May-28-93 05:33PM _The_700_Club_ Followup-To: sci.skeptic In article <

Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

May-28-93 05:33PM _The_700_Club_ Organization: LNK Corporation, RIverdale, MD From: (Bill Riggs) Message-ID: <> Followup-To: sci.skeptic In article <> (Robert Broughton) writes: >For clarification purposes, there's a more fundamental difference >between Falwell and Robertson. Robertson and his organization (and >the Bakkers as well) are "charismatics". Falwell and other "Independent >Baptists" (or "Bible Baptists") are "fundamentalists". Fundamentalists >tend to mistrust charismatics. There is a grain of truth here, but it really doesn't have any operative meaning for a couple of reasons: 1. The political objectives of Fallwell's "Moral Majority" and Robertson's "Christian Coalition" are indistinguishable. Since we're into extended analogies here on sci.skeptic, the relationship is similar to the distinction between the NAACP and the Urban League (or, to make the liberal side happy, between the SS and the SA). 2. The theologies of both "charismatics" and "fundamentalists" agree on one very important issue. I would characterize both groups as Christian "existentialists", meaning that they regard the existential problem as solved when a Christian accepts Christ as his/her personal savior and accepts the Holy Spirit. (Both groups believe in the Holy Spirit, but disagree on the manifestations and importance of the Holy Spirit's activities) In accepting Christ, the individual replaces the motivation and desires associated with the ego with the motivation of the Holy Spirit and the desires of Christ (my interpretation, and I'm certainly willing to be called down by those who think otherwise about this). What this means, sociologically speaking, is that both groups require an extremely high level of personal committment to their declared goals and norms. This is just one of the consequences of having solved the existential problem. In extreme cases, a cult may result, which absolutely defies the norms of society at large, in favor of subcultural norms. If, as in Mr. Robertson's case, the group decides to reach out into society at large, conflict between the subculture and the society at large is inevitable, even if that society is otherwise extremely tolerant. From the perspective of Christian existentialists, the problem is to ease the inevitable conflict between a life which is theoretically centered in and on Christ, and the compromises which result from living in peace in the real world. Now, Mr. Ashlock has referred to such a condition as "anal brain cancer". In exploring the "vector", I would simply point out that when the norms of Christian existentialists and society at large become too great, a great deal of spiritual tensions inevitably results therefrom. It may be possible for such groups to try to withdraw altogether from contemporary society - the Mennonites and the Amish are living proof that this can, in many cases, be done successfully by small minorities in a liberal democratic society, without excessive corruption or destruction of their traditional values. But the other strategy is the active attempt by Christian existentialists to change society itself in ways which will ease the tension between the world of the spirit and the world of the flesh. There are, obviously, many examples where this has been done in American history, ranging from the Puritans through prohibition. Because the definition of virtue and vice in Protestant philosophy follows exclusively Platonic lines, this problem is irreconcilable as long as Protestantism remains a coherent force in America (Not all Protestants are Christian existentialists, but most are; most Christian existentialists are Protestants). Over the past twenty years we have seen both strategies in use: a general estangement between Protestant Christian groups and American society and political institutions, best exemplified by the growth a a separate Protestant Christian school system and by "Operation Rescue", and the attempt by Christian existentialist groups to influence the political process, exemplified by the Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition. Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) has elements of both strategies, since it provides an alternative source of news and entertainment, and since it propagates a sociopolitical agenda. In closing, there are some interesting theological undercurrents which go beyond the distinction between fundis and charismatics. For example, the Roman Catholic Church likewise pursues a sociopolitical agenda which, while it does reflect church doctrine and the moral values imbedded therein, is much less so a no-holds barred existential fight for spiritual survival. This is due to the Aristotelean influence on Catholic dogma, geared towards defining vice as being "too much" of something, rather than being something inherently bad. The "Christian Reconstructionist" or "Dominion" theologians, on the other hand, share the Catholic view of the application of ecclesiastical law to the "City of the World". The Dominionists represent the most recent and radical extension of the Christian existentialists' inner conflict in the world at large - they believe that the Law of Moses is applicable, in all particulars, to modern day America. Mr.Robertson, does have Dominion theologians, including one Joseph Kickasola, at CBN University. But this position is not universally accepted in the Christian evangelical community. The implementation of the Law of Moses would be social action on such a gradiose scale that it would not only ease the existential problem of Christians, but eliminate it all together. No less than the fundamentalist writer Hal Lindsay, has written a book entitled "The Road to Holocaust", in which he reaffirmed the necessity of Christ's literal and physical return to institute the Kingdom of God on earth. As with Mr. Robertson's own published works on the Second Coming, Mr. Lindsay's trademark is the leveraging of the imminent return of Christ (and the accompanying historical events - the seven years of Tribulation and the the Battle of Armageddon) into an argument towards surrendering one's soul to Christ. This is clearly in line with the Christian existentialist world view. And what does all this have to do with Dungeons and Dragons ? Well, in all this, there is little to suggest a conflict between what Mr. Robertson says on TV, and what Dan and Stan are doing in the privacy of their own homes. This could only be a problem for people whose ethical sense is bound up in a Platonic ethical system, people who must resolve the existential problem in accordance with their favorite leasure activities, rather than what Mr. Robertson claims to be the will of God. Bill R. -- "When up a dangerous faction starts, "My opinions do not represent With wrath and vengeance in their hearts; those of my employer or By solemn League and Cov'nant bound, any government agency." To ruin, slaughter, and confound; - Bill Riggs (1993) To turn religion to a fable, And turn the Government to a Babel; Pervert the law, disgrace the gown, Corrupt the senate, rob the crown; To sacrifice old England's glory, And make her infamous in story. When such a tempest shook the land, How could unguarded virtue stand ?" - Jonathan Swift (1732)


E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank