Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
THE RENOUNCE AND DENOUNCE DEBATE ON PARSLEY.
Over at the Washington Post's On Faith blog, moderators Sally Quinn and Jon Meacham ask if John McCain should renounce Rod Parsley because he called Islam a "false religion" that must be "destroyed?"
The responses from the blog's panel are varied, but generally urge looking at the broader landscape rather than focusing on one statement (see some excerpts below or click through to The Washington Post and read them all).
As I've said before, Parsley has problems not because of one statement, but because of his entire body of work, dedicated to lining his pockets on the fears of his followers about scary gay people, secularists, spiritual warfare, Satan, and the end of the world. Using Christianity as a shield, Parsley attempts to immunize from criticism your basic get-rich-quick scheme: sow your seed, he says as he demands that his followers tithe to him in obedience to God, and you will reap a hundred-fold return.
Like other prosperity televangelists, Parsley is no Bible scholar. Just last Sunday, he demonstrated his lack of grasp of hermeneutics -- or of etymology -- when discussing a Bible verse containing the word "vacillate." He asserted that "vacillate" is the root for the word "Vaseline" because you slip and slide around on said petroleum product. When he says that Islam is a "false religion" that has to be destroyed, he's reflecting a very low-brow (but prevalent) view of the end of days which like our foreign policy views real and imaginary conflicts one-dimensionally, and through the prism of Biblical prophecy.
The real scandal is that Parsley gets a tax exemption to run a business (with no transparency or accountability) by exploiting his followers' anxieties and vulnerabilities about perceived enemies identified (they believe) by God's inerrant word. If he didn't have that, he'd have no platform from which to insist that the Bible commands him to proclaim Islam the enemy.
--Sarah Posner
"If Islam is a 'false religion' then so too must Christianity and Judaism be. Pastor Parsley unfortunately demonstrates a level of ignorance that is both dangerous and divisive in understanding the faithful and historic connection between the three great Abrahamic, monotheistic religions of the world, Judaism, Christianity and Islam." (The Right Reverend John Bryson Chane, the eighth Episcopal Bishop of Washington) "We should collectively denounce and renounce denouncing and renouncing." (Emergent church leader Brian McLaren).
COMMENTS (7)
"The real scandal is that Parsley gets a tax exemption to run a business (with no transparency or accountability) by exploiting his followers' anxieties and vulnerabilities about perceived enemies identified (they believe) by God's inerrant word. If he didn't have that, he'd have no platform from which to insist that the Bible commands him to proclaim Islam the enemy."
Substitute "white people" for Islam and couldn't the same thing be said about Obama's continued support of his spiritual mentor Rev. Wright?
Posted by: Chicounsel | April 2, 2008 4:57 PM
Just last Sunday, he demonstrated his lack of grasp of hermeneutics -- or of etymology -- when discussing a Bible verse containing the word "vacillate."
It gets worse. I just did a search on an online concordance offering about a dozen different Bible translations. The word "vacillate" appears in none of them. He might be using an off-the-wall translation that does use it, but even if you believe the authors all wrote in English, the etymology of a word that doesn't show up in any standard English translation is irrelevant to any hermenutic I can think of.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 2, 2008 5:55 PM
Substitute "white people" for Islam and couldn't the same thing be said about Obama's continued support of his spiritual mentor Rev. Wright?
Chicounsel:
But Rev. Wright never said anything that comes close this statement so please stop grasping for straws.
Posted by: Micheline | April 2, 2008 5:58 PM
I don't think Wright and his parishoners take themselves to be fundamentalists. So, his parishoners can take his sermons with a grain of salt.
So could Parsley's parishioners, if they're willing to read the good book for themselves.
I find Susan Jacoby insulting, myself.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 2, 2008 5:59 PM
"Substitute "white people" for Islam and couldn't the same thing be said about Obama's continued support of his spiritual mentor Rev. Wright?"
Sure, if you're a partisan moron incapable of dealing with reality. The rest of us, not so much.
Posted by: PaulB | April 2, 2008 8:41 PM
Who's this Parsley? Haven't heard any credible media source discuss the man.
Posted by: Anonymous | April 3, 2008 12:52 AM
As Ms. Posner well knows, the "On Faith" moderators grossly mischaracterized Rev. Parsley's views in their question for the panelists. Hence, the hysterical and defamatory posts by Bishop Chane and Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite of Chicago Seminary.
Far from calling for the destruction of Islam, Rev. Parsley instead wrote in "Silent No More," "I do not believe our country can truly fulfill its divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam. I know that this statement sounds extreme, but I do not shrink from its implications. The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed, and I believe September 11, 2001, was a generational call to arms that we can no longer ignore."
Far cry from calling for the destruction of a religion, isn't it? Even a Parsley hater like Ms. Posner would be forced to admit the difference. And "Silent No More" has been circulating in Washington for almost three years. Yet WaPo's On Faith moderators deliberately chose to pose a misleading question to the panelists. Unconscionable, yet thoroughly believable.
Posted by: andrew | April 3, 2008 9:41 PM