A great piece on Falwell that says what I'd like to have said a thousand times better than I ever could have.

 

The stone is cast

Jerry Falwell spent a career demonizing others. Upon his death, what else could he expect in return?

 

By Alan Wolfe

 

 

May 15, 2007 | One never wants to speak ill of the dead, but in the case of Jerry Falwell, how can one not? Falwell will always be remembered for his "700 Club" comment in the wake of Sept. 11: "I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America, I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen.'" Even though Falwell later apologized, the damage had been done: A sacred moment had been used for profane purpose.

 

And that, really, is Falwell's legacy. To the religious life of the United States he made no significant contribution. But to the political life of the country, he made one: He founded the Moral Majority. In so doing, Falwell managed to take something holy -- one does not have to be a Christian to admire the life and teachings of Jesus Christ -- and turned it into something partisan and divisive. Falwell, the quintessential conservative Christian, was always more conservative than Christian. To the extent that history will remember him, it will be as a politician, not as a preacher.

 

Even Falwell's political contribution, despite the success of the Republicans during the Reagan years, left a mixed legacy behind. But the Moral Majority disbanded in 1989, prompting the inevitable thought that Falwell's ideas were neither moral nor in the majority. The movement of conservative Protestants into the base of the Republican Party was far too important a task to be entrusted to a man as oblivious to public relations as Falwell. Once the Ralph Reeds and Karl Roves took over the task of blending religion and politics, there was no room for Falwell. Longing for Washington, he had to settle for Lynchburg, Va.

 

But then there was cable television, the perfect medium for someone as shallow as this man. Falwell appeared so many times on cable news that one tended to forget how little influence he actually wielded. Had it not been for cable television, Falwell would have been forgotten long ago (and I would not be writing about his legacy). He was perfect for the world created by Fox: extremist, polarizing, Manichaean. (The Manichees, a Persian sect that for a time attracted the great Saint Augustine, adhered to a black-and-white reality in which evil was always in an endless struggle with the good.) Five minutes of hate followed by a commercial break: It is not a format fit for all, but for Falwell, it fit like a glove.

 

Conservative Christianity has been trying to recover from Falwell for the past two decades. Just as his political views were too buffoonish to make the Moral Majority a reality, his religious sensibilities were too shallow to spread evangelical Protestantism. Evangelicalism grew in the exurban megachurches, and the megachurches, implicitly and occasionally explicitly, rejected Falwell's approach to the faith. Rick Warren, Joel Osteen, Bill Hybels -- these inclusive preachers inherited the mantle of Billy Graham, not Falwell and his great rival Pat Robertson. With the maturation of American evangelicalism has come an interest in social justice, environmentalism and peace. The people who represent evangelical Protestantism's future want little or nothing to do with injustice, pollution and war.

 

Of course America's megachurches offer a thin theology equivalent to twelve-step theology. But Falwell's contribution to American religion was even less than that. Falwell's university -- Liberty University -- never achieved anything resembling serious academic status, although it did produce a decent enough basketball team. Falwell's church, Thomas Road Baptist Church, with its Scopes-trial era insistence on hell and damnation, was not what American Christians wanted to hear. Falwell's 1980 book, "Listen, America," is an embarrassing string of clich?s. "Sin is a transgression of God's law and God's law is unalterable," Falwell wrote. "To sin is to voluntarily disobey God and His divine laws." But it was not the sinfulness of human beings that preoccupied Falwell; it was the sinfulness of the country in which they lived: "Sin brings reproach upon a people. This is the reason we are in a nosedive as a nation." Less than 50 years after the defeat of Nazi Germany, Falwell could write of America that "we have become one of the most blatantly sinful nations of all time." Falwell's theology, such as it was, never made clear how America could be both the promised land and Gomorrah at the same time.

 

Instead of pondering Jerry Falwell's legacy, we would be better off asking how this man ever become a public figure in the first place. America has had more than its share of religiously inspired demagogues -- Dr. Fred Swartz, Billy James Hargis, Carl McIntyre come to mind -- but they are forgotten figures, marginal even to the times in which lived. One would like to believe that the United States has become a bigger and better country since the days when men like them preached about captive nations and denounced the pernicious influence of rock 'n' roll. But then there is Jerry Falwell. In death, as he did in life, he reminds us that demagoguery never dies; it just changes its form. Jerry Falwell expressed great hate for a lot of his fellow Americans. It is no wonder that so many of them will greet his death with something less than love.

I give him and people in a similar veing a big 'Yawn'.

 

The reason he gets so elevated and promoted by the media are the fact that some people get emotional, distraught, and angry over opinions someone who has literally no power over anyone's way of life.

 

I worry and care more about the offensive and potentially damaging words and actions of someone in congress or elsewhere whose voice actually means something.

 

The fact that this writer had this editorial waiting in the wings and dancing on graves is lame.

Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses aren't Christians.

 

Not that it has anything to do with this thread but its a clarification.

 

Falwell is definitely not someone I agreed with but I'm not one to piss on his grave and be happy that he died.

 

I've got a couple of Jehova's Witness friends and I have trouble agreeing with your statement. Aren't they a separate branch inside Christianity (away from Protestanism and Catholicsm)?

 

Here's an official link:

http://www.jw-media.org/beliefs/trueworship.htm

 

I'm pretty sure the same applies to Mormons (aka Latter Day Saints).

Believe it or not, but faith in Christ isn't the only thing that makes you Christian (hence why Messianic Jews aren't in the gang).

 

I think Christians in general take issue with how much Jehovah's Witnesses add to the Bible.

I second Fox, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians, however, Messianic Jews are.

The fact that this writer had this editorial waiting in the wings and dancing on graves is lame.

 

This is how the journalism world works. Whoever can get their word in first is king. I garauntee every single newspaper, tv station, radio, and blogger in the world already had their Falwell obit written already. And many of them probably had similar things to this.

Good

I second Fox, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians, however, Messianic Jews are.

 

Catholics, if they are good Catholics, would say the same about all the post-reformation Christians. Techincally all those groups are destined for hell, are they not? What exactly presents the authority on what Christian is?

 

The division of groups and sects is one strong reason why I don't like organized religion.

Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses aren't Christians.

 

Not that it has anything to do with this thread but its a clarification.

 

Falwell is definitely not someone I agreed with but I'm not one to piss on his grave and be happy that he died.

 

I've got a couple of Jehova's Witness friends and I have trouble agreeing with your statement. Aren't they a separate branch inside Christianity (away from Protestanism and Catholicsm)?

 

Here's an official link:

http://www.jw-media.org/beliefs/trueworship.htm

 

I'm pretty sure the same applies to Mormons (aka Latter Day Saints).

I'm almost certain the reject the trinity.

 

That makes it pretty cut and dry.

 

I second Fox, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians, however, Messianic Jews are.

 

Catholics, if they are good Catholics, would say the same about all the post-reformation Christians. Techincally all those groups are destined for hell, are they not? What exactly presents the authority on what Christian is?

 

The division of groups and sects is one strong reason why I don't like organized religion.Its not a division or a sect, but the proper term.

 

I don't care what they personally call themselves, I worry about my own beliefs but its just simply not correct to group the two in question.

 

I also never understand why people say, 'So and so is a reason why I don't like organized religion'. My older brother says this a lot. You're either turned off by the entire faith, I don't think little things like classifications would prevent you from believing in a faith or not. If someone was interested/believed in Jesus or Allah or whoever they would. You have faith or you don't.

Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses aren't Christians.

 

Not that it has anything to do with this thread but its a clarification.

 

Falwell is definitely not someone I agreed with but I'm not one to piss on his grave and be happy that he died.

 

I've got a couple of Jehova's Witness friends and I have trouble agreeing with your statement. Aren't they a separate branch inside Christianity (away from Protestanism and Catholicsm)?

 

Here's an official link:

http://www.jw-media.org/beliefs/trueworship.htm

 

I'm pretty sure the same applies to Mormons (aka Latter Day Saints).

I'm almost certain the reject the trinity.

 

That makes it pretty cut and dry.

 

I second Fox, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians, however, Messianic Jews are.

 

Catholics, if they are good Catholics, would say the same about all the post-reformation Christians. Techincally all those groups are destined for hell, are they not? What exactly presents the authority on what Christian is?

 

The division of groups and sects is one strong reason why I don't like organized religion.Its not a division or a sect, but the proper term.

 

I don't care what they personally call themselves, I worry about my own beliefs but its just simply not correct to group the two in question.

 

I also never understand why people say, 'So and so is a reason why I don't like organized religion'. My older brother says this a lot. You're either turned off by the entire faith, I don't think little things like classifications would prevent you from believing in a faith or not. If someone was interested/believed in Jesus or Allah or whoever they would. You have faith or you don't.

 

Why does the trinity belief define a Christian? The trinity was a man made political compromise. It's never mentioned in the bible, right?

 

And the thing is, classifcations are not little things. They are big things. People fight wars over them. See Sunni vs Shiite and History of the Christian faith, 1500-1700. They preclude me from following a specific faith because organized faith almost invariably leads to conflict, exclusivity, and eventually the faith itself becoming a club. If I can detach myself and make my own choices, then why must I be one of the religions anyway? Where an organized faith doesn't do so, then it must agree to live in harmony with other faiths. At which point, arent' we experiencing religious relativity?

 

I happen to think Christ is one of the greatest figures of all time. Believing in his words in spirit just seems much more important than believing in an organization that revolves around him. The same goes for all religions of course.

Don't agree with calling a Jehovah Witness not a Christian. Belief in the trinity is not how you would define a Christian. Being a Christian means you believe in Jesus as savior and you try to follow his teachings and life. That is what a Jehovah Witness does, same with the Mormons.

Thats simply perception or stereotype.

 

I've never 'belonged' (word only used to symbolize a church I physically attend) to a church that had conflict or exclusivity nor was it or did it become a club.

 

I also don't believe more in a church or organization then I do in Jesus, his teachings, and God. I chose the church I did more on the basis of my preference on how God is praised and how it fills my spiritual needs on a weekly basis in a public setting. Not because I wanted to be part of a club or to flaunt my faith.

 

Don't agree with calling a Jehovah Witness not a Christian. Belief in the trinity is not how you would define a Christian. Being a Christian means you believe in Jesus as savior and you try to follow his teachings and life. That is what a Jehovah Witness does, same with the Mormons.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that only a certain number of people get everlasting life which goes against the teachings of Christ.

 

Mormons created their own book to go with the bible for their faith. I know a few mormons (or did in high school) and I didn't know a one who would/did refer to themselves as a Christian. They said they were, Mormon.

I know a few mormons (or did in high school) and I didn't know a one who would/did refer to themselves as a Christian. They said they were, Mormon.

I don't know, that's more of a colloquial usage issue, IMO. Most Anglicans, Lutherans, or Episcopalians will refer to themselves as Christians, while Catholics will almost always refer to themselves as Catholics. That doesn't make Catholics non-Christians, nor does it mean that Catholics don't believe they're Christians. It's just that terms like Catholic and Mormon are more preferable than Christian when describing these very distinct, non-Protestant groups.

 

I'll admit that I don't know much about religion, but I prefer a more secular, outsider's description of religious faiths. Take religioustolerance.org's definition of Christianity:

 

There are probably thousands of different definitions of the word "Christian." We have chosen the same inclusive definition as is used by public opinion pollsters and government census offices: A "Christian" includes any group or individual who seriously, devoutly, prayerfully describes themselves as Christian. Under this definition, Christianity includes: Roman Catholics, Southern Baptists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, United Church members, even a small minority of Unitarian Universalists, etc.

I mean, if you told any of the Jehovah's Witnesses on this board that, based on your belief system, they aren't really Christians, they wouldn't be too pleased. Their religious belief system says that they are, in fact, Christians. Who really gets to be the arbiter?

 

And I'm not even Christian, but I'll admit that I was offended by the characterization of these two groups as "not Christians." Hell, the other day that POS Al Sharpton even said that Mormons like Mitt Romney don't really believe in God. That sh*t pissed me off.

There is or was apparently a website which posts quotes from religious figures such as Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and Osama Bin Laden, and asks you to guess who said each quote. It's disturbing how similar their quotes actually are.

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Quiz_JPO.htm

 

In all fairness, most of that is Pat Robertson, who's all sorts of crazy.

 

As for Falwell, as a card carrying Republican, I'd be remiss if I didn't tip my hat to his religious right revolution that was given full credibility during the Reagan years, and he certainly deserves credit for playing a role in taking back Congress in '94 (though, he probably took more credit than he deserved).

 

However, in recent years, many in the party took steps to distance themselves without denigrating his past contributions...and to me, that's the way it should be. He was a tremendously influential person, and certainly one of the key quasi-political figures of the past 30 years. I don't think it's appropriate to say he was a "good" man because he was an exploitive and opportunistic pedagogue who truly valued his own fame over the "morals" he claimed to preach, but that does not mean he was a "bad" person either.

Thats simply perception or stereotype.

 

I've never 'belonged' (word only used to symbolize a church I physically attend) to a church that had conflict or exclusivity nor was it or did it become a club.

 

I also don't believe more in a church or organization then I do in Jesus, his teachings, and God. I chose the church I did more on the basis of my preference on how God is praised and how it fills my spiritual needs on a weekly basis in a public setting. Not because I wanted to be part of a club or to flaunt my faith.

 

Don't agree with calling a Jehovah Witness not a Christian. Belief in the trinity is not how you would define a Christian. Being a Christian means you believe in Jesus as savior and you try to follow his teachings and life. That is what a Jehovah Witness does, same with the Mormons.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that only a certain number of people get everlasting life which goes against the teachings of Christ.

 

Mormons created their own book to go with the bible for their faith. I know a few mormons (or did in high school) and I didn't know a one who would/did refer to themselves as a Christian. They said they were, Mormon.

 

 

The bible is open to interpretation, I would hope you could at the least agree to that. Classifying someone who calls themselves Christians as non-Christians and believe in Jesus because of how they interpret a certain section of the Bible is not right. Would you classify someone who has sex before marriage as a non-Christian who is destined for hell? Because I am sure plenty of your fellow Christians would and it is easy to interpret the bible in that way.

OMG.

 

went to TMZ and look what I found:

Thats simply perception or stereotype.

 

I've never 'belonged' (word only used to symbolize a church I physically attend) to a church that had conflict or exclusivity nor was it or did it become a club.

 

I also don't believe more in a church or organization then I do in Jesus, his teachings, and God. I chose the church I did more on the basis of my preference on how God is praised and how it fills my spiritual needs on a weekly basis in a public setting. Not because I wanted to be part of a club or to flaunt my faith.

 

Don't agree with calling a Jehovah Witness not a Christian. Belief in the trinity is not how you would define a Christian. Being a Christian means you believe in Jesus as savior and you try to follow his teachings and life. That is what a Jehovah Witness does, same with the Mormons.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that only a certain number of people get everlasting life which goes against the teachings of Christ.

 

Mormons created their own book to go with the bible for their faith. I know a few mormons (or did in high school) and I didn't know a one who would/did refer to themselves as a Christian. They said they were, Mormon.

 

 

The bible is open to interpretation, I would hope you could at the least agree to that. Classifying someone who calls themselves Christians as non-Christians and believe in Jesus because of how they interpret a certain section of the Bible is not right. Would you classify someone who has sex before marriage as a non-Christian who is destined for hell? Because I am sure plenty of your fellow Christians would and it is easy to interpret the bible in that way.

 

Interpreting beliefs about sin and beliefs about theology together is unwise.

Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses aren't Christians.

 

Jehovah's Witness believe in Jesus and we call ourselves Christians. not sure where your definition came from

 

 

i didnt like the dude but i aint gonna be happy about his death... i aint gonna lie when I heard Jimmy Carter's old quote of "in Christian way, he could go to hell" i lost it laughing.

 

Thats simply perception or stereotype.

 

I've never 'belonged' (word only used to symbolize a church I physically attend) to a church that had conflict or exclusivity nor was it or did it become a club.

 

I also don't believe more in a church or organization then I do in Jesus, his teachings, and God. I chose the church I did more on the basis of my preference on how God is praised and how it fills my spiritual needs on a weekly basis in a public setting. Not because I wanted to be part of a club or to flaunt my faith.

 

Don't agree with calling a Jehovah Witness not a Christian. Belief in the trinity is not how you would define a Christian. Being a Christian means you believe in Jesus as savior and you try to follow his teachings and life. That is what a Jehovah Witness does, same with the Mormons.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that only a certain number of people get everlasting life which goes against the teachings of Christ.

 

 

Jehovah's Witnesses believe followers of Jehovah and of course His son will get everlasting life. again i aint sure where you getting this from.

A Christian is a person who adheres to a monotheistic religion centered on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as presented in the New Testament. Any more distinction is a matter of dogma.

 

 

 

I hope he enjoys his time in hell.

 

Such vitriol for the dead only moves you closer to such a fate yourself.

I hope he enjoys his time in hell.

 

Such vitriol for the dead only moves you closer to such a fate yourself.

 

That sucks if you believe in it.

 

I also don't believe more in a church or organization then I do in Jesus, his teachings, and God. I chose the church I did more on the basis of my preference on how God is praised and how it fills my spiritual needs on a weekly basis in a public setting. Not because I wanted to be part of a club or to flaunt my faith.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that only a certain number of people get everlasting life which goes against the teachings of Christ.

 

Personally, I don't feel like I need a church to express my beliefs, and I don't really think anyone does. Religion is a deeply personal thing and you should practice it within yourself and within your life.

Being raised a Catholic, I was definetly taught that only a certain number of people get into heaven. Isn't this the same thing?

 

 

However, in recent years, many in the party took steps to distance themselves without denigrating his past contributions...and to me, that's the way it should be. He was a tremendously influential person, and certainly one of the key quasi-political figures of the past 30 years. I don't think it's appropriate to say he was a "good" man because he was an exploitive and opportunistic pedagogue who truly valued his own fame over the "morals" he claimed to preach, but that does not mean he was a "bad" person either.

 

He wasn't a bad person because he didn't have morals or because he valued fame over morals. He was a bad person because the things he said and did were immoral. They went against basic human rights and were full of hate and slander.

Just to clarify, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses both technically belong to the Christian church, as a structure.

 

The trinity has not been declared an official appendix of membership in the Christian church, but is still held as highly important in most every sect of the Church. Unitarians are another sect that doesn't believe in a divine trinity, nor do they believe that Jesus was the only fully human / fully God persona to exist. But none of this is all that significant in the grand scheme of things.

 

I'm a pastor and Jerry Falwell has definietly made my job a lot harder. But I've hurt a lot of people too in my life, so there is not much I can say, in the effect of Falwell's seeming hatred, as I have my own hatred I deal with. Human life is human life, no matter in what capacity, all life is significant and loved, even Jerry Falwell's.

 

 

(Fox @ May 15 2007, 11:50 PM) I also don't believe more in a church or organization then I do in Jesus, his teachings, and God. I chose the church I did more on the basis of my preference on how God is praised and how it fills my spiritual needs on a weekly basis in a public setting. Not because I wanted to be part of a club or to flaunt my faith.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that only a certain number of people get everlasting life which goes against the teachings of Christ.

 

Personally, I don't feel like I need a church to express my beliefs, and I don't really think anyone does. Religion is a deeply personal thing and you should practice it within yourself and within your life.

Being raised a Catholic, I was definetly taught that only a certain number of people get into heaven. Isn't this the same thing?

 

 

This kind of response hurts me more than anything in my conversations with the world. If there is anything Christ taught, it is that we belong to each other in some kind of mysterious way. Life belongs to together for the purposes of love, growth, struggles, and enjoyment. Jesus commanded that we live life together, not suggested. He created us in community just like He created himself in community (trinity), and that is exactly what the Church is; a relationship between people, where the Spirit of God somehow finds his way in it.

I'm consoling myself with the fact that, contrary to his expectations, Jerry Falwell has simply ended up as a heap of old bones somewhere.

I won't subscribe to the notion of Falwell in Hell (if there is even such a place, since thinking of things in those terms creates a very "human" quality to something that is beyond our comprehension, which is what Jesus actually said when describing "heaven"), but if there is a "physical" Heaven (with clouds, harps, angels, etc.), Falwell is probably right now in front of God and God is simply looking down and saying, "What were you thinking?"

Jehovah's Witnesses believe followers of Jehovah and of course His son will get everlasting life. again i aint sure where you getting this from.

Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in the higher 144,000 that get to rule with Jesus?

 

A Christian, to me, is one who follows Jesus and God as spelled out in the New Testament. I don't feel any religion that adds their own book or teachings in addition to what Christ said is a Christian.

 

Does it really matter? No. But, I (read: my own opinion backed up by my belief) don't think they should be grouped together when you are grouping other religions and denominations that don't believe the same things.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe followers of Jehovah and of course His son will get everlasting life. again i aint sure where you getting this from.

Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in the higher 144,000 that get to rule with Jesus?

 

A Christian, to me, is one who follows Jesus and God as spelled out in the New Testament. I don't feel any religion that adds their own book or teachings in addition to what Christ said is a Christian.

 

Does it really matter? No. But, I (read: my own opinion backed up by my belief) don't think they should be grouped together when you are grouping other religions and denominations that don't believe the same things.

 

yeah we do but we also believe that those who arent part of the 144,000 but are followers will enjoy everlasting life on a cleaned up Earth after Armaggedon.

 

also we go by the bible, all those books and magazines Witnesses pass out are based on the bible and not the other way around. basically every paragraph in those publications references a bible text to show where thats coming from.