holiday Blend" huh? But it's not. There's a reason too)

On the other hand, it's fairly well known that I have an adversion to fundamentalist ANYTHINGS... which includes christians, jews, athiest, muslims, vegans, chevy fans, linux users, whatever it may be. Everything in moderation.

We're only afraid of you because, when you organize against something (Islam, Homosexuality, Judaism, ect) the streets run red with blood.

And that would be classified as an islamic extremist that has their own interpretation of the quran which is a different religion. In some cases in christianity you could call these people pharisees of the now as they were hell bent on something being taught outside the law (Jesus' ministry was against what they believed so they had him killed). I wouldnt be afraid at all of the true believers in Christ but the ones that pervert it (yes that CAN in fact be fundamentalist christians, muslims, extremists in general, etc.)

Since this looks like it is going to turn into a non christian vs christian thread i just want to add we are all as bad as each other. As a atheist i will say that we are just as bad when it comes to being the bullies and we are also quick to play the victim also. Everyone from every race and religion at one time will play the bullie and victim we are as bad as each other we just all prefer to point out the problems with others instead of pointing out the wrong doing of our own.

I can agree with you on that. I think this thread should be closed or removed before it breaks the forum rules any further.

I don't "fear" evangelicals but it seems like the movement is continuously making life worse for friends that I know are good people. Also, the movement tends to be intolerent of other cultures (e.g.- Buddhists are going to hell). And then there's the attempt to nullify scientific progress. And the brainless way so many of them follow dubious leaders who don't even bother to quote scripture correctly because they know their followers won't check up on them. Many of these leaders are wildly hypocritical in their lifestyles and their personal use of church funds, and then they go on to excuse their behavior by tossing a lot of Jesus jargon around.

No, fear is not the word I'd use to describe my attitude towards much of evangeli*spam filter*m.

------------------

Intriguing use of filter. C*a*l*i*s is a dirty word? I've never heard of it.

That is a very reasonable statement you made. I would also agree that there are leaders in the christian faith (and other religions) that seem to like to pervert what the word actually says. This makes christianity look bad. Ive noticed that there are alot of leaders that like to preach condemnation which is NOT Christs teachings. Ive been told that alot of them preach out of anger which is a no-no in christianity. I can understand what you mean but cannot agree that christianity is the cause, its the evil heart of man.

wrong thread

I think it's unfortunate that you don't care to think a little about the very true fact that man made god

And I think it's unfortunate that you don't care to think a little about the very true fact that God made man AND give him His words through revelation. You see the different perspectives here?.

These are both BELIEFS!....there is no proof that God doesnt exist or it would be posted on every sign and billboard you see.

This discussion isnt going anywhere and color me disinterested to continue it.

Edit to note: This was intended to another thread and has been moved to the correct thread

Finally! Now if you'll stop making it personal in every thread I care to post, projecting your fears on my motives, it would be a perfect day.

Faith precludes fact. It's not an "Atheist thing" that recognizes that. It's the context and the logic. That's what embattles some believers when they imagine what Atheist means. As something completely different than those of the faithful flock, and as such aren't to be trusted. Because Atheists don't hold faith that faith can be defined as fact. And theists don't hold faith that faith speaks as anything else but fact. You're bibles don't prove there is a god. That every bible, every scripture, every thing that has ever alluded to god/goddess, are man made. That men ask men to believe they are inspired from somewhere, something, else is where the faith comes in. It isn't faith that makes one question whether or not man got it right. Read any holy text wherein an offensive war god is described and ask yourself if those characteristics are divine, or mortal!? How is god the bearer of all the egotistical predilections that in us, are the seeds of our sinful nature!?

Does one actually believe the creator of everything that exists would need it's human armies to crush it's creation because it's angry they call it, their maker, by a different name? Jealousy, in omniscient omnipotence. You know what it is, really!? All bibles are written by men that describe a god as petty, narrow minded, sanctimonious and egotistical as they are. How about this. I don't believe in the men that created the god in their image!? Because the god of violence and war, is not a god of love and benevolence. But violence and war doesn't garner power and capital in heaven. But it certainly does on Earth. What higher standard to lead a charge, than saying god calls for war? While man glories in the spoils and owns land and people, in the name of god.

No, it doesn't take faith to see the evil of people in that kind of story. Maybe people shouldn't hate Atheists because they don't believe in any god(s). Maybe instead they might consider Atheists believe in a higher power than the one to be read on the page.

I think some of the vicious apparently anti-Christian avatars are protests against hypocrisy rather than condemnations of Christianity itself.

For example

If someone cheats on his wife I might think "what a scumbag".

But I really go through the roof if the guy's been preaching Christianity on the side WHILE cheating. Then excuses himself with some lame statement like, "the devil drew me off the path of righteousness. Please pray for me and ask Christ to guide me back to the path of righteousness". Then he goes right on cheating.

Serious Christians need to take back their religion.

Oh I thank you for saying that. I've said it long before and it never gets through. Maybe a newbie has a chance at communicating past the projections and hate, to the reasoning that is suppose to lie within reasonable souls. If you're so at peace in the strength of your faith, how is it an Avatar offends it?!

Lol and we will just exclude the 900 created threads that tend to follow along with what I said earlier about your avatar. Would you sit back and let someone mock you about your disbelief in God?...thats along the lines of the question you ask me....That being said i can see you chose to defend your beliefs as I do, so the question you are asking is clearly evident without an answer being needed. If I were going to answer a question of that nature my respone would be that the reason im offended at remarks thrown at my religion are the same reasons your offended when someone mentions a diety in your presence....you retaliate and defend your beliefs. Same goes with your family. I would think it be true that if someone talked about your child in a negative tone, even though he didnt mean it negative, you would retaliate to that situation or attempt to defend Him. Does that destabilize your Love for your child be defending him.....i think not. So in reality it has nothing to do with my peace in the strenght of my faith but thank you for your concerns

Again as i said this isnt going anywhere

True. Because you've already made up your mind. So, please live up to your word and drop the projections and that what isn't going anywhere to your liking.

Forgive me GW for your innocent fallacious threads trying to belittle a religion by exposing the negative issues regarding the Faith. How inconsiderate of me to EVER even let the entertainment of the thought enter into my mind. This discussion ends here, its going NOWHERE!

People keep poking at GW's sig graphic, and I can see why. Although make no mistake, I have a twisted sense of humor and I think it's kind of funny. But, just for reference the following graphic of a similar vain would also be offensive to a lot of people--perhaps even GW.



Something to think about.

And again i apologize i have taken the perspective out of context. I will admit that I can be judgemental about these types of things. Though I also find her avatar funny, I dont see its intentions as just being innocent fun. From previous threads ive seen in the forum, this makes me lean more to the motive than the context. If she is an atheist and creates these negative threads (though not all but most) then one would normally automatically think that her avatar is intended to belittle more than it is to amuse.

Eugh, that book is sitting on my living room's bookshelf (along with other titles such as "godless" by ann coulter, "A dictionary of early Christian beliefs", "vines concise (all 5000 pages) dictionary of the Bible", "Eight translation new testament", and others..) .. Somebody save me!



I'm homeschooled (at least until next year) and I don't find that offensive.. But I can't really find an antonym between homeschooling and Jesus...

no it wouldn't and I also home school Miss wells, if one can't have a god giggle on themselves, then I say life can be boring....GW laughs at herself too the loudest ...this sig thing is so over anyways....

I think I already own a Swiffer!

And I'll tell you what, a home school curriculum worth it's salt includes instruction in personal hygiene, as a matter of course. So if cleanliness is next to godliness, winning a swiffer so as to add one more article to the school supply closet, is not a bad thing! My kids do Swiffer our home. They love it, because they like to see how thorough they can be, while being faster than one another to the finish! Sorta a combination of home economics and sport! Because competitive natures need to be nurtured in a world where some ideologies imagine icons have the power to save or damn, people!

Lol....I can say that I appreciate your sense of humor

Don't get me wrong, I was a 15 year Unschooler... If I had not been an unschooler and rabidly thought that homeschoolers were misguided and I posted that graphic in my sig, the implication would be that I thought all homeschoolers were incapable of training their kids to be more than janitors... or that all homeschooling mothers are ditzy housewives. It's why I chose to illustrate homeschooling, I know the image is outlandish and silly.

I don't post droll or antagonistic athiest imagery because at that point, it makes me look like a Christian fundy whether I am or not *shivers* I have to remind myself on occasion that you aren't an athiest fundy, but sometimes it seems like a really fine line and the graphic doesn't help--The image is funny, but when I'm trying to take your point of view seriously (and I do) the graphic has a subtle way of cheapening your point of view. I think that's why you get a lot of "ya, that's funny, but not very funny" remarks. It has nothing to do with religion per se, but it makes a personal statement that your opinion might not matter because you aren't open to many ideas that may clash with your own. I don't think that's true, but the image makes the suggestion or maybe puts the final nail in the coffin so to speak.

It's like the Quizno's Sponge monkey commercials... while they were hilarious and weird, they did NOTHING to inspire my confidence that Quiznos was a good place to eat. In fact, it sort of did the opposite. It was a dual marketing success and blunder all in one.

I'd say keep the image, but realize why people react to it they way they do.