[Vision2020] KRFP Human Rights/Racism Audio - Buyers beware

Wed, 25 Feb 2004 12:39:19 -0800

<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV class=RTE>
Visionaries:
Not long ago Bill London posted a link to Radio Free Moscow where one could download audio from a number of different events.&nbsp; He did so again today&nbsp;and I too encourage a listen.&nbsp; I found the presentation by Stan Thomas from the panel on Southern Slavery As It Wasn’t to be singularly significant – especially in light of the religious nature of much of the discussion on this forum.
I have taken the liberty to summarize Mr. Thomas’ presentation in my own words,&nbsp;but for your own scrutiny and interpretation, please find&nbsp;a transcript (for which I take full responsibility and own ahead of time any errors in transcription which did try to avoid) of a majority of the actual presentation - it is posted&nbsp;at the end of my comments.
Every religion has its own branch of fundamentalism and the commonality of these fundamentalists is the tendency to worship a book rather than the G(g)od their book points to.&nbsp; Religious experts call this idolatry (book worship), the belief that a book represents ultimate truth.&nbsp; This belief/idolatry naturally leads to an intolerance of other points of view.&nbsp; Doug Wilson, and others in the fundamentalist wing of Christianity, because of adherence to one of the five main points of fundamentalism (the inerrancy of the bible), defend biblical assertions that are “indefensible”.&nbsp; It is this type of biblical literalism (Bibliolatry) that creates cultural disharmony.&nbsp; Fundamentalists of this ilk&nbsp;are part of a fri!
 nge in America because most “informed people” know that sacred scripture is poetic and metaphoric rather than literal or inerrant.&nbsp; They also know that the Bible, rather than being seen as the Word of God, is a human report of many peoples experience of God.&nbsp;&nbsp;Reasonable religious people believe this because they accept&nbsp;our&nbsp;"two hundred year old history" of&nbsp;critical study which has declared it to be so. 
Lest Moscow think that the source of the scuffle in this community is Doug Wilson himself, or Christ Church per se, I think it is important to consider what is being put forward as the underlying “threat,” especially&nbsp;as seen through the eyes of this particular gentleman called to the community as a religious “expert”.&nbsp; Make no mistake about what the bigger, broader picture being presented&nbsp;is - it is tolerance of all religion that claims no authority and no ultimate truth and it is intolerance for fundamentalist, evangelical, biblical Christianity (as was described in the presentation&nbsp;by Mr. Thomas) which claims both authority and ultimate truth.
Adherence to inerrancy of the Bible and to a literal interpretation of the Bible is not descriptive of some small fringe element within a broader and more respectable “Christianity,” it is representative of historic and orthodox Christianity which has enjoyed far more history than Mr. Thomas’ two hundred year old history of&nbsp;critical study and those who worship the field of higher criticism (maybe we could call that hicriolatry).
Those who are throwing in with the anti- Doug Wilson/Christ Church/New St. Andrews/Logos/Zumes/Bucers/ crowd need to ponder what it is that constitutes the real rock of offense and what many of the vocal locals are opposing.&nbsp; Mr. Thomas expressed that opposition very well.&nbsp; Here it is:&nbsp; 
Stan Thomas:&nbsp; “My context for addressing the Doug Wilson phenomena is the field of religion.&nbsp; Like other major areas of concern such as economics and politics, the context of religion is now global as well as local.&nbsp; Fundamentalism in religion is not restricted to Christianity, but is expressed in all the major faiths to one degree or another.&nbsp; There are Hindu and Muslim fundamentalists as well as Christian fundamentalists.&nbsp; What they have in common is a tendency to worship a book, the Bible, rather than God, in the Christian faith; the Koran, rather than God, in the Muslim faith.&nbsp; </S!
 PAN>This is usually called idolatry and is defined in religion as worshipping a physical object as God - for instance the golden calf.&nbsp; The advantage of this for the worshipper is that a book turned into God is always right by definition.&nbsp; Therefore the tendency in fundamentalism, wherever you find it, is to claim the whole truth and nothing but the truth.&nbsp; Such certainty often leads to intolerance of other points of view.&nbsp; Within this field, I do not view Doug Wilson as an isolated case, but simply one of the more strident examples of the misuse of sacred scripture in order to propound a very particular interpretation of the Bible.&nbsp; It is not my intention to attack Doug personally, rather I wish to disagree with his ideas about the Bible and the way it shou!
 ld be understood.&nbsp; Within 
the more restricted field of religion called Christianity, he is part of a late 20th century evangelical revival in the USA that we are now experiencing.&nbsp; Such revivals are by no means rare in this country.&nbsp; Martin Marty, a well-known church historian, describes six such revivals in US history, of which this one makes the seventh.&nbsp; Historically, such revivals affect all the established churches as well as spawning new churches, and or splinter groups.&nbsp; Thus far, historically speaking, most all of the mainstream denominations have survived earlier revivals and have, to some extent, benefited from – by increased enthusiasm among their membership, greater interest in their spiritual heritage and stronger personal involvement.&nbsp; Within the evangelicals,!
 Doug Wilson is by no means in the middle, but far over to the right… (portion here not included)
&nbsp;<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
“He is not a middle-of-the- roader amongst evangelicals, but a representative of the ultra conservative fundamentalist wing of Christianity.&nbsp; By now most people know that fundamentalism in Christianity is a late 19th and early 20th Century development in this country.&nbsp; It is summarized by church historians as, “the five points of fundamentalism.”&nbsp; The five points are: the verbal inerrancy of the Bible, the deity of Jesus, the substitutionary atonement (that is that Jesus died for our sins), the physical resurrection, and the bodily return of Jesus (that is the second coming).&nbsp; Many in the evangelical movement, as a whole, believe in most of these five po!
 ints, to one degree or another.&nbsp; Generally, the evangelical movement is stronger in the Southern United States.&nbsp; Its impact on mainstream denominations has mainly come through their Southern constituency - United Methodists and United Presbyterians to name a couple of examples.&nbsp; The more conservative wing of the evangelical movement, which I consider the fundamentalist wing, has taken over the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church and is threatening to take over the Southern Baptist denomination which is the largest single denomination in America.&nbsp; The Wilson impact on the Palouse has roots in the Evangelical Free church tradition that came from opposition to state churches in Scandinavia…(portion here not included)<o:p></o:p>
&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>
“Doug seems to have subscribed to an interpretation of the Bible that emphasizes its inerrancy to the point that he finds himself having to defend biblical assertions that are really indefensible – such as the condoning of slavery.&nbsp; This kind of biblical literalism is a 20th century heresy created by the early 20th century fundamentalist movement.&nbsp; Structurally, such religious fundamentalism is found in most of the major faiths of the world.&nbsp; It happens wherever sacred scripture is worshipped for itself rather than what it points to.&nbsp; It is the sin of worshipping the golden calf rather than what the calf is meant to point to.&nbsp; In the Christian context, it’s called bibliolatry, or the idolatry of the Bible.&nbsp; Most mainstream denominations officially disavow such a literalistic approach to understanding the Bible despite the fact that they often harbor many in their congregations who, either out of ignorance or choice, continue to misuse sacred scripture in a literal way.<o:p></o:p>
&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>
“Biblical literalism is widespread in this country and is a fellow traveler with fundamentalist inerrancy.&nbsp; It is at odds with the critical study of the Bible that now enjoys a two hundred year history.&nbsp; Critical study is now the basis for bible study in most mainstream denominations.&nbsp; It asks serious questions about authorship, context and language which helps the Bible speak to the present day.&nbsp; Following decades of exhaustive study of the Bible, informed people tend to view sacred scripture as poetic and metaphoric rather than literal or inerrant. &nbsp;The Bible, rather than being seen as the Word of God, is seen as a huma!
 n report of many peoples experience of God.”<o:p></o:p>
&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>
&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>
Glad tidings,&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>
P.S. Stile 
IITimothy 3:16-17<o:p></o:p>
&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>
&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>
&nbsp;</DIV></div> <hr> <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMBENUS/2734??PS=">Click, drag and drop. My MSN is the simple way to design your homepage.</a> </html>