What Kind of College Would Jesus Go To?

A College That's Strictly Different, Chronicle of Higher Education, March 24, 2006

If you're looking for signs of the Theocratic America that Tim LaHaye prays for, you don't have to look much further than Pensacola Christian College.

It was founded 30 years ago, perfectly timed with the beginning of the Republican Revolution, and is about as restrictive and repressive an environment as anything the Taliban might have set up...well, except for the fact that they are "co-ed" in Pensacola. And claim to be Christian.

I'd really advise reading the Chronicle article, it is as informative as it is scary.

Some highlights for you:

• It is not accredited, and so some students have to start college over when they discover that their degree is worthless in the eyes of some employers...though it might be priceless in the eyes of God.
  
• Dissent is never tolerated, and expulsions for even minor infractions are routine.
  
• Students are rewarded for turning each other in for infractions.
  
• There are restrictions on when and where men and women may speak to each other.
• Some elevators and stairwells may be used only by women; others may be used only by men.
  
• Socializing on particular benches is forbidden.
  
• If a man and a woman are walking to class, they may chat; if they stop en route, though, they may be in trouble. Generally men and women caught interacting in any "unchaperoned area" — which is most of the campus — could be subject to severe penalties.
  
• A man and a woman cannot go to an off-campus restaurant together without a chaperon (usually a faculty member). Even running into members of the opposite sex off campus can lead to punishment.
  
• Men and women are not allowed to be at the beach together.
  
• Even couples who are not talking or touching can be reprimanded for engaging in "optical intercourse" — staring too intently into the eyes of a member of the opposite sex. This is also referred to as "making eye babies."
  
• Video games are banned by the college.
  
• Movies are also forbidden, including those rated G.
  
• Music is restricted to classical or approved Christian ("contemporary Christian" artists are deemed too worldly).
  
• Students are allowed to watch television news at 6 o'clock, but TVs are controlled by college employees, who flip a switch to black out the commercials, lest students see anything inappropriate.
  
• In the library, books and magazines are censored.
  
• According to its website "God has called this institution into existence for His own glory; therefore, the administration, faculty, and staff are dedicated to training young people for His service." The divine inspiration for the college allows the institution to intimidate students by telling them that quitting once enrolled is the same as quitting God. If you are expelled, then God has no more use for you than the college did.
  
• The college is Baptist, but not affiliated with the any official Baptist organization. Both its founders are graduates of Bob Jones University but is even more conservative than Bob Jones, which PCC criticizes for using translations of the Bible other thant he King James Version. Bob Jones struck back by criticizing PCC for trying to claim the high ground of Fundamentalism. (To my mind a dubious distinction, but that's what they are into. Be Ye Hot or Be Ye Cold, I guess, but how hot can you get and not be able to tell the difference from the fires of Hell? How strict do you have to be to complain that Bob Jones University is too liberal?)
  
• While computer labs exist, internet access is tightly controlled and limited to only a few hundred approved websites.
  
• One of the founders has also established A Beka Books, acknowledged as the largest Christian-textbook company in the world. A Beka sells textbooks to more than 10,000 Christian schools across the country, offering a complete curriculum for kindergarten through 12th grade. It has also won a big share of the lucrative home-school market and brings in about $70 million in revenue each year. Income from the book company subsidizes the costs of the college, and allows them to keep tuition low enough to entice students away from other rival Christian colleges.
  
• Christianity is woven throughout the curriculum. Creationism is taught in science courses. Classes begin with a prayer. Along with mandatory chapel services, students must attend the campus church three times every week; they are not allowed to go to another church unless they are from the Pensacola area, and even then they need special permission. Mandatory small-group prayer meetings are held in the evenings.
  
• According to their website: "We believe in the imminent, pre-Tribulation return of Jesus Christ for all believers. This Rapture of the saints will be followed by a seven year period of Tribulation, after which Christ will return in glory to judge the world and set up His millennial reign on earth."
  

I wonder if they reimburse you for tuition if the Rapture occurs before the end of the semester?

As a college level instructor myself, who teaches at a primarily Christian private college, I can tell you that this movement to impose a Christian curriculum on public institutions while providing an ever more radical Fundamentalist approach to education in the private schools and colleges is a frightening trend.

The Independent/UK recently published an article which revealed the startling number of graduates of another Christian private school, Patrick Henry College, ending up working for George Bush at the White House.

I think that, even though I am a Christian myself, the most dangerous thing facing our nation at the moment is the rise in political power of the Fundamentalist movement of Conservative Christians.

Don't let them use your faith against you, and remember that the Anti-Christ will convince many that he is Jesus. I'm tempted to say he's got a pretty good plan, there.

Here's the smell test I use. If a religious doctrine, church, or zealot seems to be using his religion to justify hatred and violence instead of love and forgiveness...it probably ain't coming from Jesus.

Who Would Jesus Expell?

Would You Vote For Jesus?

Reader Sue Bumpous of Alexandria, Va., submitted this quote (to Newsweek's Periscope): "Right now, I wouldn't vote Democratic if Jesus Christ was running."

Spoken by Judy Deats, a Texas Republican, who is standing by Rep. Tom DeLay in his re-election bid despite the fact that his association with lobbyist Jack Abramoff has made him vulnerable to political opposition for the first time in more than 20 years.

Easy for her to say, since Jesus isn't likely to run for public office...but suppose he did. Suppose he even ran as a Republican but held true to his own teachings. Would any Republicans vote for him?

Back during the Harriet Meyers fiasco, my identical cousin wrote a short piece for something called No Shame Theatre. The piece contemplates whether the Christian Right and Theocratic Elite would confirm Jesus if he were nominated to sit on the highest court in the land. The great irony is, I'm sure they wouldn't--even though each and every one of them expects to be judged favorably by Him when they "go on up to the place that's the best."

I reprint it here:

Confirm This
By Todd Wm. Ristau (Copyright 2005, all rights reserved)

(lights up on GEORGE BUSH, standing at a podium.)

BUSH: There’s been, uh, a lot of chatter…whispering…guessing about my nomination of Harriet…People in congress saying she isn’t smart enough to be a supreme court justice…that she’s promised people things…that she’s just getting nominated because she’s the person who gives me legal advice…Let me put it this way, you think she isn’t qualified and I’m just paying back some favors. You people got a lot of nerve, you know that? I’m the President. I’m an important person and people all over the world recognize that, but you people think you can do better than me. You can’t. But, I prayed on it, and I talked to my closest personal advisor last night, and he urged me to withdraw Harriet Miers, and so, that’s what I’m doing. Not because I’m weak, but because I’m strong. I’m strong enough to know when to just listen to advice and when to actually take it. (pause) And so, I’m nominating someone you all already love. Or, if you don’t love him, you’d better start loving him, because if you don’t love him, you’re going to have a powerful want of air conditioning in the not too long from now. Heh..heh. (pause) Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the next Supreme Court justice of the United States… My best friend…Jesus.

(GEORGE BUSH walks off stage and JESUS CHRIST enters. A hundred flashbulbs go off. He sits at a long table, wearing a nice suit with a flag lapel pin. He is behind a microphone, pushes his hair to one side and addresses the Senate. Seated in the audience are five SENATORS, who speak without standing.)

JESUS: Thank you. Ladies and Gentlemen, distinguished members of the Senate, I am ready for your questions.

SENATOR 1: Mister Christ—

JESUS: Senator, you can call me Jesus.

SENATOR 1: Mister Christ, we haven’t had a lot of time to review your record or your legal paper trail, but you are a public figure…and I have to say that some of what is in the public record is of great concern to some of us in the Senate and to our constituents.

JESUS: I understand. Please, feel free to ask any questions you might have. A lot of what a person says in their youth are but stones on the path which takes them to a mature understanding. I recognize there may be seeming contradictions and I welcome the opportunity to set the record straight.

SENATOR 1: I’d like to begin by asking you about your devotion to democracy.

JESUS: I’m sorry…is that a question?

SENATOR 1: I’ve looked through your speeches and writings and I can’t find a single mention of democracy or a discussion of individual freedoms in any of them.

JESUS: Senator, I have long used the terms King, King of Kings, and Kingdom of Heaven to illustrate a metaphoric point. If I had the chance to do it again, I believe I would replace that archaic terminology with President, President of Presidents, and Democracy of Heaven.

SENATOR 1: So you do believe in the democratic institutions which make this nation great?

JESUS: I think it is clear that God is in a tight campaign to win the popular vote in the hearts and minds of the people of this nation, and that the granting of free choice to humanity was a tacit affirmation of democratic principles--and the precious right of choice, even if one chooses to make bad choices.

(Jesus smiles, he thinks he scored points with the Senators)

SENATOR 1: So, you are pro-choice?

(Jesus looks nervous, murmurs among senators)

SENATOR 2: If the Senator will yield, I have some questions about the role of the judiciary.

SENATOR 1: I do so yield, but with the proviso that I may return to this important question.

SENATOR 2: Jesus, I have noted in your public speeches several instances of a predisposition toward mercy. If confirmed as a Justice of the Nation’s highest court, would you administer harsh punishment when warranted?

JESUS: The merciful will receive mercy.

SENATOR 2: That’s what you’ve said. My constituents are ardently in favor of the death penalty as both a punishment and a deterrent. We are very concerned about your having taken steps in the past to halt the legal execution of an adulteress.

JESUS: Senator, it is true that I halted that execution, however I’d like to point out that I later submitted to my own execution.

(Murmers of approval from all senators but #2)

SENATOR 2: But you were not guilty of the crime for which you were executed. Not only were you innocent of that crime but of any crime, and yet you paid the ultimate price for the false accusation! Doesn’t your very death therefore stand as an argument against death as a punishment?

(Jesus looks nervous, murmurs from the senators)

SENATOR 3: If the senator will yield—

SENATOR 2: I do so yield, but on the proviso—

SENATOR 3: Yes. Jesus, many of my constituents are hoping for a strict constructionist to sit on the bench. A judge who will interpret the constitution literally, as the founding fathers intended it, as they wrote it, and not legislate from the bench.

JESUS: George mentioned this to me.

SENATOR 3: You’ve said that not one jot of the law can be changed, and yet you have also been sharply criticized for taking a stand against being too strict in the interpretation of law…saying that love of the letter of the law blinds one to the spirit of the law. Which is your current position?

JESUS: Haven’t you read what David did when—

SENATOR 3: (confused) I’m sorry?

JESUS: When David went into the temple and ate the bread which only the priests were allowed—

SENATOR 3: I don’t think a parable is appropriate here. We are interested in specific answers to specific questions, not symbolic evasions. Please answer the question—are you, as a judge, there to interpret the law or to create the law?

JESUS: I am not the creator of the law, I am the fulfillment of the law.

(Senators look nervously at each other.)

SENATOR 4: Senator, if you will yield--

SENATOR 3: I do so yield.

SENATOR 4: I’m concerned about your position on privacy. I see here in one report that you have said “Nothing which is covered up will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. Whatever you have said in the dark shall be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in private rooms shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.” Is this accurate?

JESUS: It is.

SENATOR 4: How can a government function—or even a private household—without an expectation of privacy?

JESUS: Where nothing is secret, there is no need of lies.

(Nervous murmurs among senators)

SENATOR 1: Jesus, I notice in your “teachings” that you seem to have a bias against wealth and those who have it. Something about a camel and a needle, and if you would be perfect, sell everything you have, including your home, and give everything to the poor.

JESUS: Well, let me explain about that…

SENATOR 4: Is it your position that the only perfect people are the impoverished and the homeless are to be exalted above the owners of property?

JESUS: I was illustrating, perhaps with hyperbole, that the things of this world can blind you to spiritual truths.

SENATOR 3: (with a chuckle) So, you’re saying that if confirmed you will forgo a salary?

JESUS: Is receiving something without sacrifice a satisfactory illustration of justice? Or of value?

SENATOR 4: The senate will ask the questions, Jesus, and you will confine yourself to answers.

SENATOR 5: Jesus, you sound to me like a communist. Frankly, some of us find that very disturbing. America is founded on the principle of a free-market economy and in an era where welfare reform is perhaps the single most import issues facing us, it is alarming that a nominee for the Supreme Court should be on record as having said that everyone should give to anyone who begs of them whatever is asked of them.

JESUS: Poverty issues are very important to me.

SENATOR 5: Yes, that much is clear. Are you, Jesus, anti-wealth?

JESUS: I do not conspire against wealth. It is wealth that conspires against you.

(Murmurs among the senators)

SENATOR 1: Jesus, as you know, this is a nation at war.

JESUS: I’ve talked with the President about that a lot.

SENATOR 1: Yes, and frankly, some of the quotes attributed to you have us very concerned about how you would rule in matters directly pertaining to the execution of that war and the fundamental doctrines of –

JESUS: The senator is talking about Pre-emption.

SENATOR 2: Yes…you’ve said: “Don’t resist one who is evil” and advocated turning the other cheek if struck. You have cautioned against vengeance.

JESUS: (slightly evasive) The whole “love your enemies” thing has been blown out of proportion, and as the President has tried to convince me, the issue of turning your cheek after being struck is only an issue if you allow yourself to be struck in the first place. I would advocate not being struck. Taking steps to avoid being struck before the striking occurs.

SENATOR 3: Is that the same as saying “strike or be stricken”? Or are you talking about appeasement?

(Jesus looks nervous again, fiddles with the flag on his lapel, senators murmur)

SENATOR 2: Jesus, as a nominee to one of three branches of government…I’m concerned about the extent of your personal relationship with the President and how that might compromise the separation of powers. Will you continue to have private conversations with the president if confirmed?

JESUS: Yes. I will talk to anyone who talks to me. I’d talk to you, too, if you called out to me, no matter what time or what subject.

(Murmurs)

SENATOR 4: Could you describe the nature of your conversations with the President? Have you ever discussed matters of policy, the execution of the War on Terror, or matters which might come before the judiciary? Is your role that of an advisor or a confidant?

JESUS: When we talk, he mostly does all the talking. He listens…very selectively. When I advised him that if your enemy hungers, to feed him; that if he thirsts, you should give him drink, and that by doing so you will heap coals of fire on his head….I think he just heard the coals of fire on his head part.

SENATOR 5: I see. You do not believe in pre-emptive acts of warfare, or in taking just retribution for violent acts against the state. You oppose secrecy in government even when such secrecy is in the best interest of the economy and national security. You think the rich are imperiled by their wealth and should give it away to anyone too lazy to work but with enough gall to ask for it…You think anyone who asks to be forgiven should be forgiven— no matter what their crime…You are soft on crime because you think its better for your soul to have your wealth stolen from you than it is to “hoard” it….You are a pacifist of the Peace at any Cost school of thought…and you're inconsistent....you say you come not to bring peace on earth but to bring a sword and then you turn around and say blessed are the peacemakers. It's outrageous and insulting.

JESUS: Senator, I think you are misrepresenting—

SENATOR 5: I’m just trying to get a clear picture of your underlying philosophy and I’m not sure I like what I’m hearing.

JESUS: Senator, it boils down to this. I think that if you can help, you should help. I think that loving your enemies includes not killing them. I believe that you cannot over come evil with evil but only with good. And I think that there is no crime which can not be forgiven if forgiveness is honestly sought.

SENATOR 1: Thank you, Jesus…You’ve been very cooperative.

(Long pause…Jesus stares up sorrowfully at the audience.)

JESUS: You think I’m too liberal to be on the Court, don’t you?

SENATORS: (in unison) We’ll be in touch.

(Lights out. End)


What do you think? Would any of these folks who hold hands with Jesus and wrap themselves in the flag really want Jesus on the bench or in the Oval Office?

If not, how can they claim to be his followers if they won't let him take the lead?

They Will Know We Are Christians By Our Love...

Jesus said, "Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" (Matthew 7:16)

Or, as the friendly angel in a Star Trek episode made the children chant: "As you believe, so shall you do, so shall you do, so shall you do."

The purpose of this blog is to, as I am called by Christ to do, promote a Christian ideal. And also, as Jesus so often did, to point out the hypocrisy of those who claim to follow and love him but whose fruit just doesn't bear that out.

I see a lot of people with WWJD bumperstickers...and I'm not convinced they actually know what Jesus would do.

Our president has made much of his belief in Jesus and how he answers to a higher power. This site is going to examine his fruit in great detail and attempt to determine if he's offering us grapes and figs or thistles and thorns.

It ought to be easy for those with eyes to see the difference.

Let's take something that came out today.

In Secret Unit's 'Black Room,' a Grim Portrait of U.S. Abuse, as reported by the New York Times.

Would Jesus have told his disciples "No Blood, No Foul" or advocated any form of torture, no matter how mild, to achieve his ultimate goal of fulfilling his Father's mission?

If Jesus wasn't lying about any injury to the least of his bretheren being an injury to God...Why aren't Christians rioting over the torture of these people as though they were torturing Christ?

I listen to a lot of the conservative talk radio hosts, who claim Christian virtues as quickly as they claim patriotism, and in fact don't draw a distinction between the two.

There are some problems with that, and if you believe in Jesus, you'd remember some things he said.

The "render unto Ceasar" quote from the Messiah argues for a seperation of church and state more effectively than Jefferson's writings on the subject and to a Christian ought to carry more weight.

It seems difficult to read the book of Matthew and come away convinced that Jesus would be a pro-war activist who would ridicule Cindy Sheehan and call anti-war activists the greatest threat to this nation next to Al Qaida. He didn't say blessed are the peacemakers after the evil ones have been destroyed. He said not to resist an evil person and to turn to him the other cheek.

Hard to get a doctrine of pre-emption out of that.

We hear the President constantly telling us that September 11th changed everything.

Did September 11th change the bible?

Does Jesus really think that the 3,000 people killed on that day justify the deaths of nearly that many US soldiers and between 30,000 to 100,000 civilians in Iraq?

Could one of you Conservative Christian Theocrats please explain to me why you honestly think Jesus is on your side and not the side his words would seem to indicate?

For more on this topic, and an explanation of Just War Theory, please visit this page: Serving God and Country, an article in today's Columbia Missourian.

A related article from the same paper gives Official Denominational Positions on the War in Iraq.

The frightening thing is that it pretty much breaks down into those denominations which are eager for the Second Coming and an angry Jesus who will seperate sinners from saints during the Battle of Armageddon, and those who are accept that Jesus knew what he was talking about when he said that none shall know the hour or the day and are willing to let God start Armageddon when he gets around to it.

I would also like those in the former camp to explain to me how, exactly, they came to the conclusion that they could do anything at all to hasten the coming of the End Times, and what makes them so certain they are working for the right side if they are trying to force God's hand.

Do You Love Jesus? Check Yes or No Before You Run For Office

Jeff Sharp, county attorney for Barren County, and a church youth group are surveying all Kentucky legislators and legislative candidates with a single question: "Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?" --Survey questions politicians on Jesus, by Peter Smith, The Courier-Journal (Kentucky), March 3rd, 2006

Jeff and his Theocratic Bullies (many of whom are school children) claim that this survey is just an effort to inform the voters, but he said he has two goals -- to get people thinking about whether to accept Jesus, and to let candidates know "we're watching them and watching their votes on things."

Now, the U.S. Constitution says, "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust." And to be fair, nobody is being required to fill out this survey, but the implication is pretty clear that if you don't say yes, you're going to have a hard time getting elected in Kentucky.

The survey, which gives candidates space to provide an "explanation or testimony" after their response, tells candidates that the class may provide the survey results to local churches in each candidate's area.

And so far, the ones who have replied have all replied that they sure do accept Jesus. Of course, Rep. Kathy Stein, D-Lexington (who is Jewish), is causing no end of fuss over this. She was so anti-Jesus that she actually filed a resolution asking her House colleagues to disregard the survey and all "theocratic tendencies."

Sharp thinks Stein is making a mountain out of a mole hill. He says she shouldn't get so worked up about a simple little bitty ole survey.

What do you think?

How long before we actually do get a viable third party?

I forsee the fundamentalist base of the Republican Party breaking away and founding the Conservative Christian Party in the not too distant.

Because, that's what Jesus would do.

Remember that stirring part of the Sermon on the Mount where he told everyone to run for and win elections for everything from the school board to the Presidency in order to ensure dominance of their religious ideology through secular legislation?

If you don't, you're clearly not reading the Post 9-11 translation.