Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Theocracy Watch: Janet Porter Wants a Christian Takeover of Media

Jim Burroway

March 10th, 2010

Because, you know, a dozen or so major Christian channels on the internet, cable, satellite and local broadcasting isn’t enough.

YouTube Preview Image

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0 | TRACKBACK URL

elaygee
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Have any of them seen what a country run as a religious insitution looks like? Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc.
Are there any long lines to get in to those places or just long lines trying to get out?
Which “ooficial” version of Jesustan do they want to install? Are all other versions going to be cults to be eradicated like Mormons and unitarians and Jehovah;s Witnesses? Will the be Xtian enough for them?
Sounds like another bunch of Taliban. Do they plan to scrap the Statue of Liberty as a graven image?

Aaron
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

hmmm… this is a very interesting clip.

She is espousing “Kingdom theology” which is the belief that God’s influence and domination is presently taking over the world through the Holy Spirit and the physical representation of God, the Body of Christ (the church).

As a Christian, I agree with this theology, however, I do not agree that God is interested in building a theocracy from which to rule the world. Indeed, whenever the church has been given power, it generally goes down badly. :/

Nope, we’re a spiritual kingdom, not bringing God’s influence through enforcing conservative christian morality on the pluralist masses but showing the heart of Christ to all who cross our paths.

AdrianT
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

‘A dozen channels AREN’T enough’ , surely Jim ;-)

Richard Rush
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

I’ve seen/heard Janet before. The thing I always notice is her rough-around-the-edges demeanor. The term that comes to mind is “trailer trash.”

I’m sure God was lounging around Heaven on a slow day listening to her prayer and saying, “Wow, Janet, that’s a really good idea. Why didn’t I think of that. I’ll get right on it.”

Priya Lynn
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Aaron says he agrees with the christian myth taking over and dominating the world but that he doesn’t agree with theocracy. There’s no difference Aaron.

Aaron
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

You are correct, Priya, that I do believe in the eventual full expression of God’s kingdom. This would, of course, render government as we now see it as rather obsolete. Until that time, however, there is no purpose a theocracy. Until God Himself chooses to come in rule in physical form, there is no biblical imperative for Christians to rule or enforce conservative morals over the populace. Rather, we are to disciple the nations, spreading the message of God’s sacrificial love. Indeed, we are to show God’s heart to all people in the hopes that they in turn choose to submit to God’s rule.

Many of us do fight against injustice, however, as we believe this to be a part of God’s heart for the world.

Aaron
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

lol, and I especially have no wish to enforce conservative morals over the populace since I’m a liberal Christian.

Peace, love and joy. ;)

Priya Lynn
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Got it Aaron, you want the Christian myth to dominate and take over the world but you don’t want to enforce conservative morals over the populace.

Aaron
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

lol, yeah, pretty much.

Priya Lynn
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

“LOL”, yes, right, that’s so funny – submit to the rule of an imaginary being who’ll eternally torture you if you don’t, peace, love, joy.

Aaron
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Well, I’m not really into judging people’s eternal destinations, I rather think that’s above my pay grade.

Priya Lynn
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

No need for you to judge Aaron, it states this in your bible. You believe the Christian myth then part and parcel of that is eternal torture for non-believers – don’t try to hide from the implications of your beliefs.

Aaron
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

The doctrine of hell is a part of the Bible, I don’t deny that (though some do). I was just saying that I have no idea who’s going there. I also believe that the Bible says that it is through the redeeming sacrifice of God that many will be saved, but I have no idea who is covered by that. I do often wonder if many people of many different religions have been covered by this sacrifice because of their heart, which we are told is what God measures.

I’m not really fond of the idea that systematic theology saves a person, nor do I think the biblical authors were either, or the Holy Spirit acting today.

Just my thoughts, though.

Aaron
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

It may well be as C.S. Lewis said in the Great Divorce that all who go to hell choose it.

I would hope that no one would choose eternal separation from the Lord, but then, perhaps some will.

Priya Lynn
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Aaron said “I was just saying that I have no idea who’s going there.”.

Now your being disingenous. Perhaps the most famous biblical passage of all time says “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[f] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life….18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.[g]”

So don’t give me this “I have no idea who’s covered by that and I wonder if people of other religions are” lie.

You want to pretend what you’re promoting is “pease, love, joy” but you most certainly know a heap of abuse is part and parcel of that as well.

Priya Lynn
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Aaron said “It may well be as C.S. Lewis said in the Great Divorce that all who go to hell choose it.

I would hope that no one would choose eternal separation from the Lord, but then, perhaps some will.”.

I choose to die after a long happy life and have no part of either your heaven or hell. Do I have that choice in your opinion? If not then you and CS Lewis are liars.

Aaron
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

:-) You make me think.

I’ll get back to you on it after I discuss this with some friends. May I have your E-mail address?

Priya Lynn
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Its priya dot lynn at sasktel dot net

Aaron
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Thanks.

Frijondi
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Priya, plenty of Christians are aware that the collection of books known as the Bible are messy, complicated, self-contradictory, and represent different time periods and points of view.

William Sloane Coffin’s statement, “I take the Bible much too seriously to take it literally” has become almost a proverb in some denominations.

I doubt that anyone who’s not a fundamentalist would see someone who does not believe in an afterlife as “choosing eternal separation from the Lord.” To most mainline, non-fundamentalist Christians, “choosing eternal separation” would probably connote choosing to live in a manner that shows contempt or hatred for one’s fellow human beings — choosing cruelty over kindness, for example.

My Christian upbringing included the idea that you do not have to be Christian, or even believe in God, to be acceptable in the eyes of God. So I believe what I believe because I believe it. I don’t think I get extra points for it, and it’s no skin off my nose if others believe something else. And honestly, I don’t think this POV is unusual, it’s just that the Biblical literalist faction has been making a concerted effort for the last thirty or forty years to drown out other Christian voices (and other voices, period.)

Aaron
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

There is much truth in all that you said, I think.

:-)

Ephilei
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Quoting a single verse or two, interpreting it, and then calling anyone who disagrees “disingenuous” oversimplifies the Bible and life in general. There are always many ways to interpret. Priya and Aaron’s suggestions are but a couple. There’s also Universalism, that every human goes to heaven, Omnism, that all religions are true, the belief that some go to heaven and everyone else ceases to exist, and the belief that there is no afterlife for anyone. Every belief can use the Bible for support. Some better than others, but all are sincere. Don’t assume to know a person’s beliefs better than they do, especialy in the void of the internet.

@Aaron, Kingdom Theology does not necessarily use the Church. Catholics believe this. Personally, I believe the Kingdom and the Church are different entities. I want the Kingdom of God to take over, I don’t want the Church to take over.

Anyway, Porter is pushing Dominionism, a form of Kingdom Theology that uses politics (in her case, the Church taking over the media). Personally, I ever pushed Kingdom Theology, it would entirely apolitical.

Priya Lynn
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Yawn.

Frijondi
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

@Ephilei and Aaron. Whatever Kingdom Theology has been in the past, it’s mutated over the last thirty years or so. This new politicized form is dangerous, and the division that matters now is not the one between believers and non-believers, it’s the one between theocrats and non-theocrats.

I get the feeling we’re more or less on the same page here. Right now, I hope (and pray) that more non-theocratic Christians start to realize how severely they’re being targeted by the theocrats, and that in the eyes of someone like Janet Porter, they are evil. And I hope and pray that atheists and members of minority religions that are currently under attack realize that the Janet Porters of the world are just as hostile to the ELCA, UCC, Episcopal Church, More Light Presbyterians, etc.

luzmejor
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

What stands out for me is that she says she wants to “own” the stations and that she wants “more.”

I’m quite certain that nobody heard any requests from Christ for more personal power and influence over his people.

Too many modern preachers want worldly goods, like money and powerful friends.

Burr
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

If a higher power shows favor upon nations that exalt it above everything else, including treating everyone with dignity, then it sure has a funny way of showing it. Almost every failed nation-state is tightly bound to their version of a god (that includes Kim Jong-il).

John
March 10th, 2010 | LINK

Careful what you ask for. Theocracies are generally among the most brutal and repressive forms of government that there are. They also have power struggles just like any other power structure. A person like Porter could easily find herself on the “outs” of a Christian theocracy. Not a great place to be when you think of all the ways other theocracies have tortured enemies and rivals to death.

Ben in Oakland
March 11th, 2010 | LINK

I’d votre for a theocracy if it were run by unitarians.

We pray “to whom it may concern” and will embrace just about any heresy.

Jason D
March 11th, 2010 | LINK

Ben, that’s why I love the unitarians.

Thou I just can’t help but picture a small child, kneeling, hands clasped in prayer saying “To whom it may concern…”

LOL

Richard Rush
March 11th, 2010 | LINK

I love the unitarians, too. A few years ago I went to a local meeting of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. It was held at a unitarian facility, of course. It seemed that everyone at the meeting was at a place somewhere between agnostic and atheist.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if America suddenly became predominantly unitarian? Box Turtle Bulletin could close down, and Jim and Timothy could go off to do some things a lot more fun than battling bigots. I’d miss them, though, but I wouldn’t miss the depressing subject matter.

And without so many people ramming religion down our throats, us evangelical New Atheists would quiet down and spend more time on fun things, and less time annoying Timothy.

CB
March 12th, 2010 | LINK

“A silent and loving woman is a gift of the Lord: and there is nothing so much worth as a mind well instructed. A shamefaced and faithful woman is a double grace, and her continent mind cannot be valued.” (Eccles. 26:14-15)

I Timothy 2:11-14: “Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.”

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.