Blogs

Easter?

I just wasn’t feeling it today. Maybe I missed the memo. It’s Easter. I should be excited. But like Thomas I’m just not quite there yet. And like Thomas, when others are saying, “Look, there’s hope! Here’s joy!” I’m asking to see it and feel it first. Before I celebrate, I want to know there’s really a reason because images and sounds of all the reasons not to are still too fresh in my mind. Or maybe I know there will be a time when I can celebrate again, but I’m not so sure that time is now.

Give me time. It’s OK to hang back, to want to be sure, or not to take others’ word for something that sounds too outrageous to be true. After everything that’s happened those saying it’s all OK could be a bit delusional. Or maybe not. Giving it time is OK. If Christ is risen, he’ll still be risen in a few more hours or a few more days. There will be time to celebrate. But maybe not yet.

I don’t think anyone was angry at Thomas that day. No one said “shake yourself out of it!” I’m not sure anyone even pressured him to take their word for it. Surely no one was frustrated because Thomas wasn’t on their timeline, their schedule. They were still pretty surprised themselves. Whispered stories. “Did I imagine it?” “No, I heard Peter…” “Yeah, and Mary said…” “Cleopas was on this road and…”

Did he eat? Did he touch you? He just appeared — the doors were locked! A ghost? A vision? Are we crazy?

Yeah, there was excitement, but I suspect it was still hushed and that there were more than a few doubts even among those who’d seen Him. So I don’t think anyone was bothered by Thomas’ statement that he’d need to see Jesus himself and touch the wounds — to experience joy, he would need to see a reason for hope but also fully experience the pain. There is nothing wrong with that. It’s actually a pretty wise thing to do.

And the thing is, when Jesus did appear, apparently Thomas didn’t need to touch him anymore. But Jesus was willing to go as far as necessary for Thomas’s hope and joy to be restored. May we all find that kind of resurrection in our own lives.

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

Giveaway: Backsliding Into Jesus & There’s No Such Thing As Dragons

This is only open to those with a USA mailing address. There is absolutely no cost to enter.

This is your chance to receive a new copy of Jennifer Brewer‘s new book, Backsliding Into Jesus: Finding Hope After Legalism AND There’s No Such Thing As Dragons: Examining The Theology of The United Pentecostal Church by Jonah McElhaney.

Jonah’s book covers aspects of the United Pentecostal Church such as Oneness, uncut hair for women, holiness standards, and their teachings on salvation. Jennifer’s  book “explores the feelings and emotions one will inevitably face when leaving legalism and discovering the freedom of God’s grace.”

Jennifer Brewer, author of Free: From Legalism to Grace Breaking Out of the United Pentecostal Church, had this to say about There’s No Such Thing As Dragons:

After spending most of his life in the United Pentecostal Church the author examines the theology of the UPCI. By drawing on his own experiences and examining the teachings of Scripture with the teachings of the UPCI, the author shows that the imaginary dragons that were placed in his life to prevent him from venturing out too far away from the doctrines were not real. The hope is for others who see the issues within the United Pentecostal Church but have been too afraid to question or examine the theology that they too will see that there’s no such thing as dragons.

One reviewer of Backsliding Into Jesus wrote:

This book was just as good as Jennifer’s first book. She has a way to speak so openly about her road and her life after the UPCI. One of my favorite lines from the book is “Freedom in Christ means more than just getting to wear what we want….” I can’t tell you how many times I have heard that myself. I have actually been asked is walking away from God to wear what you want and cut your hair worth it. I was NEVER walking away from God, I was walking away from a belief system that was not fulfilling me. It was not feeding me, it was harming my family, and we wanted to be free from that. Thank you Jennifer for taking a stand and helping those that are looking for a way to their own freedom, Not freedom from God but Freedom from legalism.

If you have already read either of these books, please consider leaving a review or star rating on Amazon as it would be greatly appreciated. Reviews count more and can give others a better idea of the book contents and if it helped you.

This giveaway is a drawing. To enter, just leave a comment to show you wish to be included. The drawing will close on March 30, 2024 at 6pm (eastern time), after which I will draw a winner. We also have entries being made in our Facebook support group.

Be sure to check back to see if you have won as in the past some people have not responded after winning and so a new winner had to be drawn. You will then need to email me your mailing address if I do not already have it, so be sure to watch your email and check the spam folder. If I know your Facebook profile, I will message you there.

Don’t be alarmed if your comment does not immediately show as it may require approval.

You can follow Jonah at his blogs here and here.  Also, Amateur Faith Night had Jonah as a guest when they discussed Authentic Trinitarianism versus Oneness Pt 1 & Authentic Trinitarianism versus Oneness Pt 2.

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

Giveaway: C.H. Yadon & the Vanishing Theological Past in Oneness Pentecostalism

This is only open to those with a USA mailing address. We always provide these giveaways at no charge to our readers.

This is your chance to receive a new copy of C.H. Yadon and the Vanishing Theological Past in Oneness Pentecostalism by Thomas Fudge. It is the third book in his series on Oneness Pentecostalism. It sells new for $29.95 (currently reduced to $25.29). It covers Oneness Pentecostal history, and highlights the United Pentecostal Church, of which Mr. Fudge was once a member. The emphasis is on the life of C.H. Yadon. Yadon turned in his UPC license in 1993 when the affirmation statement started being required of all ministers. Over the years, the UPCI has pushed people out of the organization as they took stands against various beliefs.

United Pentecostal General Superintendent David Bernard did not want this book to be published and his comments are included in Fudge’s work. His comments alone are a good reason to want to read this book as the UPCI doesn’t want aspects of their actual history known. This is what Bernard wrote:

“I do not recommend the book for publication, for the following reasons: (1) The audience is extremely limited. The focus and tone are too narrow to appeal to most scholars. The subject matter is of interest primarily to Oneness Pentecostals, but C.H. Yadon is not a well-known figure in the movement’s history, and those who would be interested could be repelled by the harsh anti-UPC rhetoric. Thus, the most likely readers are those who have left the Oneness Pentecostal movement or who are considering it. (2) The research does not meet scholarly standards. It doesn’t adequately engage the latest scholarship in the field. It doesn’t consider or interact meaningfully with opposing evidence or alternative views. It relies excessively on marginal, questionable, or unverifiable sources with inadequate attention to readily available, documented, and credible sources. (3) It is a mixture of historical analysis and theological debate, but doesn’t fully complete either task successfully. In any case, the author has already covered this ground in a previous book. (4) It gives excessive space and coverage to a little-known, insignificant work by a nineteenth-century, semi-Arian writer. Since that work doesn’t represent a significant position within Oneness Pentecostalism, it has limited historical or theological value. (5) The family of C.H. Yadon opposes publication.”

This giveaway is a drawing and not a first come, first served giveaway. To enter, just leave a comment to show you wish to be included. The drawing will close on March 20, 2024 at 6pm (eastern time), after which I will draw the winner.

Be sure to check back to see if you have won as in the past some people have not responded after winning and so a new winner had to be drawn. You will then need to email me your mailing address if I do not already have it, so be sure to watch your email and check the spam folder. If I know your Facebook profile, I will message you there.

Don’t be alarmed if your comment does not immediately show as it may require approval.

Some might be interested in a series of lectures by Thomas Fudge on the history of Christianity from the Roman Empire until the Reformation. https://youtu.be/WgTDplQabRk

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

Narnia is evil. Because scripture. | What one Christian fundamentalist preacher said about C.S. Lewis

Editorial Note: The following is reprinted with permission from Eleanor Skelton’s blog. It was originally published on March 16, 2016. 

So last summer, I read this book that one of my friends let me borrow called Cameras in Narnia: How the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe Came to Life.

The author gives an inside perspective since he was on set for almost the entire filming process, and I enjoy reading about how movies are made.

I learned that work on the movie started in 2002, and the director used pre-visualization to plan shoots, especially scenes like battle sequences. The White Witch’s ice castle was constructed of Styrofoam, and the wardrobe was specifically carved for the set.

Andrew Adamson, the director, said that learning filmmaking in New Zealand is nearly impossible. They don’t really have degree plans for it. He left in 1991 to pursue filmmaking as a career, but most of the outdoor scenes in the world of Narnia were filmed in his homeland.

While I was reading, I remembered an article written by fundamentalist Christians that I read years ago, condemning the movie’s release.

The film came out in theaters in December 2005, but I didn’t see it until the next spring because my dad was not interested in fantasy and my mom was concerned that the adaptation wouldn’t be faithful to the book.

One of my dad’s older sisters called us and asked my mom if she’d heard of this new series called Narnia because she was worried about my siblings and I reading it. My mom told her that the books were in print back when she was a child, but a new movie had just released.

My aunt mailed us a Southwest Radio Bible Church article called “The Chronicles of Narnia: Christian Entertainment or Indoctrination in Evil?” The piece was published in the January 2006 issue of The Prophetic Observer. 

I also had friends in my fundamentalist church’s youth group around the same time who weren’t allowed to read Narnia.

It’s such a hilarious example of extreme Christian fundamentalism and awful logic that I’m going to break it down into sections and provide commentary. Here’s the full text if you want to read it all at once.

So first off, Dr. Larry Spargimino gives us an info dump on the film’s background.

I think he’s assuming that his audience will be automatically suspicious because Disney is producing the film. Then he starts using other phrases that would make them more concerned: “Many Lewis supporters claim that Aslan is a Christ figure, a deliverer, who sets the captives free.” 

I think we’re supposed to assume that androgynous = automatically evil because he assumes his audience believes in complementarianism and traditional gender roles. Spargimino doesn’t seem to understand that androgyny can be a biological thing.

However, he never actually explains what he’s getting at here. He just moves on and gives another info dump, this time from Lewis’ biography.

Yup, Dr. Larry just cited Wikipedia.

Apparently he doesn’t understand that’s not an acceptable source for your college papers. His other citations so far have all been conservative Christian news websites like World magazine or World Net Daily and then Focus on the Family’s Radio Theater website. WorldNetDaily is known for misinformation and propaganda, according to the Ad Fontes Media Bias ratings.

I’m pretty sure this means Dr. Larry’s only research for this article was a Google search.

I’m guessing that we’re supposed to think Lewis wouldn’t have been friends with Tolkien if he had been a Real Christian™. Dr. Larry doesn’t seem to think Lewis was actually a Christian because he says “he claims to have been converted by the evidence for Christianity.”

Then Dr. Larry says that Lewis wrote a book about demons. We aren’t told why he wrote about demons, just that he wrote about them. Then the article jumps to explaining why incubi are evil. Spargimino gives us another random definition and expects us to form our own conclusions, with little context.

Nevermind that incubi were one of the White Witch’s henchmen. Nevermind that they killed Aslan. Nope, the whole book is bad because incubi are in it.

Here’s where incubi are mentioned in the text:

“A great crowd of people were standing all round the Stone Table and though the moon was shining many of them carried torches which burned with evil-looking red flames and black smoke. But such people! Ogres with monstrous teeth, and wolves, and bull-headed men; spirits of evil trees and poisonous plants; and other creatures whom I won’t describe because if I did the grownups would probably not let you read this book – Cruels and Hags and Incubuses, Wraiths, Horrors, Efreets, Sprites, Orknies, Wooses, and Ettins. In fact here were all those who were on the Witch’s side and whom the Wolf had summoned at her command. And right in the middle, standing by the Table, was the Witch herself.” — The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe, Chapter 14

In context, the incubi make sense. Out of context, the definition given would probably horrify most parents reading this article.

So when Dr. Larry asks if Christians need this kind of “Christian” allegory, his audience is already mentally answering with a resounding no.

Once again, Dr. Larry is citing disreputable sources. Geocities was a free Yahoo webhosting service that shut down in 2009. Geocities was known for being kind of awful.

Now the audience is supposed to be upset that Lewis is explaining truth with mythological characters because “we wonder if the blurring of reality and fantasy is really the way to go.” Why? Because Scripture!

Since fundamentalists believe nothing is missing in Scripture, which according to their theology is supposed to fulfill every human need, then their answer to Spargimino’s question is no.

Therefore, Narnia is not something our children need to read. Furthermore, they could be harmed by reading these books or watching this movie. Therefore, we will not allow our children to read these books.

This is how fundamentalist logic works. It’s sad and it’s incredibly limiting.

The same reasoning used in this article was used to keep us from reading Harry Potter or any other entertainment that Christian fundamentalists think is against the Bible or potentially sinful.

It’s fear tactics.

Dr. Larry Spargimino never actually comes out and explains that this is why Narnia is evil, he just hints and plants doubts in the minds of an already indoctrinated audience. They’ll end up convincing themselves that it’s something to avoid.

If this guy was writing a paper for a college English course, he’d get marked off for not explaining what his quotes and sources mean, for not clarifying what he’s actually trying to say. But since he’s a fundamentalist radio preacher, he can get away with it.

When you encounter conservative Christians bemoaning the release of a new book or movie as the new worst thing ever, look for this type of thinking. It’s very common.

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

Purity Culture isn’t just a Christian thing

Editorial Note: The following is reprinted with permission from Eleanor Skelton’s blog. It was originally published on October 26, 2015. 

I spent my teenage years immersed in purity culture, in both evangelical and fundamentalist Christian circles.

If you were homeschooled, went to youth group, or wore a purity ring, you probably know what I’m talking about.

Purity culture was an ideology, a movement complete with books like Dannah Gresh’s Secret Keeper, promoted in concerts by Christian artists like Rebecca St. James and single women’s retreats, like the one I went to that was organized by Biblical Discipleship Ministries and hosted at Bill Gothard’s ALERT Academy in Big Sandy, Texas. (Note: Bill Gothard has been accused by at least 10 women of sexual abuse and the court case was featured in Amazon Prime’s docuseries Shiny Happy People in June 2023.)

A conservative Muslim man who added me on Facebook several months ago often posts religious memes or quotes from the Quran. This week, he shared a few memes that seemed oddly familiar, because they echoed many things that purity culture taught me.

Here they are, along with their Christian counterparts.

1. You will only find a partner as you grow closer to God.

Purity culture seemed to almost guarantee that we’d find The One (TM), if we obeyed all the rules. Following the formula would supposedly bring you closer to God and, by default, closer to that one person chosen to be your life partner from the beginning of time.

Eric and Leslie Ludy, authors of When God Writes your Love Story, said, “Girls, if you will learn to wait patiently and confidently for God to bring a Christlike man into your life, you will not be disappointed. And guys, learn to treat women like the Perfect Gentleman, Jesus Christ, If you do, you will not only be promoted out of ‘jerkhood,’ but you will then be worthy of a beautiful princess of purity who is saving herself just for you.”

Islamic teachings seem to be nearly identical, except you might be waiting for The One[s], depending on which sect you belong to.

2. Wives should obey and submit to their husbands.

This is basically complementarian theology, based on how evangelical and fundamentalist Christian churches interpret Ephesians 5:22-33.

According to this view, men and women are said to be equally valuable, but serve in different roles. Men are the leaders and women are their helpmeets. Those who believe in this claim that any attempt to live outside of these scripted gender roles will result in a failed marriage.

The most spiritual women, according to this teaching, submit to their husbands and obey them even when they disagree or even when their husbands are wrong or abusive.

3. Casual dating is bad because your goal should be to find someone to marry.

Purity culture teaches that kissing, holding hands, and sex outside of marriage is disrespectful to your future spouse and stealing intimacy from any potential relationships in the future.

A sexually active woman is used and no longer desirable, like damaged merchandise or a wilted rose.

Again, this idea isn’t unique to evangelical Christianity. It’s part of other high-control religions as well.

4. Specific instructions on what clothing is modest and pleasing / displeasing to God.

Basically the more covered your body is, the better, according to people who believe this.

Wear long sleeves and long skirts to demonstrate that we’re women, but you better not show your midriff or have a neckline. In fact, it’s better if you avoid any clothing even suggesting that you have curves. Shirts with V-necks are sketchy even if it doesn’t show cleavage, turtlenecks are your safest bet.

The goal is to become the least likely woman to “make your brother in Christ stumble,” which often ends up putting a lot of pressure on women in these religious communities, because it makes women responsible for men’s feelings and attraction to them.

Purity culture’s teachings have been used to blame women for their sexual assault or harassment when people ask “well, what were you wearing?”

These ideas aren’t unique or special.

Conservative Muslims say the exact same thing. Purity culture isn’t exclusive to Christianity. But in reality, we don’t have the inside track to something fabulous if we follow these teachings, and it’s not a magical life hack formula that will fix everything broken in our lives.

It’s more likely that we’re supporting an oppressive patriarchal system through these restrictive religious beliefs.

Most of this isn’t even in the Bible. Jesus doesn’t love you more if you wear the right clothing. I believe he lets you make your own adult choices.

Purity culture won’t make you a better person. It might just give you a superiority complex.

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

Click to access the login or register cheese
YouTube
YouTube
Set Youtube Channel ID
x  Powerful Protection for WordPress, from Shield Security
This Site Is Protected By
ShieldPRO