Labels

Coulter Christianity

Becky Garrison of the Wittenburg Door offers a great response to the New Atheists who want to hold up Ann Coulter, Fred Phelps, and Jerry Falwell as evidence of Christianity's craziness. None of these persons represent the majority of us, and the same is true, she says of John Spong on the Left.
So, at the God's Politics blog she writes:

Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and other New Atheists cite Fred Phelps, Jerry Falwell, and Ann Coulter as ontological proof that all Christians are hypocrites. Using this logic, I could turn the tables around and pick out, say, the Marquis de Sade, Mao Tse-tung, and Marilyn Manson. I can use their stories to prove that all atheists are sadists, dictators, and really bad rock musicians. In the words of Dana Carvey (a.k.a. former President George H.W. Bush), “Not gonna do it. Wouldn't be prudent.”

And she closes:

So, what should Christians do when both the New Atheists and the media act as though the actions of extremists on both sides of the political spectrum are indicative of Christianity as a whole? Do we stay silent and hope they will just fade away? And if we should speak, how do we respond so that the love of Christ shines through?

Good advice! But you'll have to read the middle part at God's Politics.
Email Post
Labels:

Comments

Mike L. said…
Isn't that exactly how moderate Muslims feel about extremists that claim their own religion? At times I've wondered why moderate and liberal muslims are not more outspoken. Maybe the same goes for Christians.

Sometimes I want to drop the label "christian" for myself because it puts me in company that I don't like. Then I stop and wonder if it is good to let extremists define my own faith. I think this reason is exactly why the last year I've been
5:28 PM
Mystical Seeker said…
Spong does come across as arrogant, and her personal encounter with him is probably why she felt the need to bring him into her commentary. But I do think that in the popular imagination very few people think of his his views as being emblematic of Christianity as a whole, while, unfortunately, the Christian Right has managed to define itself in many people's minds as being the same as Christianity per se. In his case, I think it isn't extremism so much as his personality that comes into play. Marcus Borg, in his own way, is as threatening to the orthodoxy as Spong is, but he is much more gentle and conciliatory about it. In this case, style is everything.

I do think that she is right that it is easy to point to some negative example and then cite that as the prototype for Christianity, when in fact there are many varieties of the faith.

And thanks, by the way, for the comment you left in my blog. :)
8:18 PM
Post a Comment