It's not hard to fall out of the good graces of the most conservative elements of any religious community. And those authority figures often become even more testy under stress. One doesn't have to go far to see some of the sources of that stress, whether we're looking among Evangelical Christians (as Carol Howard Merritt recently described) or among Roman Catholic Christians (as Ian Masters recently summarized).
The impact of conservative or fundamentalist displeasure extends far beyond fundamentalism's borders into moderate religious territory. As some of the New Atheists have pointed out, highly conservative authority figures multiply their power by keeping moderate elements afraid of becoming the objects of conservative ire.
Having succeeded in becoming such an object through my writings (especially my latest book, A New Kind of Christianity), I'm often asked during interviews why many Evangelicals dislike me so much. The question has prompted me to reflect on religious authority and its workings.
The classic Milgram experiment performed at Yale in the early 1960s showed that a strong majority of normal people will surrender their conscience to a person perceived as a legitimate authority figure. When people were instructed by an authoritative researcher to administer electric shocks of increasing intensity after each wrong answer given by a stranger (who was actually an actor cooperating with the test), they complied in alarming numbers. And they kept complying, continuing to press the punishment button after the person had screamed in pain and then apparently gone unconscious. Milgram explained:
I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. Stark authority was pitted against the subjects' [participants'] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects' [participants'] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation.
In my opinion, multitudes of Christians find themselves in a real-life Milgram experiment these days. Their consciences are in conflict with their beloved religious authority figures on several key issues -- ten of which I raise in my book -- but they continue to press the punishment button when instructed to do so. For example:
Many find it increasingly unconscionable to believe that they are among the elect and their non-Christian neighbors (and in many cases, their doctrinally-different Christian neighbors as well) are damned, awaiting eternal conscious torment in hell for their failure to convert to the Christian faith. They realize that this belief has a wide range of negative psychological, social, and political impacts, and they have questions and doubts about the whole system, but they remain silent.Many have lost confidence in a violent God who punishes people for the sins of their ancestors, who uses tsunamis and earthquakes to visit wrath on the disgraced, who blesses wars of choice, and so on. But they publicly defend this view of God in spite of their private misgivings.
Many continue to oppose full human rights for Palestinians because they believe end-time Bible prophecies mandate their underdog status, and because they believe God has granted special privileges and ethical exemptions to the Israeli government. When they hear about the injustices being suffered by Palestinians, they still keep silent. The day-to-day political power of the Christian Zionist lobby in the United States (which has enormous control in the world of religious broadcasting) thus becomes a kind of daily repeat of the Milgram experiment.
Many are afraid to admit that they voted for Barack Obama, or believe in evolution, or are concerned about global climate change, or are OK with their friends being gay or priests being married, or use birth control, or wish women could be treated as equals in their church, or don't take every word of the Bible as having equal authority and historical accuracy. If they speak up, they will be shunned by their religious authorities -- and zapped by their fellow Christians who have been told to press the punishment button when anyone dares to differ by giving the "wrong" answer. So they comply.
When some of us raise questions about these and other issues, and especially when we question some of the underlying theological assumptions that have created these harmful patterns repeatedly through history, we are subjected to the pain buzzer as well. Our motives are judged, our words are twisted, our proposals are misinterpreted, and our books are even banned or burned. But we aren't complaining; we're just sayin': if we, their fellow Christians, are treated like this, how is it going to be for Muslims, gays, Palestinians, and the poor, not to mention the polar bears and rain forests?
So the best way to stay out of religious trouble is to keep your opinions private whenever they differ from the most strident inquisitors in your religious community. If you feel a twinge of guilt when you condemn a person for being gay, don't think about it. Just press the button. When you use dehumanizing language for people of other faith traditions -- or of other opinions within your own faith tradition -- don't feel bad. Just press the button again. Side with your religious authority figures, not with those being criticized, scapegoated, condemned, excluded, and zapped. If you believe what you're told and verbally zap those who differ, you won't get in trouble.
But then again, if these religious authorities are such good people, why do you have to be so afraid of them?
What Stanley Milgram said about "ordinary people simply doing their jobs" could also be said about ordinary Christians (or Muslims, or Jews, or atheists) simply following their leaders.
Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.
I'm a Christian. I love God, Jesus, the Bible, prayer, worship, serving others -- the whole package. But when my conscience tells me that I'm hurting people by complying with religious conventions, I don't keep pressing the button. I start asking questions. That's why I wrote my book, and that's why I'm willing to get into trouble for it.
Brian McLaren, a former pastor, is the author of a dozen books, most recently A New Kind of Christianity: Ten Questions That Are Transforming the Faith (HarperOne). He blogs at brianmclaren.net.
Blogsnark: Liberal Religion vs. Conservative Religion, Is One ...
Conservative Religion: Denigrating Women
Christian right - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Conservative Columnist: "Religion Is Killing The Republican Party"
It also may be helpful to point out that Mosaic Law was not intended to be binding under the 'new covenant.' It was intended to do a certain thing for a specific period of time and, once fulfilled in Christ, it no longer carries the weight it once did.
I'm not sure I follow your comment that 'they'll say sin doesn't apply anymore.' Could you clarify what you mean?
Given over to a reprobate mind, those who reject the truth may feel disliked, but prayers continue.
Speaking for myself, I 'dislike' you because you misrepresent the Gospel of Christ. You've edited everything out of the Gospel message that means something and think it's better off than before you got hold of it.
You proclaim a God without wrath who sent man without sin into a world without justice to the ministrations of a Christ without a cross.
And if our hope in Christ is only for this life, we are more to be pitied than anyone else in the world.
Obviously not every Christian would be this accommodating but not every pagan is this accommodating, either. The problem isn't the fact that a person is an "evangelical." The problem is that people in general are pushy and selfish and want to get their view across no matter if you care or not.
Well, I can't really offer any comment on the rest of your article, since its mere in house dogma bickering, which all I could offer is what I'd prefer to see, but there's no biblical basis for it. Granted, that seems to be a common theme on the subject.....but anyhow....
The above quote is spot on. I do enjoy it when people within the christian circles not only listen to atheists, but even comprehend what they are saying and are able to repeat it back as it was intended.
That might seem a bit condescending, but I hope you realize, that is a very rare gift you have. Kudos.
What do you think it is it that you guys believe you know about God that escaped the comprehension of our Post-Christian Founding Fathers and of Einstein?
"GOD IS AN ESSENCE THAT WE KNOW NOTHING OF. UNTIL THIS AWFUL BLASPHEMY IS GOT RID OF, THERE NEVER WILL BE ANY LIBERAL SCIENCE IN THE WORLD."
John Adams
http://books.google.com/books?id=26V5sFshT_4C&pg=PA189&dq="GOD+IS+AN+ESSENCE+THAT+WE+KNOW+NOTHING+OF.++UNTIL+THIS+AWFUL+BLASPHEMY+IS+GOT+RID+OF,+THERE+NEVER+WILL+BE+ANY+LIBERAL+SCIENCE+IN+THE+WORLD."++John+Adams&ei=vWS6S_-YNpPmlQTp4NHnDw&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false
MY BLASPHEMOUS BLOGS
Bible Belts
http://biblebelts.blogspot.com/
Bewildering Bible Legends
http://bewilderingbiblelegends.blogspot.com/
In the East God Won - The high cost of organized ignorance.
http://whengodwins.blogspot.com/
Holy Cows and Calves - Sacred superstitions, aka religions.
http://holycowsandcalves.blogspot.com/
ניפוץ אלילים - ביעור הבערות
Holy Heretics - Jesus, Maimonides, Spinoza, the Founding Fathers, Herzl and Einstein.
http://holyheretics.com/
Holocaust Haggadah - שואה
Delusion dealers blame the victims.
http://holocausthagaddah.blogspot.com/
Many founding Fathers did believe in God as did Einstein as do many archaeologists and scientists.
But still scripture says:
In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, "I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will. Luke 10:21
So it shouldnt surprise us if even the most 'learned' and revered individuals among us cant seem to comprehend God.
This reminds me of the time when I was watching a Lord of the Rings movie with my roommate. A scene in the movie was definitely NOT in the book, and I turned to her, and said, "This part didn't really happen." She turned to me and said, "This whole story never happened!"
We all love our own delusions. But it would be so foolish to follow a false God. Why don’t we learn from the Jews?
Many “Full of Faith” Jews pray three times daily - with great conviction - that all others pray for a delusion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleinu
That makes sense.
-- those not with us are against us Luke 11:23 NIV
The 1-god of the Big-3 monster theisms enjoys many exponents who speak for it. Just as well, it will never speak for itself — except as a ventriloquist’s dummy.
Iran puts monomaniacal clerics in control of a mullah-based dictatorship with a Shia-styled dummy mouthpiece, Allah. The Vatican puts monomaniacal clerics in control of a bishop-based dictatorship with an RC-styled dummy mouthpiece, God.
Ameristan puts monomaniacal degree mill theologs on the air who advocate a xian dictatorship with a fundie-styled dummy mouthpiece, Christ.
With comic book threats of supernatural damnation, the Cosmic Avenger protects its beloved mullahs, bishops, pedophile priests, “C” Street Family traitors, televangelists, fundie school boards.
Threats from religious madhouses have no standing. The Cosmic Avenger will not be serving up divine retribution. “He’s” just another Big-Lie of the paternalist Big-3.
All 1-god bombast derives from comix noir tarted up as divine discourse. To advance their political agendas, apologists weaponize any “verse” no matter how elided, out-of-context, or perverse.
Written, altered, and interpreted by countless ventriloquists, the 1-god’s ancient lies are endlessly shouted at mind numbing volume by today’s dueling dummies. Xianity and islam, in relentless insistence that that their lies are truths — delight in threatening, harassing, or killing “heretics” who refuse to bow to their theocratic pretensions.
Faith, the trusting suspension of disbelief, has always been theater of the absurd.
as far as "groupthink" goes, there seems to be a lot of it here, in the simple form of uninformed concurrence with McLaren's opinions of conservative Christians. Gotta love it when "progressive" thinking doesn't progress too far. But, admittedly, it is hard to learn truth truly without a dependence on God for truth--ask Adam & Eve how that went for them.
Second, since when does disagreeing with McLaren's often unbiblical thoughts regarding Christianity become "dislike" of his person? This is the foolish, self-centered thin-skinned-ness today, i.e., as though attacking someone's ideas is the same as ad hominem . This basic premise of argumentation is taught in some of the first courses of any Christian education.
Brian, if this is the direction you insist upon taking: (1)Toughen up and admit you are going against a common-sense and careful exegesis of the Christian Scriptures; (2) Chart your new path like an honest truth-broker, and call what you are promulgating with some other name than "Christianity."
I think what we need to understand is that McLaren and his ilk are not, as you say, honest truth-brokers.
They do not 'take every thought captive for obedience to Christ.'