More Venom from the "Spirit-Filled" Camp


  "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law." - Galatians 5:21-23

"You will know them by their fruits." - Matthew 7:20

Chippy the Attack Gopher

on the rampage against

those mean ol' Pharisee types

who read their Bibles!

"How dare you question

the Mighty Prophet

Gopher,  heretic?!?!?"

Recently, a fellow Christian writer and biblical counselor and I were attacked online, for daring to question the veracity of extreme "deliverance ministries" (and those who set themselves up as "prophets"). What made this particular attack so odd was that neither he nor I commented with a critical spirit, challenged anyone to a debate, OR questioned the fruit of the individual's life. What we were questioning, (and quite objectively, I might add), was the aberrant theology being promoted. Neither of us said anything the least bit sarcastic or inflammatory, nor did we attempt to bait the blog owners. This rabid hatred completely blind-sided me -- from individuals claiming to be Christ-followers.

Moreover, on the basis of one reference to 1 Corinthians 11-14 (cessation of the sign gifts) and 2 Thessalonians (referring to the lying signs and wonders in the last days), I was then told I was "obviously not a Christian"; "could not be saved"; sarcastically dismissed for my polite tone; called "trite"; and accused of raising a "strawman" (sic). I think the writer meant "red herring" in this context, but I'll let that slide. This was on the basis of ONE COMMENT simply giving a hermaneutic frame of reference for the apologist's comment. As a newcomer to this particular blog, I deliberately worded my explanation as respectfully and diplomatically as possible, leaving rhetoric and argument out of it.

The attack on the other writer, who actually responded to the sneering and personal insults, was even worse. This hatefulness was on a "Christian" blog, from people who don't even know us. Sadly, we agreed with our attackers' mission - a ministry to ex-homosexuals (the blog exposes the lie of homosexuality, and gives the biblical truth to those coming out of this lifestyle). None of that mattered. We gave the (substantial) biblical proof of A) cessation of the sign gifts; B) that demonic deliverance in the Bible was an act of mercy, not a way of ridding sin; C) people are delivered from life-dominating sins by faith and repentance, NOT by the "casting out" of the demon of ____(fill in sin of choice).

None of that mattered. We dared touch the sacred cow of C. Peter Wagner's fictitious "Five-Fold Ministry", and thus were deemed worse than pagans. My most heinous offence? Suggesting that freedom from homosexuality was by repentance, rather than "supernatural deliverance complete with prophetic words of knowledge". How dare I question a Prophetess, who is now a Prayer/Intercessor/Fast-er (for a small donation to her ministry, of course). Never mind that no biblical prophet(ess) ever charged a cent for praying.

Most of my regular readers know that I am a nouthetic counselor in training, and am publishing a book about biblical repentance from eating disorders. Many of you have read my testimony, through my "Redeemed from the Pit" blog (where I get attacked, regularly, for having the audacity to call bulimia a sin). After being set free by the grace of God, after 17 years enslaved, I think I know something about the power of the Holy Spirit. (Despite the unwarranted and relentless attack by these rabid charismaniacs to the contrary). My colleague, the apologist? A "rock-throwing Pharisee-cum-Sadduccee". Again, the venom was poured out on us for no other crime than being cessationists, and holding a "Prophetess'" claims up to the light of Scripture (which 1 John 4:1 commands us to do). According to my Bible, God takes false prophets (and prophetesses) very, very seriously.

What these rabid, hate-filled, desperation-driven seekers of signs fail to realize is that when one makes an extra-biblical claim, the burden of proof is on them. An argument cannot be made from silence. The Lord Jesus said "repent and believe"; not "pray for a demon to be cast out and to receive an extra-biblical prophetic word". The Canon of Scripture is closed, but even if we agree to disagree on that, the proof is in the unChrist-likeness of their response. Jesus Himself said that " a man speaks out of the abundance of the heart".  Our words were "filled with grace and seasoned with salt" (Colossians 4:6), but the "Spirit filled Christians" responded with malice, slander and harshness. They returned goodwill with evil. They did not content themselves with a single snide remark, but continued to slander us even after we graciously bowed out of further dialogue. Hmm...they were filled with a spirit of something, that's for sure.

Rotten fruit simply doesn't grow from a good tree. I admit I'm perplexed and cannot explain where this evil comes from in ones who claim the Name of Christ, but a brief look at the three moderators' blogs revealed morbid prose about flesh burning off of bodies in hell, below-the-belt verbal assaults on other people, and an irrational (albeit unsupported) allegiance to the new-fangled idea that the office of Apostle has somehow been restored. Aha...so that's it, I thought. Pride....and a desire to be self-important. We inadvertently 'messed with' that idol, and now their feathers are all ruffled!' No doubt when they're passing out on the floors of their sanctuaries, barking like dogs or screaming gibberish, they think themselves oh-so-much holier than we mere students of the Word, and therefore are vindicated by cursing and damning us with no cause. Yes. So much holier.

By their fragrant fruits ye shall know them, indeed. They act just like their father.

The ultimate irony? One of the rabid 5-Folders has John Macarthur's "Grace to You" linked at the top of his homepage. I laughed out loud when I saw that -- Macarthur makes the two of us look like continuationists!!!

Local Second Grader Suspended over Jesus Sketch

This from my home state of Massachusetts today: a second-grade class was instructed to draw pictures of "something that reminded them of Christmas". (Kinda surprising....in my kids' elementary school and preschool, Kwaanza and Hannukah seem to take precedence).

The point of the exercise was to get the kids creatively sketching something associated with the holiday. (Read the whole article here.)

An eight year old draws a crucifix - which he no doubt sees every week at church - and has the audacity to associate the cross with Christmas (very perceptive of him, by the way - few adults do as much. Baby Jesus in the manger is so much less confrontational and threatening than a Christ Who provides the only means of salvation, and demands repentance and surrender.)

The boy is dismissed from school and required to undergo a psych evaluation (we all know how objective and unbiased they are, right?) before he can return to the public school system.

People, this is the "Judeo-Christian culture" in which we live. Free speech is great, until you mention Jesus.

He (still) makes people uncomfortable.

From Glenn, at "Sanity in an Upside Down World": "You know, it’s a really upside-down world where a school system can teach grade-school kids all about homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle but requires a psychological evaluation of a child who draws a stick-figure of Christ on the cross when asked to draw something reminding him of the day we celebrate Christ’s birth."

Good point.

I Am, For Once, at a Loss for Words

Okay....so here's the story.

There's this general ED recovery support group thing in the area, and once a month they bring people in who are 'recovered' to share their story of 'hope and inspiration'. So I found out about it, talked to the director by phone, (very nice lady, btw) and she had me send her my story/testimony by e-mail. I told her about my book project (mentioning the fact I am a Bible-believing Christian who counsels online), and tentatively I'm going to speak to the group. If you know anything about me, you know that Jesus is kinda important in my life...oh yeah, and He's the one who freed me of all those nasty addictions. I'm always one to give credit where credit is due.

I just g0t the following e-mail back from her:

Hi Marie,

Thanks so much for sending this along. It sounds like you’ve had an amazing journey, one that will surely impact so many people positively.

One thing I wanted to ask, though, given that we have people from all different faiths and walks of life, if there would be any way you’d consider using the term spirituality vs. strictly Christian. While we recognize that each person’s story is unique, we also want to be sure to offer stories that will allow people to connect as fully as possible.

I’m willing to talk with you more about this, if it would be helpful.

Thanks, again, for sending this along. Let me know what you think!

Now, I already know what I THINK, but I'm trying to figure out how to respond honestly, graciously, while explaining that while I have no intentions of proselytizing - but my testimony loses it's point if I delete any mentions of Christ. It sounds like that's the "real deal" - I'm sure there is no objection to the fact that I am a Christian, just so long as I keep quiet about it.

Interestingly, this organization carries adds for Remuda Ranch (a "Christian" inpatient center) on its website.

Comments and advice...please. I am going to run errands to clear my head before responding by either phone or e-mail. Not sure which is more appropriate.

UPDATE:

I just responded:

Thanks so much for getting back to me so quickly. Let's see....

First of all, I understand your concern. Speaking in a secular setting always demands an objectivity and different tone than (for example) to a teen youth group who all know each other very well. However, I honestly don't think substituting spirituality for Christian(ity) would work here - because my entire recovery hinged on what I allowed God to do in my life. "Spirituality" is a very broad term, which encompasses occultism, panentheism, and wicca - but I wouldn't want to imply that tarot cards or a tree or bush would be able to do anything about someone's addiction. Even the 12-Step programs started out being Christian, recognizing the individual's need of God. Many of the key incidents mentioned in my story occurred in or in relation to a church...so even if I didn't specifically mention the fact that I am a Christian, the listeners would figure it out by implication.

If what you're asking is to eliminate any mention of God (or, more specifically, Jesus Christ) from the presentation, I honestly couldn't do that because there'd be nothing left to tell. Seriously - we'd have no story. :-) I seek to give credit where credit is due, and in my personal experience, He gets all of it. I totally get where you're coming from - wanting to avoid offending anyone - but leaving His name out of my recovery story would leave a watered-down (or at best, very incomplete) version of events. I don't have an agenda to condemn or convert anyone - just to share hope through relating my experience of restoration. Folks tend to take or leave it, but I don't believe in shoving anything down anyone's throat. I noticed the advertisement for Remuda Ranch on ****'s website, so I figured Christian perspectives were okay. If this group is not an appropriate venue for my particular story, I completely understand and as they say, no harm no foul! But I hope my explanation makes sense and you can understand why, while a few details may certainly be omitted without affecting the thrust of the story, I cannot eliminate all references to Christ and still have it be an accurate rendering of my journey to health.

Thank you so much for your kind time and attention, and have a great weekend!

Sincerely,

That'll probably go over like a ham at a bar mitzvah, but it was the best I could do. Sigh. Oh well.

Sign of the Times

The Associated Press headlines Benedict's visit: "Pope Expresses Respect for Islam in Jordan".

The sheer irony of this statement is impossible to miss. This is from the same man who re-affirmed the Council of Trent's heresy that salvation is not obtained by grace through faith alone. Spitting in the face of Protestant and Evangelical Christians worldwide, in July 2007 he declared that Gospel-preaching churches "cannot properly be called 'churches'" and categorically affirmed that we are outside the "one true faith" by our refusal to embrace Romanist apostasy.

The article leads:

Pope Benedict XVI began his first trip to the Middle East on Friday, expressing his "deep respect" for Islam and hopes that the Catholic Church would be a force for peace in the region as he treaded (sic) carefully following past missteps with Muslims and Jews.

"My visit to Jordan gives me a welcome opportunity to speak of my deep respect for the Muslim community, and to pay tribute to the leadership shown by his majesty the king in promoting a better understanding of the virtues proclaimed by Islam," Benedict said shortly after landing in Jordan, a mostly desert country where Moses is said to have viewed the Promised Land.

He said Jordan was in the forefront of efforts to promote peace, inter-religious dialogue and to "curb extremism."

Jordan's king praised the pope and said the world must reject "ambitious ideologies of division."

"We welcome your commitment to dispel the misconceptions and divisions that have harmed relations between Christians and Muslims," said Abdullah.

Wow...so the head of one of the "one true church" is committed to "dispelling divisions" between Christianity and a sickeningly violent, demonically-inspired false religion? Good luck with that. Seems Christ Himself had a little something to say about unity with those who would destroy the Church:

"But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.

Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn
" 'a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -
a man's enemies will be the members of his own household. (Matthew 10:33-37)"

The Cross is, by definition, divisive. It is an offense and a stumbling block to those who don't believe. If the Vatican's head honcho isn't man enough to admit that publicly, I truly pity and fear for his soul.

Don't believe that Islam condones murder of members of one's own family who turn to Christ? Voice of the Martyrs is a good place to start (also see Islam's "holy" books, the Haddith 9'57 and Sura 3'85).

The article also states:

Benedict's three-day stay in Jordan is his first visit to an Arab country as pope. He is scheduled to meet with Muslim religious leaders at Amman's largest mosque — his second visit to a Muslim place of worship since becoming pope in 2005. He prayed in Istanbul's famed Blue Mosque, a gesture that helped calm the outcry over his remarks.

(emphasis mine)

Did you catch that? The self-proclaimed "Vicar of Christ" - His very "representative" on earth - is now praying in pagan houses of worship. Somehow, I can't imagine Jesus Christ, during His sojourn to Caesarea Philippi, praying in the nearby temple of Pan to placate the region's Canaanites. (With all this political correctness, it makes me wonder whose god the pope is praying to). This is not exactly a new precedent - his predecessor said mass with a statue of Buddha and other pagan symbols on the altar. Don't believe me? I'll post a photograph if challenged. It was an "interfaith mass" - one in which only Evangelical leaders, to their credit, refused to participate.

One shouldn't expect highly principled behavior from a politician, and that is precisely what the pope is. I suppose this spiritual dualism is all in the name of "respect" - which presumably makes it more palatable. The Muslim world is a formidable force to be reckoned with, and no politician with interests to protect wants to alienate jihadists.

Would that the pope had so much "respect" for Bible-believing Christians. May God open his eyes to the Truth in Christ.

Theo-humor

This is funny...especially for anyone who's ever visited a "seeker sensitive"-type church. (I saw Joel Osteen on TV once. I turned it off after about 10 minutes).
























Barbara, you link to the greatest things on your blog. I can't believe I've never discovered Calvinist Cartoons.

UPDATE: It gets better. Read this satire "25 warning signs that you might be obsessing about Calvinism" over at Purgatorio! There are too many graphics to download in order to post it over here. I'm far too lazy (and the kiddies need breakfast).

#17: You hear a news story about some criminals being “reformed” and your first thought is to wonder how many criminals are arminians. ROFL!!

"Speed" and Sinners Prayer for Tots

Last summer, I taught the incoming kindergarten class for our VBS program. (We go to a great church that teaches the Gospel clearly, and is filled with godly, fruit-producing people). I stopped short of leading the kids in a "Sinner's Prayer", as I do not believe 5-year-olds can think abstractly enough to understand substitutionary atonement. (I should mention that said-prayer was simply tacked on the end of day 5's curriculum. I was allowed in all things to use my own best judgment, which was especially fortunate when the curriculum suggested arts and crafts projects that were beyond my feeble ability. The point is, no one at the church pressured me to do the "Sinner's Prayer" with the little ones, and in fact the other adult teaching with me also agreed it was not such a good idea). The kindergarteners love Christ, know He loves them, and grasp the concept of sin. That's a good start, and age-appropriate. However, my teenaged helpers then led half the class into a separate room, presumably to color, and led them in just such a prayer - returning excitedly with a list of children who "had given their lives to Christ." I didn't have the heart to tell them how easy it is to get a 5-year-old to repeat a prayer after you.

Last Halloween, I ordered a packet of tracts from ATS to hand out to Trick-or-Treaters, geared toward kids and cleverly illustrated. No Gospel, no mention of repentence, only a vague reference to Christ being the light of the world. An incomplete gospel is worse than no gospel at all. Into the trash they went.

Okay......my kids participate in AWANA, which is a great program and motivates children to dig into the Scriptures. Last year, my 4-year-old son had nearly two dozen Bible verses (and references!) memorized, despite not knowing how to read. He LOVED learning about God (still does), and could explain the premise of the Gospel quite well for his age. One night in the bathtub, he reflected, "Jesus loved us so much He took our punishment, because 'all have sinned'. 'God loved us and sent His son'. And He is sad when we do naughty things - that's sin. We need to be nice and try to do what makes God happy." Well said, for a 4-year-old. I teach him about God, incorporate biblical principles into daily life (as we do with all our kids), bring them to church, and so on. But I will not lead Stefan in a "Sinner's Prayer", as I believe it is nothing more than an incantation at this age. Or at any age, when you leave out heartfelt repentance.

I couldn't help noticing, though, that the "Skipper's" book from his AWANA club tells the kids all about trusting Jesus, but leaves out the need for repentance. No explanation of the new life. Do we expect regeneration from 5-year-olds who have (by and large) been brought up in Christian homes? Why not just lead them in the ways of God, and let the Holy Spirit convict them into a true conversion, when they're old enough to grasp the implication of how serious sin really is? Leading kids into a "ask Jesus into my heart" prayer can actually short-circuit their spiritual growth later on. Just talk to any youth pastor - many teens point to a moment in early childhood when they "prayed a prayer". Their claim to be saved hinges on that one moment, but sometimes show no fruit and are indistinguishable from their non-Christian friends (except maybe by their Christian T-shirts).

Stefan came home with a tract this week, the ATS publication "Speed". I put it aside (he can't yet read it by himself). Here's an excerpt:

Here is the game plan God gave us in the Bible:

1. Sin separates us from God.

2. Only Jesus can take away our sin.

3. You must trust Jesus as your Leader and Savior.

4. God’s free gift to us is new life–eternal life with him.

SAY “YES” TO JESUS RIGHT NOW!

Pray a simple prayer like this: Dear Heavenly Father, Thank you for loving me. I am sorry for those things I have done that have separated us. Please forgive me. I want Jesus to be the Leader and Savior of my life. I believe he died on the cross and conquered death so that I could have eternal life with you. I receive this new life you freely give. In the name of Jesus, Amen.

Where, exactly, does repentance fit into this? (An apology is not the same as seeking forgiveness - Jay Adams has a great book on that subject). Why is "Lord" softened to "Leader"? Why is the Lordship of Christ completely disregarded? Is this an American/"seeker sensitive" thing? Making the Gospel more palatable by taking out the hard stuff does no one any good. How will the kids grasp the Good News, if we're afraid to tell them the bad news? Does Jesus not warn us that to follow Him means a radical change?

There's something wrong with this. We're willingly breeding a generation of superficial professions - of an historical faith in Christ. Obedience is not optional - it is expected of true believers.

Apparently I'm not the only one....

...who thinks it was an evasive non-answer.

Last month, some controversy arose over an entry I wrote, taking issue with a leading Christian publication's portrayal of Islam, through the revisionist eyes of one of its adherents (see my original entry here). This month's edition arrived yesterday, and with a sense of great satisfaction and vindication I see that I am not the only reader who thought the interview misrepresented Islam's true agenda.

(I have to be careful about naming the publication, as they are publishing one of my articles in a few months). Many kudos to Mr. Goldberg for articulating what millions of Christians with intact critical thinking skills already know:

Islam According to the Qur'an

With chagrin I read the article "Islam According to Gallup" [November]. To say that it soft-pedals Islam is an understatement. The interviewer should have asked more probing questions or offered some refutation to what Islamic scholar Dalia Mogahed gave an ignorant public.

Mogahed glides over the question about the punishment for apostasy in Islam by saying, "Islamic law is a vibrant, ever-changing set of interpretations." Islamic law, however, is clear that the penalty for apostasy is death. The more secularized Muslim governments may impose lesser penalties, but that is because they are not following Islamic law strictly. On October 20, Afghanistan's government commuted the death sentence of a young journalist for blasphemy. The sentence was reduced from death to "only" 20 years in prison. A couple days later, a Somali man was murdered because he had converted from Islam to Christianity. Yet the article did not address occurrences like these. Why not?

Further, Mogahed says that some violent verses from the Qur'an have a "historical context and must be understood … in a specific way," implying that those verses are no longer valid. Yet the fundamental principle of Islam is that the Qur'an is the literal word of Allah, perfect, complete, immutable, and valid for all eternity. Is Mogahed prepared to openly and publicly declare that those violent verses are no longer valid?

Gallup can survey the opinions of Muslims, but it cannot determine what Islam is. There is only Islam according to the Qur'an and the sayings of Muhammad.

Carl Goldberg
Phoenix, Arizona

Here is the link to his letter (third one down). To their credit, the magazine consistently publishes opinions dissenting from what they print on many issues. This month's cover story on "Marketing Jesus" was superb.

Very Impressive Non-Answer

...And today's Very Impressive Non-Answer award of yadda-yadda articulation goes to.......Muslim feminist analyst Dalia Mogahed, who was interviewed here by Warren Larson. Larson, the director of the Zwemer Center for Muslim Studies at Columbia International University (a well-known academic center of liberalism), authored Islamic Ideology and Fundamentalism in Pakistan: Climate for Conversion to Christianity?

So a leading Christian publication is running a feature that not only gives Islam a voice, but that voice casts Islam in a progressive and favorable light. To quote Mark Driscoll, "If I may state the obvious, Christianity...is about Christ. Now, I don't mean to stretch it....."

I stopped being amazed by anti-biblical ideology masquerading as Christianity somewhere around 2003, when my church was doing Richard Foster books that promoted zen-like meditation. When the UCC gave up all pretense of following the God of the Bible, I didn't raise an eyebrow. But the space given to Islam in Christian media outlets is not only disconcerting, it promotes a completely false, unbiblical and dangerous ecumenism. For the discerning, it is easy to see through the facade. This Muslim spokeswoman hangs herself on her own words.

Here's the quote:

Larson: Don't all four schools of Sunni Islamic law suggest that a Muslim who leaves Islam and embraces Christianity, for example, should be executed?

Mogahed: We have to look at modern interpretations, because Islamic law is a vibrant, ever-changing set of interpretations. Fiqh, or human interpretation of Shari'ah, maps changes with time and place. Look, for example, at Sheikh Ali Jumu'a, grand mufti of Egypt, whose interpretation of apostasy laws is not to take drastic measures. In the past, apostasy was seen as treason because citizenship in one group was defined by faith, and when people left one faith, they had to work against their community. One's faith today is no longer seen in the same context, because the nation-state has been completely transformed.

Notice she neither answered the question, nor denied that ex-Muslims are persecuted and killed by other Muslims the world over because of their faith in Jesus Christ. Mogahed actually stated in the interview that data indicates Islamic violence is NOT driven by religious extremism, but rather by "extreme political ideology". Mmm, yeah. Like that Danish cartoon incident. That probably had more to do with the severe persecution of Muslims in Copenhagen and Denmark's oppressive economic conditions than it did with fascism. Those crazy

Vikings Danes can be real demagogues.

The 4-page spread in CT "challenges stereotypes" about Islam. Mogahed claims that "Muslims admire democratic values" and that the Koran does not espouse violence (which is a bald-faced lie). For a more accurate, chapter and verse assessment of what the Koran really says, see the writings of former Muslim Dr. Ergun Mehmet Caner, including "20 Things Every Christian Should Know About Islam". Notice when questioned about "apostates" (by definition, those who leave Islam for other religions; also known as "infidels"), she evades the question by affirming how wrong it would be to call other Muslims apostates. So I guess the scholarship of Drs. Ergun and Emir Caner, who are both Baptist pastors with PhDs in theology, wouldn't count since they are just "apostates".

Go read their joint project, "Unveiling Islam: An Insider's Look at Muslim Life and Beliefs" for some quotes that actually contain substance and truth. Careful, though; it's seditious stuff.

Christian Kitsch and Jesus Junk - It's Just Not Funny

The increase of seasonal kitsch catalogues coming in the mail this time of year, coupled with the unavoidable fact that I am on several Christian retailers’ mailing lists calls an ugly trend to my attention that keeps getting uglier every year. It is the trivialization of Christianity and Christ Himself by turning the “faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” into a commercial marketing opportunity.

In an excellent paper discussing this disturbing cultural phenomenon, author Jared Bridges relates an incident that occurred a few years ago when he accompanied two Eastern European students to a Kentucky Christian bookstore.

“One of the two, Andrei, was a Christian who wanted to visit the store while in America to purchase some Christian music. The other student, Sasha, was an admitted atheist who was merely along for the ride. While Andrei went to a “listening station” to peruse the latest D.C. Talk album, Sasha and I walked around the store, looking at such products as “Bibleman” videos and “Testa-mints” candies. It was then that the atheist Sasha made an observation that is particularly damning to the contemporary evangelical subculture. He said, “Christians in America market God just like everything else. In my country, Christians take God more seriously.” I couldn’t help but sadly agree with him, and I could offer no defense.”

The same has occurred to me, more than once, and my reaction at times has varied. Some of the merchandise marketed as “Christian” is so absurd that my immediate response is to laugh; it appears to satirize itself. The culture war of the Jesus and Darwin fish is one example of this. I remember walking with my family past the window of an upscale boutique in Maine a few years ago and laughing hysterically at the hand-painted, porcelain mouse Nativity set. The idea of portraying Mary, Joseph and the Christ Child as furry mice dressed in period clothing seemed so ridiculous that, at the time, I didn’t stop to ponder the spiritual implications of it.

In the meantime, I have seen Veggie Tales Nativity sets, rubber ducky Nativity sets, Precious Moments Nativity sets, and much more. It gets worse.

Bible action figures? Talking Jesus dolls? That one I had seen in a Christian catalogue; still, seeing the doll “live” in Wal-mart a few weeks ago added a new dimension of creepiness.

Forget purity rings. There are entire lines of abstinence-promoting “Christian” underwear targeted at teens now. Here’s where it gets really weird: there’s stuff like this marketed by atheists, specifically for the purpose of mocking Christians (which I will not link to). It’s getting hard to tell which is which.

Product description:
"Blessed are the shopping list scrawlers and the test takers when their pencils are topped with one of these replicas of Jesus. Handsomely detailed with a red robe and arms outstretched in blessing or prayer. Five 1-1/4 inch tall, soft vinyl Jesuses on each illustrated blistercard."

Last year, a colleague showed me a Catholic site that sells porcelain knick-knacks depicting Jesus playing soccer with kids, hockey with kids, etc. It made me cringe – I seriously couldn’t believe anything that stupid could exist. That was before the yearly deluge of evangelical-oriented catalogues arrived – now I can buy anything from Jesus Band-aids and flip-flops to rubber Jesus pencil-toppers. Banal stupidity evidently knows no denominational bounds. However, what’s interesting is that the patrons of businesses which market Jesus Junk (I did not invent that term; do an Internet search), tend to be Protestant Evangelicals.


This is, by and large, the same group that criticizes iconoclasts. I do not know a whole lot about Eastern Orthodox iconography, but I do know that the artwork is not supposed to be realistic – the images are seen as symbolic, rather than representational. More importantly, God looks at the heart behind any kind of tangible object made for His glory. The icons, at least, are created with an attitude of awe, reverence and respect. The same cannot be said of T-shirts and posters that attempt to cleverly link Christ with well-known product lines. Since when did Jesus Christ become a name-brand product to be marketed?

Again, Evangelicals will be quick to criticize the Catholic tradition of displaying the crucifix (“leaving Christ on the Cross”) and turning the symbol into an object of devotion. While there may be some legitimacy to this charge, it is a fact that Catholics are worshiping the crucified, resurrected and living Lord. But more importantly, it is impossible to look at a crucifix, in church or elsewhere, and not recognize the solemn meaning of the symbol. By definition, the crucifix forces one to confront the horror that our Savior endured, and does not seek to obscure or sugar-coat the reality of the atonement. Can the same be said of cutesy Precious Moments cross figurines (as popular with Catholics on First Communions as with Protestants), cross maze games, cross bling-bling, or cross lollipops? (I’m not making this stuff up. See here for some of the cheesiest examples of American evangelicalism gone awry).

Am I the only one who sees this as seriously sick? It’s not funny. Actually, satire is funny. There is much about our American evangelical sub-culture that is rich fodder for insightful comedians, and we deserve to laugh at ourselves. Dana Carvey’s “Church Lady” on SNL and Seinfeld’s “You stole my Jesus fish” episode are examples that come to mind. Charlatan televangelists like Mike Murdoch and Benny Hinn SCREAM to be made fun of, and Christian as well as secular comedians cleverly profit from knowing where and how much to skewer the fundies. But here’s where it ends. Marketing God’s Name, much less in such a crass and tasteless way, is beyond disrespectful – it is blasphemous.

Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of God and His death on the cross is humanity’s only hope of salvation. Sticking His image on car dash boards and air fresheners is to lose sight of that in a uniquely irreverent way – because these items are ostensibly bearing the label “Christian”. Really? I’m a “Christ-follower” because I wear a WWJD bracelet? In predictable fashion, “Christian” pop-culture annoyingly apes secular pop-culture by coming up with a “spiritual-cool” alternative for every worldly trend – including Twister-style digital dance games. Who cares about living a God-honoring life when you’ve got the latest digital toy – only with CCM tunes? As blogger Jason Janz writes, ‘we have created a subculture’.

Analyzing this appalling trend, Janz cites three reasons for the mass appeal of Christian kitsch: 1) many people trust that wearing Jesus Junk will result in conversions (it won’t); 2) many Christians seem to believe Jesus Junk promotes Christian community (it doesn’t); and 3) many people seem to be in the business because of pure commercialism (true). See his excellent essay here.

Janz writes:

“Does the joining of the holy with the common compromise the message of the cross? We can knock out about half of all Jesus Junk if we just decide not to purchase anything that blends two worlds. Budweiser beer and gambling have never been a friend to grace and to endeavor to meld them into cutesy clichés harms the credibility of the Gospel. You can now purchase poker chips with John 3:16 on one side that says “Don’t Gamble With Eternity.” Then you flip it over, and it quotes Mark 8:36 with the phrase, “Accept Jesus Before You Cash In Your Chips.” This is compromise.”

Yes, it is. But it’s also treading the Name of God underfoot, and in a sense, “pimping the Lord”, to paraphrase a courtroom TV judge. Can you imagine Muslims plastering Muhammad’s likeness on coffee mugs, or carving it into Jack-o-lanterns? And remember, Muhammad was a human prophet. THIS IS THE DIVINE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE AND SAVIOR OF MANKIND. This trend is wrong on so many levels that old-fashioned idolatry actually looks more benign when compared to the cross water ring-toss games and Jesus sweatbands and boxer shorts. One Midwestern seminary professor keeps a collection of Jesus Bobble-head dolls to underscore this point.

It could be argued that I, also, am not innocent of this and have supported the Christian kitsch industry with my “Luther is my Homeboy” t-shirt purchase. Truth be told, it was an impulse purchase and if I had really sat down and thought about it, I probably would not have spent $22.00 on a joke that most people don’t even get anyway. (Besides, the historical Luther had an anti-Semitic streak that holds no comic appeal). However, there is a fundamental difference between the theo-geek humor inherent in “Luther is my Homeboy” and the more crass “Jesus is my Homeboy” shirt which I have also seen. The former was a well-meaning, beer-enjoying, passionate guy with his own flaws and failings, just like everyone else. The latter was the sinless Son of God Who died for my sins and deserves my eternal gratitude, reverence and worship. See the difference?

Bridges said it well when he concluded:

“The truth is that kitsch does trivialize God. It is a taking of his name in vain that makes the label “Christian” just another brand name on par with any other. Rather than being transformed, Christians who use kitsch conform to the world by marketing God in the same way that the world does.”

(see full essay here).

And that, my friends, is the bottom line: trivializing God, diluting the Gospel message, and commercializing our faith is the net result of all this junk. Clearly, someone is buying it, because the manufacturers keep churning it out and the catalogues keep coming, year after year. It is a sad commentary of the frivolous times we live in, when truly nothing is sacred anymore.

These guys are both pastors themselves (as well as sons of pastors) and are being ironic, not mocking:

I Swear I am Not Making this Up...

It's started. The yearly Christian merchandi$e catalogues, replete with kitchy, "Christianized" toys and electronic games marketed at the middle-class Evangelical consumer.

But this year seems to have reached a new level of absurdity.


Meet Sarah, one of three in a line of "God's Girlz", a spiritualized-knock off of the street-wise and secular "Bratz Dolls" that are so trampy that most non-Christian Moms won't let their girls play with them. But never mind. The Bratz are "keepin' it real" and come by their attitude honestly.

This is the blurb below the pictures of these three juvenile jems (one of whom sports skinny jeans, platinum-blond hair and a "pick Jesus" T-shirt, visible over her electric guitar):

"Tired of dolls with a worldly appearance? You'll welcome these "mom-approved" dolls with a perfect fit of faith and fashion! Whether your girls play with nature-loving Hannah, musical Abigail, or worshipful Sarah, they'll love the stylishly modest outfits featuring faith-affirming T-shirts. And you'll rejoice in the biblical message each posable doll communicates. Ages 4 and up."

(emphasis mine).

Stylishly modest??? Ummm...she's wearing a TANK TOP and SILVER LEGGINGS (to the knee). This is Sarah, the "worshipful" one. I wouldn't let my daughter dress that way for Halloween, let alone for worship. But, then again, she's "a princess" (note the crown on her head and explanation on box), so maybe it's all a self-esteem building tactic.

It is not so unbelievable that a manufacturer would make something like this (we are, after all, a very lucrative demographic); what's inconceivable to me is that any woman with a pulse would buy one of these for her daughter.

Seen any absurd merchandise bearing a Christian label lately? Send it in. I love satire.

UPDATE: Barb, they published it over at "A Little Leaven"! Check out the comments: http://www.alittleleaven.com/2008/11/christianized-bratz-doll.html#comments

I'll have to return the favor by thinking up some smart-alec observations about the Jesus nightlight they posted over there.